Effect of letrozole added to gonadotropins in controlled ovarian stimulation protocols on the yield and maturity of retrieved oocytes

Outcomes after assisted reproductive technology in women with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY QUESTION

What are the associations between a history of cancer and outcomes after ART?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer and a lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy and live birth after ART.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Small, single-institution studies have suggested that cancer and its treatment may negatively affect ART outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing ART outcomes between women with and without cancer. PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched for original, English-language studies published up to June 2021.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Inclusion criteria required reporting of ART outcomes after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) among women with a history of cancer compared to women without cancer who used ART for any indication. Outcomes of interest ranged from duration of COS to likelihood of live birth after embryo transfer. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs and 95% prediction intervals (PIs). We assessed heterogeneity by age-adjustment, referent group indication for ART, study location and among women with breast cancer and women who initiated ART before cancer treatment. We used visual inspection, Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method to assess funnel plot asymmetry.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Of 6094 unique records identified, 42 studies met inclusion criteria, representing a median per study of 58 women with cancer (interquartile range (IQR) = 159) and 114 women without cancer (IQR = 348). Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.74; 95% PI: 0.00, 64.98); lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.73; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.35); and lower likelihood of live birth (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.83; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.69). Substantial among-study heterogeneity was observed for COS duration, gonadotropin dose, cycle cancellation, total oocytes and mature oocytes. Fertilization percentage showed less heterogeneity, but study-specific estimates were imprecise. Similarly, number of embryos showed less heterogeneity, and most studies estimated minimal differences by cancer history. Funnel plot asymmetry was observed for estradiol peak and oocyte maturation percentage.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Appreciable confounding is possible in 11 studies that lacked adequate control for group differences in age, and among-study heterogeneity was observed for most outcomes. Lack of data limited our ability to assess how cancer clinical factors (e.g. cancers other than breast, cancer stage and treatment) and ART cycle characteristics (e.g. fresh versus frozen embryo transfers and use of gestational carriers) may affect outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Women with cancer may be less likely to achieve pregnancy and live birth after embryo transfer. Further examination of reproductive outcomes and sources of heterogeneity among studies is warranted to improve evidence of the expected success of ART after a cancer diagnosis.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported in part by R01 CA211093 and P30 ES010126. C.M. was supported by the University of North Carolina Lineberger Cancer Control Education Program (T32 CA057726) and the National Cancer Institute (F31 CA260787). J.A.R.-H. was supported by the National Cancer Institute (K08 CA234333, P30 CA016672). J.A.R.-H. reports receiving consulting fees from Schlesinger Group and Guidepoint. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

The impact of letrozole on oocyte quality in assisted reproductive technology (ART); a randomized double-blind clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of letrozole on oocyte quality and pregnancy outcome in assisted reproductive technology (ART).

METHODS

This double blind placebo controlled clinical trial was conducted in Vali-Asr Infertility Center. Infertile women candidate for IVF that underwent antagonist protocol were selected. Eligible women randomly allocated into treatment (letrozole/Let group) and control (placebo) group. Participants received letrozole 5 mg/day or placebo at the time of gonadotropin start until trigger day in the same manner. Number of oocyte retrieved, metaphase II oocyte number, high grade oocyte number (G1), high quality embryo, Chemical and clinical pregnancy rate and OHSS (ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome) rate was recorded. 216 infertile women (104 in letrozole and 112 in the control group) were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the Let group estradiol level was significantly lower (p_value < .001) and testosterone significantly higher than in the control group (p_value = .02). The number of retrieved oocytes, MII oocytes, G1 oocytes, and 2PN was significantly lower in the Let group (p < .05). No significant difference was found in the day of stimulation, total gonadotropin dose, OHSS rate, and clinical pregnancy rate between the two groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results, letrozole may reduce oocyte quality and cause poor IVF outcomes as well.

