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
  • [31] Ovarian Stimulation in Patients With Cancer: Impact of Letrozole and BRCA Mutations on Fertility Preservation Cycle Outcomes
    Volkan Turan
    Giuliano Bedoschi
    Volkan Emirdar
    Fred Moy
    Kutluk Oktay
    Reproductive Sciences, 2018, 25 : 26 - 32
  • [32] The role of menstrual cycle phase and AMH levels in young breast cancer patients whose ovarian tissue was cryopreserved for fertility preservation.
    Takae, S.
    Sugihita, Y.
    Yoshioka, N.
    Nakajima, M.
    Nishijima, C.
    Iwahata, H.
    Horage, Y.
    Kawamura, K.
    Suzuki, N.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2015, 30 : 329 - 330
  • [33] Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles
    Jacques Balayla
    Togas Tulandi
    William Buckett
    Hananel Holzer
    Naama Steiner
    Guy Shrem
    Alexander Volodarsky-Perel
    Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 2020, 37 : 913 - 921
  • [34] Efficacy and safety of controlled ovarian stimulation using GnRH antagonist protocols for emergency fertility preservation in young women with breast cancer-a prospective nationwide Swedish multicenter study
    Marklund, Anna
    Eloranta, Sandra
    Wikander, Ida
    Kitlinski, Margareta Laczna
    Lood, Mikael
    Nedstrand, Elizabeth
    Thurin-Kjellberg, Ann
    Zhang, Pu
    Bergh, Jonas
    Rodriguez-Wallberg, Kenny A.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2020, 35 (04) : 929 - 938
  • [35] Sleep Disturbance and Ovarian Stimulation Outcomes in Infertility and Fertility Preservation Patients
    Lyttle, Brianna M. W.
    Lawson, Angela K.
    Klock, Susan
    Smith, Kristin
    Kazer, Ralph
    Hirshfeld-Cytron, Jennifer
    Pavone, Mary Ellen
    JOURNAL OF REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, 2018, 63 (5-6) : 292 - 298
  • [36] Ovarian stimulation and emergency in vitro fertilization for fertility preservation in cancer patients
    Michaan, Nadav
    Ben-David, Gila
    Ben-Yosef, Dalit
    Almog, Beni
    Many, Ariel
    Pauzner, David
    Lessing, Joseph B.
    Amit, Ami
    Azem, Foad
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2010, 149 (02) : 175 - 177
  • [37] Pathways to motherhood: A single-center retrospective study on fertility preservation and reproductive outcomes in patients with breast cancer
    Chen, Chao-Ying
    Yi, Yu-Chiao
    Guu, Hwa-Fen
    Chen, Ya-Fang
    Kung, Hsiao-Fan
    Chang, Jui-Chun
    Chen, Li-Yu
    Hung, Chih-Chiang
    Chen, Ming-Jer
    JOURNAL OF THE FORMOSAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2025, 124 (02) : 112 - 117
  • [38] Successful controlled ovarian stimulation despite elevated hCG levels after first-trimester abortion in the context of fertility preservation
    Goeckenjan, M.
    Roesner, S.
    Toth, B.
    Strowitzki, T.
    Germeyer, A.
    GYNECOLOGICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2013, 29 (11) : 960 - 962
  • [39] Fertility preservation with random-start controlled ovarian stimulation and embryo cryopreservation for early pregnancy-associated breast cancer
    Pereira, Nigel
    Kligman, Isaac
    Hunt, Rosalie
    Kopparam, Rohini
    Wahmann, Bridget
    Rosenwaks, Zev
    GYNECOLOGICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2019, 35 (03) : 214 - 216
  • [40] A retrospective study evaluating the impact of scattering radiation from imaging procedures on oocyte quality during ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation in young breast cancer patients
    Condorelli, Margherita
    Sens, Maelle
    Goldrat, Oranite
    Delbaere, Anne
    Racape, Judith
    Lambertini, Matteo
    Demeestere, Isabelle
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2022, 192 (01) : 123 - 130