Published in:
01-10-2020 | Fertility | Fertility Preservation
Ovarian stimulation outcomes among transgender men compared with fertile cisgender women
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 10/2020
Login to get accessAbstract
Purpose
To compare assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes among transgender men with those of fertile cisgender women.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included 12 transgender men, six with no testosterone exposure and six after testosterone treatment, and 12 cisgender women (oocyte donors) who underwent ART in our institution between June 2017 and December 2019. Statistical analyses compared ART data and outcomes between three groups: cisgender women, transgender men without testosterone exposure, and transgender men after testosterone exposure. Comparisons were also made between transgender men with and without testosterone exposure.
Results
The transgender men with no testosterone exposure (23.3 ± 4 years) were significantly younger than the transgender men who had undergone testosterone treatment (30.3 ± 3.8 years; P = 0.012) and the cisgender women (29.1 ± 3.1 years; P = 0.004). The amount of FSH used for ovulation induction (1999 ± 683 mIU/mL) was significantly lower among transgender men without prior testosterone exposure compared with that among cisgender women (3150 ± 487 mIU/mL; P = 0.007). There were no differences in the peak estradiol levels, the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of MII oocytes, and the oocyte maturity rates between the three groups. Five out of six testosterone-treated transgender men underwent embryo cryopreservation, and they all achieved good-quality embryos.
Conclusions
Transgender men have an excellent response to ovulation stimulation even after long-term exposure to testosterone. Oocyte/embryo cryopreservation is, therefore, a feasible and effective way for them to preserve their fertility for future biological parenting.