Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Fertility preservation: ovarian response to freeze oocytes is not affected by different malignant diseases—an analysis of 992 stimulations

  • Fertility Preservation
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To study if ovarian response is affected by the type of disease if fertility preservation is required.

Methods

A registry of the trinational fertility preservation network FertiPROTEKT including 992 patients aged 18–40 years undergoing ovarian stimulation and follicle aspiration for fertility preservation from 1/2007 until 3/2016 was analysed. The number of collected oocytes, days of stimulation, total gonadotropin dosage and gonadotropin dosage per day were evaluated.

Results

Total oocyte number was negatively correlated with increasing age (r = 0.237, p < 0.0001). Oocyte numbers were in women < 26 years 15.4 ± 8.8, 26–30 years 13.1 ± 8.5, 31–35 years 12.2 ± 7.7 and 36–40 years 9.9 ± 8.0. Age-adjusted oocyte numbers were not different in women with Hodgkin’s lymphoma (12.6 ± 8.8), non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (12.4 ± 8.2), leukaemia (11.7 ± 8.2), sarcoma (11.8 ± 8.2), cerebral cancer (16.5 ± 8.1), gastrointestinal cancer (13.2 ± 8.1) gynaecological cancer (10.8 ± 8.2) and other types of malignancies (15.8 ± 8.1) apart from ovarian cancer with lower oocyte yield (7.3 ± 8.3, p < 0.001) compared to women with breast cancer (13.3 ± 8.8). The total gonadotropin dose used for stimulation was only elevated in Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma compared to women with breast cancer (p < 0.05). Oocyte yield was lower in women with versus without ovarian cancer (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

As ovarian response is not affected by the type of cancer, ovarian stimulation can be performed with the same oocyte yield in different malignant diseases. However, oocyte yield is reduced if ovarian surgery is required and in older women.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. von Wolff M, Dittrich R, Liebenthron J, Nawroth F, Schüring AN, Bruckner T, et al. Fertility-preservation counselling and treatment for medical reasons: data from a multinational network of over 5000 women. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;31:605–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bodri D, Guillén JJ, Galindo A, Mataró D, Pujol A, Coll O. Triggering with human chorionic gonadotropin or a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist-treated oocyte donor cycles: findings of a large retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:365–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. von Wolff M, Thaler CJ, Frambach T, Zeeb C, Lawrenz B, Popovici RM, et al. Ovarian stimulation to cryopreserve fertilized oocytes in cancer patients can be started in the luteal phase. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1360–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cakmak H, Tran ND, Zamah AM, Cedars MI, Rosen MP. A novel “delayed start” protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist improves outcomes in poor responders. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1308–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. von Wolff M, Capp E, Jauckus J, Strowitzki T, Germeyer A, FertiPROTEKT study group. Timing of ovarian stimulation in patients prior to gonadotoxic therapy: an analysis of 684 stimulations. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;199:146–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kuang Y, Chen Q, Hong Q, Lyu Q, Ai A, Fu Y, et al. Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol). Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;29:684–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Huober-Zeeb C, Lawrenz B, Popovici RM, Strowitzki T, Germeyer A, Stute P, et al. Improving fertility preservation in cancer: ovarian tissue cryobanking followed by ovarian stimulation can be efficiently combined. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:342–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim J, Turan V, Oktay K. Long-term safety of letrozole and gonadotropin stimulation for fertility preservation in women with breast cancer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101:1364–71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lawrenz B, Jauckus J, Kupka M, Strowitzki T, von Wolff M. Efficacy and safety of ovarian stimulation before chemotherapy in 205 cases. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:2871–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alvarez RM, Ramanathan P. Fertility preservation in female oncology patients: the influence of the type of cancer on ovarian stimulation response. Hum Reprod. 2016.

  11. Sonigo C, Comtet M, Duros S, Sifer C, Sermondade N, Grynberg M. Antral follicle responsiveness to FSH, assessed by the follicular output rate (FORT), is altered in Hodgkin’s lymphoma when compared with breast cancer candidates for fertility preservation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:91–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Das M, Shehata F, Moria A, Holzer H, Son WY, Tulandi T. Ovarian reserve, response to gonadotropins, and oocyte maturity in women with malignancy. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:122–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Friedler S, Koc O, Gidoni Y, Raziel A, Ron-El R. Ovarian response to stimulation for fertility preservation in women with malignant disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:125–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Almog B, Azem F, Gordon D, Pauzner D, Amit A, Barkan G, et al. Effects of cancer on ovarian response in controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:957–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lawrenz B, Fehm T, von Wolff M, Soekler M, Huebner S, Henes J, et al. Reduced pretreatment ovarian reserve in premenopausal female patients with Hodgkin lymphoma or non-Hodgkin-lymphoma—evaluation by using antimüllerian hormone and retrieved oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:141–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Garcia-Velasco JA, Domingo J, Cobo A, Martínez M, Carmona L, Pellicer A. Five years’ experience using oocyte vitrification to preserve fertility for medical and nonmedical indications. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1994–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lekovich J, Lobel ALS, Stewart JD, Pereira N, Kligman I, Rosenwaks Z. Female patients with lymphoma demonstrate diminished ovarian reserve even before initiation of chemotherapy when compared with healthy controls and patients with other malignancies. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:657–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Quinn MM, Cakmak H, Letourneau JM, Cedars MI, Rosen MP. Response to ovarian stimulation is not impacted by a breast cancer diagnosis. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:568–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Drakopoulos P, Blockeel C, Stoop D, Camus M, de Vos M, Tournaye H, et al. Conventional ovarian stimulation and single embryo transfer for IVF/ICSI. How many oocytes do we need to maximize cumulative live birth rates after utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos? Hum Reprod. 2016;31:370–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Caponecchia L, Cimino G, Sacchetto R, Fiori C, Sebastianelli A, Salacone P, et al. Do malignant diseases affect semen quality? Sperm parameters of men with cancers. Andrologia. 2016;48:333–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Johnson LN, Dillon KE, Sammel MD, Efymow BL, Mainigi MA, Dokras A, et al. Response to ovarian stimulation in patients facing gonadotoxic therapy. Reprod BioMed Online. 2013;26:337–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all members of the network FertiPROTEKT for contributing to the registry and Dr. Elisabeth Krämer for the linguistic revision and correction of the manuscript.

Funding

Germeyer was in part be supported by the Hopp Foundation (http://dietmar-hopp-stiftung.de).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gynaecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Women’s University Hospital, University of Berne, Effingerstrasse 102, 3010, Berne, Switzerland

    M . von Wolff

  2. FertiPROTEKT, Marburg, Germany

    M . von Wolff & A. Germeyer

  3. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    T. Bruckner

  4. Division of Gynaecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Women’s University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 440, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    T. Strowitzki & A. Germeyer

Authors
  1. M . von Wolff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Bruckner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Strowitzki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Germeyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M . von Wolff.

Ethics declarations

As anonymized registry data were analysed, ethical approval was not required.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

von Wolff, M..., Bruckner, T., Strowitzki, T. et al. Fertility preservation: ovarian response to freeze oocytes is not affected by different malignant diseases—an analysis of 992 stimulations. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 1713–1719 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1227-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1227-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation