Search

Background: Treatment exposures for childhood cancer reduce ovarian reserve. However, the success of assisted reproductive technology (ART) among female survivors is not well established. Methods: Five‐year survivors of childhood cancer in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study were linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System, which captures national ART outcomes. The authors assessed the live birth rate, the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), and associations with treatment exposure using generalized estimating equations to account for multiple ovarian stimulations per individual. Siblings from a random sample of survivors were recruited to serve as a comparison group. Results: Among 9885 female survivors, 137 (1.4%; median age at diagnosis, 10 years [range, 0–20 years]; median years of follow‐up after age 18 years, 11 years [range, 2–11 years]) underwent 224 ovarian stimulations using autologous or donor eggs and/or gestational carriers (157 autologous ovarian stimulation cycles, 67 donor ovarian stimulation cycles). In siblings, 33 (1.4%) underwent 51 autologous or donor ovarian stimulations. Of those who used embryos from autologous eggs without using gestational carriers, 97 survivors underwent 155 stimulations, resulting in 49 live births, for a 31.6% chance of live birth per ovarian stimulation (vs. 38.3% for siblings; p =.39) and a 43.9% chance of live birth per transfer (vs. 50.0%; p =.33). Prior treatment with cranial radiation therapy (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20–0.97) and pelvic radiation therapy (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15–0.73) resulted in a reduced chance of live birth compared with siblings. The likelihood of live birth after ART treatment in survivors was not affected by alkylator exposure (cyclophosphamide‐equivalent dose, ≥8000 mg/m2 vs. none; RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.52–2.05). Conclusions: Childhood cancer survivors are as likely to undergo treatment using ART as sibling controls. The success of ART treatment was not reduced after alkylator exposure. The results from the current study provide needed guidance on the use of ART in this population. Linking the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study database to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System revealed that childhood cancer survivors are as likely to undergo treatment with assisted reproductive technology as their siblings. The success of assisted reproductive technology was not reduced after alkylator exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Evaluate follicular phase progesterone elevation (≥ 1.5 ng/mL) prior to trigger during IVF stimulation and its effects on live birth rate (LBR), clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and implantation rate (IR) in fresh IVF cycles. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study within an academic clinic. A total of 6961 fresh IVF and IVF/ICSI cycles from October 1, 2015 to June 30, 2021 were included and grouped by progesterone (PR) prior to trigger: PR < 1.5 ng/mL (low PR group) and PR ≥ 1.5 ng/mL (high PR group). Main outcome measures included LBR, CPR, and IR. Results: Among all cycle starts, 1568 (22.5%) were in the high PR group and 5393 (77.5%) were in the low PR group. Of the cycles which proceeded to an embryo transfer, 416 (11.1%) were in the high PR group and 3341 (88.9%) were in the low PR group. The high PR group had significantly lower IR (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.64–0.88), CPR (aRR 0.74; 95% CI 0.64–0.87), and LBR (aRR 0.71; 95% CI 0.59–0.85) compared to the low PR group. When stratified by progesterone on the day of trigger (TPR), there was a clinically notable decrease in IR (16.8% vs 23.3%), CPR (28.1% vs 36.0%), and LBR (22.8% vs 28.9%) in the high PR group compared to the low PR group even when TPR < 1.5 ng/mL. Conclusions: In fresh IVF cycles in which TPR < 1.5 ng/mL, progesterone elevation ≥ 1.5 ng/mL at any point in time prior to trigger negatively impacts IR, CPR, and LBR. This data supports testing of serum progesterone in the follicular phase prior to trigger, as these patients may benefit from a freeze-all approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]