PURPOSE: To compare oocyte cryopreservation cycles performed in cancer patients to those of infertile women. METHODS: Cancer patients referred for fertility preservation underwent counseling in compliance with the ASRM; those electing oocyte cryopreservation were included. Ovarian stimulation was achieved with injectable gonadotropins and freezing was performed using slow-cooling and vitrification methods. RESULTS: Fifty cancer patients (mean age 31 y) underwent oocyte cryopreservation; adequate ovarian stimulation was achieved in 10 ± 0.3 days. The outcome from these cycles included a mean peak estradiol of 2,376 pg/ml and an average of 19 oocytes retrieved (15 mature oocytes were cryopreserved/cycle). All patients tolerated ovarian hyperstimulation. There were no significant differences noted between cryopreservation cycles performed in cancer patients and in women without malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Oocyte cryopreservation appears to be a feasible fertility preservation method for reproductive-age women diagnosed with cancer. This modality is not only effective but also, providing a multidiscipline effort, can be completed in timely fashion.
PURPOSE: To compare oocyte cryopreservation cycles performed in cancerpatients to those of infertile women. METHODS:Cancerpatients referred for fertility preservation underwent counseling in compliance with the ASRM; those electing oocyte cryopreservation were included. Ovarian stimulation was achieved with injectable gonadotropins and freezing was performed using slow-cooling and vitrification methods. RESULTS: Fifty cancerpatients (mean age 31 y) underwent oocyte cryopreservation; adequate ovarian stimulation was achieved in 10 ± 0.3 days. The outcome from these cycles included a mean peak estradiol of 2,376 pg/ml and an average of 19 oocytes retrieved (15 mature oocytes were cryopreserved/cycle). All patients tolerated ovarian hyperstimulation. There were no significant differences noted between cryopreservation cycles performed in cancerpatients and in women without malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Oocyte cryopreservation appears to be a feasible fertility preservation method for reproductive-age women diagnosed with cancer. This modality is not only effective but also, providing a multidiscipline effort, can be completed in timely fashion.
Authors: Jaime M Knopman; Nicole Noyes; Sheeva Talebian; Lewis C Krey; James A Grifo; Frederick Licciardi Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2008-09-18 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Zsolt P Nagy; Ching-Chien Chang; Daniel B Shapiro; Diana Patricia Bernal; Carlene W Elsner; Dorothy Mitchell-Leef; Andrew A Toledo; Hilton I Kort Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2008-08-09 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: E Porcu; S Venturoli; G Damiano; P M Ciotti; L Notarangelo; R Paradisi; M Moscarini; G Ambrosini Journal: Reprod Biomed Online Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 3.828
Authors: Mi Kyoung Kim; Dong Ryul Lee; Ji Eun Han; You Shin Kim; Woo Sik Lee; Hyung Jae Won; Ji Won Kim; Tae Ki Yoon Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2011-11-25 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Francesca E Duncan; Mary Ellen Pavone; Alexander H Gunn; Sherif Badawy; Clarisa Gracia; Jill P Ginsberg; Barbara Lockart; Yasmin Gosiengfiao; Teresa K Woodruff Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Molly B Moravek; Leslie C Appiah; Antoinette Anazodo; Karen C Burns; Veronica Gomez-Lobo; Holly R Hoefgen; Olivia Jaworek Frias; Monica M Laronda; Jennifer Levine; Lillian R Meacham; Mary Ellen Pavone; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Erin E Rowell; Andrew C Strine; Teresa K Woodruff; Leena Nahata Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2019-01-14 Impact factor: 5.012