Elisa Malacarne1, Marta Devesa2, Francisca Martinez2, Ignacio Rodriguez2, Buenaventura Coroleu2. 1. Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pisa, Via Roma, 67, 56126, Pisa, Italy. malacarne.eli@gmail.com. 2. Human Reproduction Service, Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproduction, University Hospital Dexeus, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed during childbearing age, and fertility preservation is becoming increasingly more essential. However, recent studies indicate a possible poorer response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in cancer patients than in non-cancer controls and a negative impact of BRCA mutations on female fertility. This study aims to evaluate ovarian response and the number of mature oocytes (MII) vitrified in women with breast cancer, with or without BRCA mutation, comparing them to the expected response according to an age-related nomogram. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study involving sixty-one breast cancer patients who underwent COH for oocyte cryopreservation. The age-specific nomogram was built using 3871 patients who underwent COH due to oocyte donation, fertility preservation for non-medical reasons, or FIVET for male factor exclusively. RESULTS: The mean number of oocytes retrieved was 13.03, whereas the mean number of MII oocytes was 10.00. After the application of the z-score, no statistically significant differences were found compared with the expected response in the general population, neither by dividing patients according to the presence or absence of BRCA mutation nor according to the phase in which they initiated stimulation. CONCLUSION: The results obtained do not support the notion of a negative impact of the BRCA mutation on the ovarian response of women with breast cancer. Women with breast cancer undergoing COH for fertility preservation can expect the ovarian response predicted for their age.
PURPOSE:Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed during childbearing age, and fertility preservation is becoming increasingly more essential. However, recent studies indicate a possible poorer response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in cancerpatients than in non-cancer controls and a negative impact of BRCA mutations on female fertility. This study aims to evaluate ovarian response and the number of mature oocytes (MII) vitrified in women with breast cancer, with or without BRCA mutation, comparing them to the expected response according to an age-related nomogram. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study involving sixty-one breast cancerpatients who underwent COH for oocyte cryopreservation. The age-specific nomogram was built using 3871 patients who underwent COH due to oocyte donation, fertility preservation for non-medical reasons, or FIVET for male factor exclusively. RESULTS: The mean number of oocytes retrieved was 13.03, whereas the mean number of MII oocytes was 10.00. After the application of the z-score, no statistically significant differences were found compared with the expected response in the general population, neither by dividing patients according to the presence or absence of BRCA mutation nor according to the phase in which they initiated stimulation. CONCLUSION: The results obtained do not support the notion of a negative impact of the BRCA mutation on the ovarian response of women with breast cancer. Women with breast cancer undergoing COH for fertility preservation can expect the ovarian response predicted for their age.
Authors: Javier Domingo; Vicente Guillén; Yanira Ayllón; María Martínez; Elkin Muñoz; Antonio Pellicer; Juan A Garcia-Velasco Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2012-01-28 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Kutluk Oktay; Brittany E Harvey; Ann H Partridge; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Joyce Reinecke; Hugh S Taylor; W Hamish Wallace; Erica T Wang; Alison W Loren Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joseph M Letourneau; Erin E Ebbel; Patricia P Katz; Kutluk H Oktay; Charles E McCulloch; Wei Z Ai; A Jo Chien; Michelle E Melisko; Marcelle I Cedars; Mitchell P Rosen Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Stephanie J Lee; Leslie R Schover; Ann H Partridge; Pasquale Patrizio; W Hamish Wallace; Karen Hagerty; Lindsay N Beck; Lawrence V Brennan; Kutluk Oktay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alison W Loren; Pamela B Mangu; Lindsay Nohr Beck; Lawrence Brennan; Anthony J Magdalinski; Ann H Partridge; Gwendolyn Quinn; W Hamish Wallace; Kutluk Oktay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Whoon Jong Kil; Seung Do Ahn; Seong Soo Shin; Sang-Wook Lee; Eun Kyung Choi; Jong Hoon Kim; Byung Ho Son; Sei-Hyun Ahn; Woo Kun Kim; Sung Bae Kim Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2006-03-23 Impact factor: 4.872