These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: IVF characteristics and the molecular luteal features of random start IVF cycles are not different from conventional cycles in cancer patients. Author: Esmaeilian Y, Hela F, Bildik G, Akin N, İltumur E, Yusufoglu S, Yildiz CS, Keles İ, Vatansever D, Taskiran C, Yakin K, Oktem O. Journal: Hum Reprod; 2023 Jan 05; 38(1):113-124. PubMed ID: 36367834. Abstract: STUDY QUESTION: Are the IVF parameters and the steroidogenic luteal characteristics of random-start IVF cycles different from conventional cycles in cancer patients? SUMMARY ANSWER: No; controlled ovarian stimulation cycles randomly started at late follicular phase (LFP) and luteal phase (LP) are totally comparable to those conventional IVF cycles started at early follicular phase (EFP) in terms of the expression of the enzymes involved in cholesterol utilization and steroid hormone biosynthesis pathways, gonadotropin receptor expression and, estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4) production in addition to the similarities in ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation, oocyte yield, fertilization rate and embryo development competency in cancer patients. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Random start ovarian stimulation protocols are commonly employed for oocyte and embryo freezing for fertility preservation in cancer patients with time constraints who do not have sufficient time to undergo ovarian stimulation initiated conventionally at EFP of the next cycle. No data is available regarding the molecular steroidogenic features of these cycles analyzed together with the clinical IVF characteristics in cancer patients. We aimed to address this question in this study to help understand how similar the random start cycles are to the conventional start ones. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A clinical translational research study conducted in 62 cancer patients undergoing IVF for fertility preservation between the years 2017 and 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Sixty-two patients who were diagnosed with different types of cancer and underwent ovarian stimulation for oocyte (n = 41) and embryo (n = 21) cryopreservation using GnRH antagonist protocol and human menopausal gonadotropins before receiving cancer treatment/surgery were enrolled in the study. For patients with breast cancer and endometrial cancer the aromatase inhibitor letrozole was used with gonadotropin stimulation. Ovarian stimulation was initiated conventionally at EFP in 22 patients and served as control while it was started at LFP in 20, and mid-LP in the other 20 patients. The luteinized granulosa cells (GCs) were recovered from follicular aspirates during oocyte retrieval procedure and used for the experiments separately for each individual patient. The expression of the enzymes involved in sex steroid biosynthesis (StAR, 3β-HSD, Aromatase) and cholesterol synthesis (3-hydroxy 3-methylglutaryl Co-A reductase (HMG-Co-A reductase)), utilization (hormone sensitive lipase (HSL)), and storage (Acetyl-Coenzyme A acetyltransferase 1 (ACAT-1)), and gonadotropin receptor expression status were analyzed using immunoblotting and RT-PCR methods. Laser confocal immunofluorescence imaging was applied to analyze and compare the expression patterns of the steroidogenic enzymes and their relation with mitochondria. In vitro E2 and P4 production by the cells were compared among the groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline demographic and IVF characteristics of the patients undergoing the conventional start and random start IVF cycles were similar. Duration of gonadotropin stimulation was significantly longer in LFP and LP start cycles in comparison to the conventional ones. Ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation, mature and total oocyte yield, fertilization and Day 5 blastulation rates of the embryos were comparable between the conventional versus random start cycles. When the luteal GCs of these random start cycles were analyzed we could not find any gross differences between these cycles in terms of the viability index and gross light microscopic morphologic features. More detailed analysis of the molecular luteal characteristics of the cells using RT-PCR, immunoblotting methods revealed that the expression profiles of the gonadotropin receptors, and the enzymes involved in sex steroid biosynthesis and cholesterol synthesis/utilization, and the steroidogenic activity of the luteal GCs of the random start cycles are almost identical to those of the conventional start cycles. Confocal image analysis demonstrated similar patterns in the signal expression profiles of the steroidogenic enzymes and their co-localization within mitochondria. LARGE SCALE DATA: N/A. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Caution should be exercised when interpreting our data and counseling cancer patients seeking fertility preservation because it is still unclear if previous exposure to cancer drugs, different ovarian pathologies or infertility etiologies, previous ovarian surgery and/or any other underlying diseases that are concomitantly present with cancer may cause a difference between conventional and random start stimulation protocols in terms of IVF parameters, luteal function and reproductive outcome. Relatively low number of patients in each stimulation protocol and pooling of luteal GCs for each patient rather than individual analysis of each follicle and oocyte are additional limitations of our study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings provide reassurance that random start protocol offers cancer patients an equally good prospect of fertility preservation as conventional IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Funded by the School of Medicine, the Graduate School of Health Sciences of Koc University and Koç University Research Center for Translational Medicine (KUTTAM), equally funded by the Republic of Turkey Ministry of Development Research Infrastructure Support Program. All authors declare no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]