The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis
To evaluate the impact of cancer diagnosis on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation. Meta-analysis. Not applicable. An electronic-based search was performed with the use of PubMed until May 2018 limited to English-language articles. In the final analysis, 10 case-controlled retr...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Fertility and sterility 2018-12, Vol.110 (7), p.1347-1355 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1355 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 1347 |
| container_title | Fertility and sterility |
| container_volume | 110 |
| creator | Turan, Volkan Quinn, Molly M. Dayioglu, Nurten Rosen, Mitchell P. Oktay, Kutluk |
| description | To evaluate the impact of cancer diagnosis on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation.
Meta-analysis.
Not applicable.
An electronic-based search was performed with the use of PubMed until May 2018 limited to English-language articles. In the final analysis, 10 case-controlled retrospective cohort studies were included, comparing ovarian response to stimulation between women with cancer and age-matched healthy women (control group).
None.
Number of total oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes, fertilization rate and two pronuclei embryos obtained.
Ten studies that included a total of 713 women with cancer were analyzed in the cancer group (722 cycles), and 1,830 healthy women (1,835 cycles) qualified as controls for the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed no impact of cancer diagnosis on the mean number of total oocytes (P=.517; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.12), mature oocytes (P=.104; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.01), and two pronuclei embryos (P=.136; 95% CI −0.32 to 0.04) and fertilization rates (P=.273; 95% CI −0.29 to 0.183). When the analysis was limited to women with breast cancer diagnosis, there was also no difference in the mean number of total oocytes (P=.812; 95% CI −0.28 to 0.36) and mature oocytes (P=.993; 95% CI −0.16 to 0.16) between the two groups.
This meta-analysis indicates that cancer diagnosis is not associated with reduced response to ovarian stimulation.
El impacto del cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ováricapara la preservación de la fertilidad: un meta-análisis
Evaluar el impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ovárica para la preservación de la fertilidad.
Meta-análisis.
No aplicable.
Se realizó una búsqueda electrónica con el uso de PubMed hasta mayo de 2018 limitada a artículos en inglés. En el análisis final, se incluyeron 10 estudios casos-control de cohortes retrospectivas, que compararon la respuesta ovárica a la estimulación entre mujeres con cáncer y mujeres sanas de la misma edad (grupo control).
Ninguna.
Número total de ovocitos recuperado, número de ovocitos maduros, tasa de fecundación y embriones obtenidos en estadio de 2 pronúcleos.
Se analizaron diez estudios que incluyeron un total de 713 mujeres con cáncer en el grupo de cáncer (722 ciclos) y 1.830 mujeres sanas (1.835 ciclos) cuantificadas como controles para el meta-análisis. Los resultados combinados no mostraron impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.517; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.08.013 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2149034916</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0015028218318223</els_id><sourcerecordid>2149034916</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-84a1735b9b9cd037d252096ea744aa350c551693b9f9ec45a28e415177a3399d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE2P1DAMhiMEYmcX_gLKkUsHp0nahhus-JJW4rKcI0_qLhm1SUkyI82_J8MscFzJsg9-7Nd-GeMCtgJE926_nSiVkEvN2xbEsIUaQj5jG6F11-hOy-dsAyB0A-3QXrHrnPcA0Im-fcmuJGiQQqoNe7j_SdwvK7rC48QXnP1DwOBOPAaeKK8xZOIl8njE5DHwXPxymLH42p9i4udD_OzLia8Vp3T803rPkS9UsMGA8yn7_Iq9mHDO9Pqx3rAfnz_d335t7r5_-Xb74a5xqjelGRSKXuqd2Rk3guzHVrdgOsJeKUSpwWktOiN3ZjLklMZ2ICW06HuU0phR3rC3l71rir8OlItdfHY0zxgoHrJthTIglRFdRYcL6lLMOdFk1-QXTCcrwJ5ttnv732Z7ttlCDSHr6JtHlcNuofHf4F9fK_DxAlD99egp2ew8BUejT-SKHaN_WuU3FKKU-Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2149034916</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Turan, Volkan ; Quinn, Molly M. ; Dayioglu, Nurten ; Rosen, Mitchell P. ; Oktay, Kutluk</creator><creatorcontrib>Turan, Volkan ; Quinn, Molly M. ; Dayioglu, Nurten ; Rosen, Mitchell P. ; Oktay, Kutluk</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate the impact of cancer diagnosis on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation.
