M Lambertini1,2, O Goldrat3, A R Ferreira4, J Dechene3, H A Azim5, J Desir6, A Delbaere3, M-D t'Kint de Roodenbeke1, E de Azambuja1, M Ignatiadis1, I Demeestere3. 1. Department of Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet and Université Libre de Bruxelles (U.L.B.), Brussels, Belgium. 2. Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet and Université Libre de Bruxelles (U.L.B.), Brussels, Belgium. 3. Fertility Clinic, CUB-Hôpital Erasme and Research Laboratory on Human Reproduction, Université Libre de Bruxelles (U.L.B.), Brussels, Belgium. 4. Hospital de Santa Maria and Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universiade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut (AUB), Beirut, Lebanon. 6. Medical Genetics Department, CUB-Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles (U.L.B.), Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
Background: Preclinical evidence suggests a possible negative impact of deleterious BRCA mutations on female fertility. However, limited and rather conflicting clinical data are available. This study assessed the reproductive potential and performance of fertility preservation strategies in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of two prospective studies investigating oocyte cryopreservation and ovarian tissue cryopreservation in newly diagnosed early breast cancer patients. In the current analysis, baseline anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and performance of cryopreservation strategies were compared between patients with or without germline deleterious BRCA mutations. Results: Out of 156 patients included, 101 had known BRCA status of whom 29 (18.6%) were BRCA-mutated and 72 (46.1%) had no mutation. Median age in the entire cohort was 31 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28-33). Median AMH levels were 1.8 μg/l (IQR 1.0-2.7) and 2.6 µg/l (IQR 1.5-4.1) in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.109). Among patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation (N = 29), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to retrieve (6.5 versus 9; P = 0.145) and to cryopreserve (3.5 versus 6; P = 0.121) less oocytes than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Poor response rate (i.e. retrieval of ≤4 oocytes) was 40.0% and 11.1% in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.147). Among patients who underwent ovarian tissue cryopreservation (N = 72), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to have a numerically lower number of oocytes per fragment (0.08 versus 0.14; P = 0.193) and per square millimeter (0.33 versus 0.78; P = 0.153) than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Two BRCA-mutated patients were transplanted after chemotherapy and one delivered at term a healthy baby. No difference between BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutated patients was observed in any of the above-mentioned outcomes. Conclusion: A consistent trend for reduced reproductive potential and performance of cryopreservation strategies was observed in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients. Independent validation of these results is needed.
Background: Preclinical evidence suggests a possible negative impact of deleterious BRCA mutations on female fertility. However, limited and rather conflicting clinical data are available. This study assessed the reproductive potential and performance of fertility preservation strategies in BRCA-mutated breast cancerpatients. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of two prospective studies investigating oocyte cryopreservation and ovarian tissue cryopreservation in newly diagnosed early breast cancerpatients. In the current analysis, baseline anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and performance of cryopreservation strategies were compared between patients with or without germline deleterious BRCA mutations. Results: Out of 156 patients included, 101 had known BRCA status of whom 29 (18.6%) were BRCA-mutated and 72 (46.1%) had no mutation. Median age in the entire cohort was 31 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28-33). Median AMH levels were 1.8 μg/l (IQR 1.0-2.7) and 2.6 µg/l (IQR 1.5-4.1) in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.109). Among patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation (N = 29), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to retrieve (6.5 versus 9; P = 0.145) and to cryopreserve (3.5 versus 6; P = 0.121) less oocytes than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Poor response rate (i.e. retrieval of ≤4 oocytes) was 40.0% and 11.1% in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.147). Among patients who underwent ovarian tissue cryopreservation (N = 72), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to have a numerically lower number of oocytes per fragment (0.08 versus 0.14; P = 0.193) and per square millimeter (0.33 versus 0.78; P = 0.153) than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Two BRCA-mutated patients were transplanted after chemotherapy and one delivered at term a healthy baby. No difference between BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutated patients was observed in any of the above-mentioned outcomes. Conclusion: A consistent trend for reduced reproductive potential and performance of cryopreservation strategies was observed in BRCA-mutated breast cancerpatients. Independent validation of these results is needed.
Authors: S E Gellert; S E Pors; S G Kristensen; A M Bay-Bjørn; E Ernst; C Yding Andersen Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Drechsel Katja C E; van Tilborg Theodora C; Eijkemans Marinus J C; Lentjes Eef G W M; Homminga Irene; Goddijn Mariette; van Golde Ron J T; Verpoest Willem; Lichtenbelt Klaske D; Broekmans Frank J M; Bos Anna M E Journal: Reprod Sci Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 3.060
Authors: Nikita M Shah; Dana M Scott; Pridvi Kandagatla; Molly B Moravek; Erin F Cobain; Monika L Burness; Jacqueline S Jeruss Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Christina N Cordeiro Mitchell; Bailey McGuinness; Eliana Fine; William G Kearns; Mindy S Christianson; James Segars; Lisa M Pastore Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2020-03-24 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Valentino Martelli; Maria Maddalena Latocca; Tommaso Ruelle; Marta Perachino; Luca Arecco; Kristi Beshiri; Maria Grazia Razeti; Marco Tagliamento; Maurizio Cosso; Piero Fregatti; Matteo Lambertini Journal: Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) Date: 2021-05-24