Abstract 3821
Background
Mature oocyte vitrification and storage is currently used to help patients preserving their ability to have offspring either for fertility preservation (FP) before gonadotoxic treatment such as chemotherapy or for elective purposes. Our meta-analysis investigated whether letrozole co-administration during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for FP is effective and safe.
Methods
A literature search using PubMed was conducted up to March 8th, 2019 to retrieve information from studies that compared the performance of COS with or without letrozole co-administration for FP. Mean or median values and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or standard deviations (SDs) were collected for efficacy (number of collected oocytes, number of mature oocytes, maturation rate) and safety (peak estradiol levels [E2], total gonadotropin dose, number of stimulation days) endpoints. Statistical analysis was conducted with random-effects model.
Results
A total of 10 articles were eligible including 1930 patients undergoing COS with or without letrozole. Studies compared COS with and without letrozole in cancer or infertile cohorts (N = 9) and infertile cohort only (N = 1). The total number of oocytes and mature oocytes collected were similar between letrozole and no letrozole groups while the peak estradiol was significantly higher in the standard COS without letrozole (Table).Table:
1829P
MR (letrozole vs no letrozole) | 95% CI | P-value | |
---|---|---|---|
Collected oocytes | 1.02 | 0.90-1.16 | 0.748 |
Mature oocytes | 0.98 | 0.83-1.16 | 0.830 |
Maturation rate | 0.94 | 0.86-1.03 | 0.181 |
Peak E2 | 0.27 | 0.22-0.32 | <0.001 |
Total gonadotropin | 0.97 | 0.86-1.10 | 0.676 |
Length of stimulation | 1.00 | 0.95-1.04 | 0.849 |
Conclusions
Letrozole co-administration during COS resulted to be as effective as standard COS but with significantly decreased peak estradiol levels, suggesting its increased safety especially for hormone-sensitive cancer patients.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
5553 - Cytokine genetic variations and worse quality of life among family caregivers of head and neck cancer patients in palliative care
Presenter: Daniel Pequeno
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
4321 - Health-related quality of life of advanced melanoma survivors treated with CTLA-4 immune checkpoint inhibition: a matched cohort study
Presenter: Annelies Boekhout
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
779 - Capecitabine vs Cisplatin along with concurrent radiotherapy in the treatment of inoperable lower esophageal cancers focusing on TWISTT score and QOL
Presenter: Goutham Anugu
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
5914 - Cancer, Mental Health and End Life Simulation (CAMhELS): A novel effectiveness evaluation.
Presenter: Asanga Fernando
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
2597 - Cancer patients’ expectations and understanding about their disease
Presenter: Mónica Pinho
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
5187 - Impact of patients’ death on oncologists and coping strategies: An online survey
Presenter: Soumaya Labidi
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
4579 - Clinical benefit from late lines of therapy offered to patients treated in a tertiary referral centre
Presenter: Andrea Sbrana
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
5058 - Preparedness for caregiving in caregivers of cancer patients
Presenter: Hatice Yakar
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
5917 - Oncologic Emergency Medicine in the real world: A survey and proposal for improvement
Presenter: Carintia Dorta Pérez
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract
4077 - The Reality of Critical Cancer Patients in a Polyvalent Intensive Care Unit
Presenter: Tiago Filipe Da Cruz Tomas
Session: Poster Display session 1
Resources:
Abstract