Meta-analysis.
Not applicable.
An electronic-based search was performed with the use of PubMed until May 2018 limited to English-language articles. In the final analysis, 10 case-controlled retrospective cohort studies were included, comparing ovarian response to stimulation between women with cancer and age-matched healthy women (control group).
None.
Number of total oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes, fertilization rate and two pronuclei embryos obtained.
Ten studies that included a total of 713 women with cancer were analyzed in the cancer group (722 cycles), and 1,830 healthy women (1,835 cycles) qualified as controls for the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed no impact of cancer diagnosis on the mean number of total oocytes (P=.517; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.12), mature oocytes (P=.104; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.01), and two pronuclei embryos (P=.136; 95% CI −0.32 to 0.04) and fertilization rates (P=.273; 95% CI −0.29 to 0.183). When the analysis was limited to women with breast cancer diagnosis, there was also no difference in the mean number of total oocytes (P=.812; 95% CI −0.28 to 0.36) and mature oocytes (P=.993; 95% CI −0.16 to 0.16) between the two groups.
This meta-analysis indicates that cancer diagnosis is not associated with reduced response to ovarian stimulation.
El impacto del cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ováricapara la preservación de la fertilidad: un meta-análisis
Evaluar el impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ovárica para la preservación de la fertilidad.
Meta-análisis.
No aplicable.
Se realizó una búsqueda electrónica con el uso de PubMed hasta mayo de 2018 limitada a artículos en inglés. En el análisis final, se incluyeron 10 estudios casos-control de cohortes retrospectivas, que compararon la respuesta ovárica a la estimulación entre mujeres con cáncer y mujeres sanas de la misma edad (grupo control).
Ninguna.
Número total de ovocitos recuperado, número de ovocitos maduros, tasa de fecundación y embriones obtenidos en estadio de 2 pronúcleos.
Se analizaron diez estudios que incluyeron un total de 713 mujeres con cáncer en el grupo de cáncer (722 ciclos) y 1.830 mujeres sanas (1.835 ciclos) cuantificadas como controles para el meta-análisis. Los resultados combinados no mostraron impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.517; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0.12), ovocitos maduros (P=0.104; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0.01), y embriones en estadio de dos pronúcleos (P=0.136; IC del 95% de -0.32 a 0.04) y tasas de fecundación (P=0.273; IC del 95% de -0.29 a 0.183). Cuando el análisis se limitó a mujeres con diagnóstico de cáncer de mama, tampoco hubo diferencias en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.812; IC del 95% de -0.28 a 0.36) y ovocitos maduros (P=0.993; IC del 95% de -0.16 a 0.16) entre los dos grupos.
Este meta-análisis indica que el diagnóstico de cáncer no está asociado con una respuesta disminuida a la estimulación ovárica.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-0282</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-5653</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.08.013</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30503134</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>cancer ; Fertility preservation ; in vitro fertilization ; total oocyte number ; two pronuclei embryos</subject><ispartof>Fertility and sterility, 2018-12, Vol.110 (7), p.1347-1355</ispartof><rights>2018 American Society for Reproductive Medicine</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-84a1735b9b9cd037d252096ea744aa350c551693b9f9ec45a28e415177a3399d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-84a1735b9b9cd037d252096ea744aa350c551693b9f9ec45a28e415177a3399d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028218318223$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30503134$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Turan, Volkan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quinn, Molly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dayioglu, Nurten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosen, Mitchell P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oktay, Kutluk</creatorcontrib><title>The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis</title><title>Fertility and sterility</title><addtitle>Fertil Steril</addtitle><description>To evaluate the impact of cancer diagnosis on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation.
Meta-analysis.
Not applicable.
An electronic-based search was performed with the use of PubMed until May 2018 limited to English-language articles. In the final analysis, 10 case-controlled retrospective cohort studies were included, comparing ovarian response to stimulation between women with cancer and age-matched healthy women (control group).
None.
Number of total oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes, fertilization rate and two pronuclei embryos obtained.