Effects of letrozole or tamoxifen coadministered with a standard stimulation protocol on fertility preservation among breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of letrozole or tamoxifen coadministration on fertility preservation treatment outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of 118 breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation treatment between 2008 and 2018. Patients who received letrozole (n = 36) or tamoxifen (n = 30) were compared to controls (n = 52) who underwent standard ovarian stimulation protocols. The primary outcome measures included the number of retrieved oocytes, mature oocytes (MII), fertilization, and top-quality embryo rates. The secondary outcome measures included duration of stimulation, gonadotropin dose and peak estradiol level.

RESULTS

The number of oocytes retrieved, MII oocytes, fertilization rate, duration of stimulation, or gonadotropin dose were similar in the letrozole and tamoxifen groups, compared to controls. Top-quality embryo rate was lower in the tamoxifen group compared to controls (25% vs 39.4%, respectively, P = 0.034). The abnormal fertilization rate was higher in the letrozole group compared to controls (7.8% vs 3.60%, respectively, P = 0.015). A stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that letrozole and peak estradiol were significantly associated with abnormal fertilization (OR 11.94; 95% CI 2.35-60.4, P = 0.003 for letrozole and OR 1.075; 95% CI 1.024-1.12, P = 0.004 per 100 unit change in estradiol).

CONCLUSIONS

There may be a negative effect of letrozole or tamoxifen on fertilization and embryo quality, in fertility preservation cycles. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Efficacy and Safety of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation With or Without Letrozole Co-administration for Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The co-administration of letrozole during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins is used to limit the potentially harmful effects of a supra-physiological rise in estrogen levels on hormone-sensitive cancers. However, the efficacy and safety of adding letrozole to COS remain debated.

Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared the efficacy and safety of COS with co-administration of letrozole vs. COS without letrozole in all patient populations. A secondary analysis was done including only the studies in breast cancer patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the number of retrieved mature Metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Secondary efficacy and safety endpoints were total number of oocytes, maturation rate, fertilization rate, number of cryopreserved embryos, peak estradiol levels, progesterone levels, and total gonadotropin dose. Data for each endpoint were reported and analyzed thorough mean ratio (MR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results: A total of 11 records were selected including 2,121 patients (990 patients underwent COS with letrozole and 1,131 COS without letrozole). The addition of letrozole to COS did not have any negative effect on the number of mature oocytes collected (MR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.87–1.16; P = 0.967) and the other efficacy endpoints. COS with letrozole was associated with significantly decreased peak estradiol levels (MR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.24–0.32; P < 0.001). Similar results were observed in the secondary analysis including only breast cancer patients.

Conclusions: These findings are reassuring on the efficacy and safety of COS with gonadotropins and letrozole and are particularly important for fertility preservation in women with hormone-sensitive cancers.

Aromatase Inhibitors for Ovarian Stimulation in Patients with Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy diagnosed in women, and its treatment has a high probability of loss of fertility. Oocyte vitrification is the most commonly used technique to preserve fertility before starting oncological treatment. Aromatase inhibitors induce hypoestrogenemia while promoting the release of gonadotropins and constitute an alternative drug for ovarian stimulation in patients with breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE

In this mini-review, we update and describe the current status of aromatase inhibitor use in controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte vitrification in patients with breast cancer.

RESULTS

Aromatase inhibitors are commonly used in combination with gonadotropins for ovarian stimulation in patients with breast cancer who preserve their fertility through oocyte vitrification. They achieve similar ovarian responses as conventional ovarian stimulation protocols in regards to the number of oocytes, and no additional complications after their use have been reported. Furthermore, aromatase inhibitors seem to be safe not only for offspring, as no more congenital defects occur in newborns from pregnancies achieved after their use, but also for the patients, as no more malignancy recurrence or increased mortality was found in cohort studies.

CONCLUSION

Aromatase inhibitors are elective drugs for ovarian stimulation in patients with breast cancer who decide to preserve their fertility through oocyte vitrification.