Published in:
01-04-2018 | Fertility Preservation
Thirteen years’ experience in fertility preservation for cancer patients after in vitro fertilization and in vitro maturation treatments
Authors:
Helene Creux, Patricia Monnier, Weon-Young Son, William Buckett
Published in:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
|
Issue 4/2018
Login to get access
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to describe the experience and outcomes of in vitro maturation without ovarian stimulation (IVM-FP) and conventional in vitro fertilization after ovarian stimulation (IVF-FP) in a fertility preservation (FP) program for women with cancer.
Methods
Retrospective cohort study from 2003 to 2015 was conducted. The study population consisted of 353 women with cancer who underwent 394 FP cycles (187 IVF-FP cycles and 207 IVM-FP) for oocytes and/or embryos cryopreservation.
Result(s)
Comparatively with IVM-FP, IVF-FP had a higher median [25th–75th percentile] number of oocytes collected—12 [8–18] vs 7 [5–13]; oocytes cryopreserved—10 [6–15] vs 5 [2–8]; and, where applicable, embryos cryopreserved—5 [3–7] vs 3 [2–5] (p < 0.000001). Following FP treatment, 32 patients (9.0%) died, 18 patients (5.6%) conceived spontaneously, and 23 patients (6.5%) returned to attempt pregnancy with a median lapse of returning of 4.6 [3.1–6.1] years. Of these, cryopreserved oocytes or embryos were used in 33 cycles (19 after IVF-FP and 14 after IVM-FP). Overall, the cumulative pregnancy rate (CPR) was 47.6% (10/21) and the live birth rate (LBR) was 38.1% (8/21). Per cycle, CPR and LBR were 37 and 31% following IVF-FP and 14 and 7% following IVM-FP, although these differences did not reach statistical significance. We report the fourth live birth after IVM-FP in cancer, and the first one after IVM embryo warming resulting from in vivo oocyte retrieval and IVM procedure.
Conclusion(s)
Both IVF-FP and IVM-FP are possible options for FP women with cancer. Due to minimal data regarding ultimate outcomes, further follow-up is needed.