Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Initiated at Different Phases of the Menstrual Cycle for Fertility Preservation in Oncological Patients: a Retrospective Study

被引:1
|
作者
Baig, A. Santolaria [1 ]
Camunas, N. Garcia [1 ]
Sanchez, P. Polo [1 ]
Nadal, J. Subira [1 ,2 ]
Fabuel, S. Monzo [1 ]
Rubio Rubio, J. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ & Polytech La Fe Hosp, Human Reprod Unit, Valencia, Spain
[2] IVIRMA, Valencia, Spain
关键词
Random start; Controlled ovarian stimulation; Fertility preservation; Oncological patients; FORT; FOI; RANDOM-START; BREAST-CANCER; OOCYTE CRYOPRESERVATION; LETROZOLE; PROTOCOLS; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1007/s43032-023-01175-2
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study is to compare conventional start in early follicular phase (EFP) with late follicular phase (LFP) and luteal phase (LP) in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation (FP) to assess differences in clinical outcomes. Retrospective study of the first cycles of COS for FP in oncological patients between 2012 and 2020 in a tertiary hospital. Two-hundred forty-eight cycles were classified into 3 groups: 176 cycles in EFP, 8 cycles in LFP, and 52 cycles in LP. Comparing LFP to EFP, there were no differences in number of oocytes (10.0 [6.3-16.0] vs 12.0 [8.0-18.0]; p = 0.253) or number of metaphase II (MII) obtained (7.0 [2.3-13.3] vs 9.0 [6.0-13.0]; p = 0.229). Total number of days needed was higher in LFP (14.5 [12.5-16.0] vs 3.0 vs 10.0 [8.3-11.0 p = 0.000) but without significant differences in number of days of usage of gonadotropins (11.5 [8.3-12.8] vs 10.0 [8.3-11.0] p = 0.308). No differences were found between LP and EFP in number of oocytes (14.5 [9.0-20.0] p = 0.151) or MII (11.5 [7.0-16.0] p = 0.084). Number of days of gonadotropins (11.0 [10.0-12.0] p = 0.00) and total dosing (3000.0 [2475.0-3600.0] p = 0.013) were significantly higher in LP. FORT and FOI were similar in all groups. COS with a random start in fertility preservation has similar outcomes to EFP start. Therefore, we can initiate COS at any phase of the menstrual cycle with optimal results. However, LP may need more days of stimulation.
引用
收藏
页码:2547 / 2553
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles
    Balayla, Jacques
    Tulandi, Togas
    Buckett, William
    Holzer, Hananel
    Steiner, Naama
    Shrem, Guy
    Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander
    JOURNAL OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AND GENETICS, 2020, 37 (04) : 913 - 921
  • [22] The experience of female oncological patients and fertility preservation: A phenomenology study
    del Valle, Lara
    Corchon, Silvia
    Palop, Josefa
    Maria Rubio, Jose
    Celda, Luis
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, 2022, 31 (06)
  • [23] A retrospective study of ovarian tissue cryopreservation in female patients with hematological diseases for fertility preservation
    Wang, Yi-Ling
    Zhai, Qing-Jie
    Wang, Zhao-Hua
    Yang, Xin
    Wang, Jian-Liu
    Zhu, Hong-Lan
    ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2024, 309 (06) : 2863 - 2880
  • [24] Luteal phase stimulation, the future of fertility preservation? Retrospective cohort study of luteal phase versus follicular phase stimulation
    Jochum, Floriane
    Sananes, Nicolas
    Teletin, Marius
    Lichtblau, Isabelle
    Rongieres, Catherine
    Pirrello, Olivier
    JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY OBSTETRICS AND HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2019, 48 (02) : 91 - 94
  • [25] Fertility preservation in patients with haematological disorders: a retrospective cohort study
    Senapati, Suneeta
    Morse, Christopher B.
    Sammel, Mary D.
    Kim, Jayeon
    Mersereau, Jennifer E.
    Efymow, Brenda
    Gracia, Clarisa R.
    REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2014, 28 (01) : 92 - 98
  • [26] Fertility preservation in female oncology patients: the influence of the type of cancer on ovarian stimulation response
    Alvarez, R. M.
    Ramanathan, P.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2018, 33 (11) : 2051 - 2059
  • [27] Maximize the safety and efficacy of fertility preservation by random start/dual ovarian stimulation for early breast cancer patients
    Young, Shih-Hung Richard
    Chang, Yi-En
    Yang, Wei-Chung Vivian
    Lu, Buo-Jia
    Chou, Szu-Yuan
    Chen, Chi -Huang
    TAIWANESE JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2023, 62 (02): : 330 - 333
  • [28] Circulating Tumor DNA to Interrogate the Safety of Letrozole-Associated Controlled Ovarian Stimulation for Fertility Preservation in Breast Cancer Patients
    Rothe, Francoise
    Lambertini, Matteo
    Goldrat, Oranite
    Maetens, Marion
    Bareche, Yacine
    Blanc, Jeremy
    Rouas, Ghizlane
    Larsimont, Denis
    Sotiriou, Christos
    Ignatiadis, Michail
    Demeestere, Isabelle
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2021, 11
  • [29] Comparison of Oocyte and Embryo Quality Between Random Start and Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Cycles in Cancer Patients Undergoing Fertility Preservation
    Güler İsrafilova
    Yavuz Emre Şükür
    Sinan Özkavukcu
    Meltem Aksu Sönmezer
    Cem Somer Atabekoğlu
    Batuhan Özmen
    Bülent Berker
    Ruşen Aytaç
    Acar Koç
    Murat Sönmezer
    Reproductive Sciences, 2021, 28 : 2200 - 2207
  • [30] Fertility preservation for women with breast cancer: a multicentre randomized controlled trial on various ovarian stimulation protocols
    Balkenende, Eva M. E.
    Dahhan, Taghride
    Beerendonk, Catharina C. M.
    Fleischer, Kathrin
    Stoop, Dominic
    Bos, Annelies M. E.
    Lambalk, Cornelis B.
    Schats, Roel
    Smeenk, Jesper M. J.
    Louwe, Leonie A.
    Cantineau, Astrid E. P.
    de Bruin, Jan Peter
    Linn, Sabine C.
    van der Veen, Fulco
    van Wely, Madelon
    Goddijn, Mariette
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2022, 37 (08) : 1786 - 1794