Ten studies that included a total of 713 women with cancer were analyzed in the cancer group (722 cycles), and 1,830 healthy women (1,835 cycles) qualified as controls for the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed no impact of cancer diagnosis on the mean number of total oocytes (P=.517; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.12), mature oocytes (P=.104; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.01), and two pronuclei embryos (P=.136; 95% CI −0.32 to 0.04) and fertilization rates (P=.273; 95% CI −0.29 to 0.183). When the analysis was limited to women with breast cancer diagnosis, there was also no difference in the mean number of total oocytes (P=.812; 95% CI −0.28 to 0.36) and mature oocytes (P=.993; 95% CI −0.16 to 0.16) between the two groups.
This meta-analysis indicates that cancer diagnosis is not associated with reduced response to ovarian stimulation.
El impacto del cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ováricapara la preservación de la fertilidad: un meta-análisis
Evaluar el impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ovárica para la preservación de la fertilidad.
Meta-análisis.
No aplicable.
Se realizó una búsqueda electrónica con el uso de PubMed hasta mayo de 2018 limitada a artículos en inglés. En el análisis final, se incluyeron 10 estudios casos-control de cohortes retrospectivas, que compararon la respuesta ovárica a la estimulación entre mujeres con cáncer y mujeres sanas de la misma edad (grupo control).
Ninguna.
Número total de ovocitos recuperado, número de ovocitos maduros, tasa de fecundación y embriones obtenidos en estadio de 2 pronúcleos.
Se analizaron diez estudios que incluyeron un total de 713 mujeres con cáncer en el grupo de cáncer (722 ciclos) y 1.830 mujeres sanas (1.835 ciclos) cuantificadas como controles para el meta-análisis. Los resultados combinados no mostraron impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.517; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0.12), ovocitos maduros (P=0.104; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0.01), y embriones en estadio de dos pronúcleos (P=0.136; IC del 95% de -0.32 a 0.04) y tasas de fecundación (P=0.273; IC del 95% de -0.29 a 0.183). Cuando el análisis se limitó a mujeres con diagnóstico de cáncer de mama, tampoco hubo diferencias en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.812; IC del 95% de -0.28 a 0.36) y ovocitos maduros (P=0.993; IC del 95% de -0.16 a 0.16) entre los dos grupos.
Este meta-análisis indica que el diagnóstico de cáncer no está asociado con una respuesta disminuida a la estimulación ovárica.</description><subject>cancer</subject><subject>Fertility preservation</subject><subject>in vitro fertilization</subject><subject>total oocyte number</subject><subject>two pronuclei embryos</subject><issn>0015-0282</issn><issn>1556-5653</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE2P1DAMhiMEYmcX_gLKkUsHp0nahhus-JJW4rKcI0_qLhm1SUkyI82_J8MscFzJsg9-7Nd-GeMCtgJE926_nSiVkEvN2xbEsIUaQj5jG6F11-hOy-dsAyB0A-3QXrHrnPcA0Im-fcmuJGiQQqoNe7j_SdwvK7rC48QXnP1DwOBOPAaeKK8xZOIl8njE5DHwXPxymLH42p9i4udD_OzLia8Vp3T803rPkS9UsMGA8yn7_Iq9mHDO9Pqx3rAfnz_d335t7r5_-Xb74a5xqjelGRSKXuqd2Rk3guzHVrdgOsJeKUSpwWktOiN3ZjLklMZ2ICW06HuU0phR3rC3l71rir8OlItdfHY0zxgoHrJthTIglRFdRYcL6lLMOdFk1-QXTCcrwJ5ttnv732Z7ttlCDSHr6JtHlcNuofHf4F9fK_DxAlD99egp2ew8BUejT-SKHaN_WuU3FKKU-Q</recordid><startdate>201812</startdate><enddate>201812</enddate><creator>Turan, Volkan</creator><creator>Quinn, Molly M.</creator><creator>Dayioglu, Nurten</creator><creator>Rosen, Mitchell P.</creator><creator>Oktay, Kutluk</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201812</creationdate><title>The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis</title><author>Turan, Volkan ; Quinn, Molly M. ; Dayioglu, Nurten ; Rosen, Mitchell P. ; Oktay, Kutluk</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c479t-84a1735b9b9cd037d252096ea744aa350c551693b9f9ec45a28e415177a3399d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>cancer</topic><topic>Fertility preservation</topic><topic>in vitro fertilization</topic><topic>total oocyte number</topic><topic>two pronuclei embryos</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Turan, Volkan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quinn, Molly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dayioglu, Nurten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosen, Mitchell P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oktay, Kutluk</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Fertility and sterility</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Turan, Volkan</au><au>Quinn, Molly M.</au><au>Dayioglu, Nurten</au><au>Rosen, Mitchell P.</au><au>Oktay, Kutluk</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Fertility and sterility</jtitle><addtitle>Fertil Steril</addtitle><date>2018-12</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>110</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1347</spage><epage>1355</epage><pages>1347-1355</pages><issn>0015-0282</issn><eissn>1556-5653</eissn><abstract>To evaluate the impact of cancer diagnosis on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation.
