Literature DB >> 30227359

Ovarian response and follow-up outcomes in women diagnosed with cancer having fertility preservation: Comparison of random start and early follicular phase stimulation - cohort study.

Charles Muteshi1, Tim Child2, Eric Ohuma3, Muhammad Fatum2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine response to controlled ovarian stimulation in a random start cycle and utilisation of cryopreserved oocytes and embryos in cancer patients. STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was carried out in an assisted reproductive treatment centre. Participants included 137 cancer patients who underwent controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation between 1 Feb 2003 and 30 June 2016. The primary outcome variable was number of oocytes retrieved. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed, and differences compared using Chi squared test and student t-test as appropriate. P <  0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Using the antagonist protocol, there was no difference in number of oocytes retrieved between the early follicular phase or at random start stimulation; 11.9 (95% CI 10.3-13.5) and 12.9 (95% CI 9.6-16.2), P =  0.602, respectively. Similarly, the number of embryos frozen was comparable between those starting stimulation in early follicular and random phase, 6.7 (95% CI 5.7-7.7) and 5.1 (95% CI 3.6-6.5), P= 0.1508 respectively. Among patients undergoing fertility preservation, those who returned to attempt a pregnancy had an ongoing pregnancy rate of 24.3%. Overall, 65% of oocytes and embryos were still in storage, however, 16 (11.7%) had elected to have their oocytes or embryos disposed of. CONCLUSION(S): For women faced with potential gonadotoxic treatment and requiring urgent fertility preservation, ovarian stimulation with the antagonist protocol can be started at random without compromising ovarian response. Pregnancy rates following utilisation of frozen-thawed oocytes and embryos are promising, however, more research is needed to understand reasons underlying disposition of oocytes and embryos especially when survival following cancer treatment has improved significantly.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer; Fertility preservation; Random start stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30227359     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.09.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  2 in total

1.  How effective are the non-conventional ovarian stimulation protocols in ART? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Demian Glujovsky; Romina Pesce; Mariana Miguens; Carlos E Sueldo; Karinna Lattes; Agustín Ciapponi
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-11-21       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Motherhood after cancer: fertility and utilisation of fertility-preservation methods.

Authors:  Maren Goeckenjan; A Freis; K Glaß; J Schaar; I Trinkaus; S Torka; P Wimberger; A Germeyer
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 2.344

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.