4.0 Article

Do stage and grade of malignancy impact fertility preservation in breast cancer patients?

出版社

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2021.102215

关键词

Breast cancer; Fertility preservation; Ovarian stimulation; Cryopreservation; Cancer grade

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Breast cancer stage and grade do not affect the number of retrieved mature oocytes, but a higher grade of breast cancer is associated with a lower antral follicle count at baseline and the need for higher doses of gonadotropin during ovarian stimulation.
Introduction: The impact of cancer on basal fertility and ovarian response to stimulation has not yet been clarified. Evidence on this topic is scarce and conflicting. Aim of this study was to assess the impact of breast cancer stage and grade on the number of retrieved mature oocytes during controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation. Methods: Retrospective cohort study evaluating data on 101 stimulation cycles of women with breast cancer undergoing oocyte cryopreservation categorized according to breast cancer stage (low-stage: I; high-stage: II-III) and grade (low-grade: G1-2; high-grade: G3) using the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (VIII edition). Results: High-stage disease was not associated with worse oocyte retrieval outcomes (median 7 vs 7, p = 0.75). High-grade disease patients showed a significantly lower antral follicle count (AFC) compared to low-grade disease patients (10 vs 13, p = 0.03), and required higher doses of FSH (2612 IU vs 2250 IU; p = 0.03) during stimulation. Median number of vitrified oocytes was 6 in low-grade disease patients and 7 in high-grade disease patients (p = 0.35). Conclusions: Stage and grade of breast cancer do not impact the number of retrieved mature oocytes. However, higher grade of breast cancer is associated with lower AFC at baseline and need for higher doses of gonadotropin during ovarian stimulation. (C) 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据