Meta-analysis.
Not applicable.
An electronic-based search was performed with the use of PubMed until May 2018 limited to English-language articles. In the final analysis, 10 case-controlled retrospective cohort studies were included, comparing ovarian response to stimulation between women with cancer and age-matched healthy women (control group).
None.
Number of total oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes, fertilization rate and two pronuclei embryos obtained.
Ten studies that included a total of 713 women with cancer were analyzed in the cancer group (722 cycles), and 1,830 healthy women (1,835 cycles) qualified as controls for the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed no impact of cancer diagnosis on the mean number of total oocytes (P=.517; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.12), mature oocytes (P=.104; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.01), and two pronuclei embryos (P=.136; 95% CI −0.32 to 0.04) and fertilization rates (P=.273; 95% CI −0.29 to 0.183). When the analysis was limited to women with breast cancer diagnosis, there was also no difference in the mean number of total oocytes (P=.812; 95% CI −0.28 to 0.36) and mature oocytes (P=.993; 95% CI −0.16 to 0.16) between the two groups.
This meta-analysis indicates that cancer diagnosis is not associated with reduced response to ovarian stimulation.
El impacto del cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ováricapara la preservación de la fertilidad: un meta-análisis
Evaluar el impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en la respuesta a la estimulación ovárica para la preservación de la fertilidad.
Meta-análisis.
No aplicable.
Se realizó una búsqueda electrónica con el uso de PubMed hasta mayo de 2018 limitada a artículos en inglés. En el análisis final, se incluyeron 10 estudios casos-control de cohortes retrospectivas, que compararon la respuesta ovárica a la estimulación entre mujeres con cáncer y mujeres sanas de la misma edad (grupo control).
Ninguna.
Número total de ovocitos recuperado, número de ovocitos maduros, tasa de fecundación y embriones obtenidos en estadio de 2 pronúcleos.
Se analizaron diez estudios que incluyeron un total de 713 mujeres con cáncer en el grupo de cáncer (722 ciclos) y 1.830 mujeres sanas (1.835 ciclos) cuantificadas como controles para el meta-análisis. Los resultados combinados no mostraron impacto del diagnóstico de cáncer en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.517; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0.12), ovocitos maduros (P=0.104; IC del 95% de -0.23 a 0.01), y embriones en estadio de dos pronúcleos (P=0.136; IC del 95% de -0.32 a 0.04) y tasas de fecundación (P=0.273; IC del 95% de -0.29 a 0.183). Cuando el análisis se limitó a mujeres con diagnóstico de cáncer de mama, tampoco hubo diferencias en el número medio de ovocitos totales (P=0.812; IC del 95% de -0.28 a 0.36) y ovocitos maduros (P=0.993; IC del 95% de -0.16 a 0.16) entre los dos grupos.
Este meta-análisis indica que el diagnóstico de cáncer no está asociado con una respuesta disminuida a la estimulación ovárica.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>30503134</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.08.013</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0015-0282 |
| ispartof | Fertility and sterility, 2018-12, Vol.110 (7), p.1347-1355 |
| issn | 0015-0282 1556-5653 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2149034916 |
| source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | cancer Fertility preservation in vitro fertilization total oocyte number two pronuclei embryos |
| title | The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T15%3A34%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20impact%20of%20malignancy%20on%20response%20to%20ovarian%20stimulation%20for%20fertility%20preservation:%20a%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Fertility%20and%20sterility&rft.au=Turan,%20Volkan&rft.date=2018-12&rft.volume=110&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1347&rft.epage=1355&rft.pages=1347-1355&rft.issn=0015-0282&rft.eissn=1556-5653&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.08.013&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2149034916%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2149034916&rft_id=info:pmid/30503134&rft_els_id=S0015028218318223&rfr_iscdi=true |