Fertility preservation for women with breast cancer: a multicentre randomized controlled trial on various ovarian stimulation protocols.

STUDY QUESTION: Does ovarian stimulation with the addition of tamoxifen or letrozole affect the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs) retrieved compared to standard ovarian stimulation in women with breast cancer who undergo fertility preservation? SUMMARY ANSWER: Alternative ovarian stimulation protocols with tamoxifen or letrozole did not affect the number of COCs retrieved at follicle aspiration in women with breast cancer. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Alternative ovarian stimulation protocols have been introduced for women with breast cancer who opt for fertility preservation by means of banking of oocytes or embryos. How these ovarian stimulation protocols compare to standard ovarian stimulation in terms of COC yield is unknown. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This multicentre, open-label randomized controlled superiority trial was carried out in 10 hospitals in the Netherlands and 1 hospital in Belgium between January 2014 and December 2018. We randomly assigned women with breast cancer, aged 18-43 years, who opted for banking of oocytes or embryos to one of three study arms; ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, ovarian stimulation plus letrozole or standard ovarian stimulation. Standard ovarian stimulation included GnRH antagonist, recombinant FSH and GnRH agonist trigger. Randomization was performed with a web-based system in a 1:1:1 ratio, stratified for oral contraception usage at start of ovarian stimulation, positive estrogen receptor (ER) status and positive lymph nodes. Patients and caregivers were not blinded to the assigned treatment. The primary outcome was number of COCs retrieved at follicle aspiration. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: During the study period, 162 women were randomly assigned to one of three interventions. Fifty-four underwent ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, 53 ovarian stimulation plus letrozole and 55 standard ovarian stimulation. Analysis was according to intention-to-treat principle. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: No differences among groups were observed in the mean (±SD) number of COCs retrieved: 12.5 (10.4) after ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, 14.2 (9.4) after ovarian stimulation plus letrozole and 13.6 (11.6) after standard ovarian stimulation (mean difference -1.13, 95% CI -5.70 to 3.43 for tamoxifen versus standard ovarian stimulation and 0.58, 95% CI -4.03 to 5.20 for letrozole versus standard ovarian stimulation). After adjusting for oral contraception usage at the start of ovarian stimulation, positive ER status and positive lymph nodes, the mean difference was -1.11 (95% CI -5.58 to 3.35) after ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen versus standard ovarian stimulation and 0.30 (95% CI -4.19 to 4.78) after ovarian stimulation plus letrozole versus standard ovarian stimulation. There were also no differences in the number of oocytes or embryos banked. There was one serious adverse event after standard ovarian stimulation: one woman was admitted to the hospital because of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The available literature on which we based our hypothesis, power analysis and sample size calculation was scarce and studies were of low quality. Our study did not have sufficient power to perform subgroup analysis on follicular, luteal or random start of ovarian stimulation. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our study showed that adding tamoxifen or letrozole to a standard ovarian stimulation protocol in women with breast cancer does not impact the effectiveness of fertility preservation and paves the way for high-quality long-term follow-up on breast cancer treatment outcomes and women's future pregnancy outcomes. Our study also highlights the need for high-quality studies for all women opting for fertility preservation, as alternative ovarian stimulation protocols have been introduced to clinical practice without proper evidence. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was supported by a grant (2011.WO23.C129) of 'Stichting Pink Ribbon', a breast cancer fundraising charity organization in the Netherlands. M.G., C.B.L. and R.S. declared that the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC (location VUMC) has received unconditional research and educational grants from Guerbet, Merck and Ferring, not related to the presented work. C.B.L. declared a speakers fee for Inmed and Yingming. S.C.L. reports grants and non-financial support from Agendia, grants, non-financial support and other from AstraZeneca, grants from Eurocept-pharmaceuticals, grants and non-financial support from Genentech/Roche and Novartis, grants from Pfizer, grants and non-financial support from Tesaro and Immunomedics, other from Cergentis, IBM, Bayer, and Daiichi-Sankyo, outside the submitted work; In addition, S.C.L. has a patent UN23A01/P-EP pending that is unrelated to the present work. J.M.J.S. reported payments and travel grants from Merck and Ferring. C.C.M.B. reports her role as unpaid president of the National guideline committee on Fertility Preservation in women with cancer. K.F. received unrestricted grants from Merck Serono, Good Life and Ferring not related to present work. K.F. declared paid lectures for Ferring. D.S. declared former employment from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD). K.F. declared paid lectures for Ferring. D.S. reports grants from MSD, Gedeon Richter and Ferring paid to his institution; consulting fee payments from MSD and Merck Serono paid to his institution; speaker honoraria from MSD, Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck Serono paid to his institution. D.S. has also received travel and meeting support from MSD, Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck Serono. No payments are related to present work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4108. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 6 August 2013. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 30 January 2014.

Hysteroscopy before in-vitro fertilisation (inSIGHT): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hysteroscopy is often done in infertile women starting in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) to improve their chance of having a baby. However, no data are available from randomised controlled trials to support this practice. We aimed to assess whether routine hysteroscopy before the first IVF treatment cycle increases the rate of livebirths. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial in seven university hospitals and 15 large general hospitals in the Netherlands. Women with a normal transvaginal ultrasound of the uterine cavity and no previous hysteroscopy who were scheduled for their first IVF treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to either hysteroscopy with treatment of detected intracavitary abnormalities before starting IVF (hysteroscopy group) or immediate start of the IVF treatment (immediate IVF group). Randomisation was done with web-based concealed allocation and was stratified by centre with variable block sizes. Participants, doctors, and outcome assessors were not masked to the assigned group. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy (detection of a fetal heartbeat at >12 weeks of gestation) within 18 months of randomisation and resulting in livebirth. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01242852. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2011, and Aug 27, 2013, we randomly assigned 750 women to receive either hysteroscopy (n=373) or immediate IVF (n=377). 209 (57%) of 369 women eligible for assessment in the hysteroscopy group and 200 (54%) of 373 in the immediate IVF group had a livebirth from a pregnancy during the trial period (relative risk 1·06, 95% CI 0·93-1·20; p=0·41). One (<1%) woman in the hysteroscopy group developed endometritis after hysteroscopy. INTERPRETATION: Routine hysteroscopy does not improve livebirth rates in infertile women with a normal transvaginal ultrasound of the uterine cavity scheduled for a first IVF treatment. Women with a normal transvaginal ultrasound should not be offered routine hysteroscopy. FUNDING: The Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW).

Development of the follicular basement membrane during human gametogenesis and early folliculogenesis.

BACKGROUND: In society, there is a clear need to improve the success rate of techniques to restore fertility. Therefore a deeper knowledge of the dynamics of the complex molecular environment that regulates human gametogenesis and (early) folliculogenesis in vivo is necessary. Here, we have studied these processes focusing on the formation of the follicular basement membrane (BM) in vivo. RESULTS: The distribution of the main components of the extracellular matrix (ECM) collagen IV, laminin and fibronectin by week 10 of gestation (W10) in the ovarian cortex revealed the existence of ovarian cords and of a distinct mesenchymal compartment, resembling the organization in the male gonads. By W17, the first primordial follicles were assembled individually in that (cortical) mesenchymal compartment and were already encapsulated by a BM of collagen IV and laminin, but not fibronectin. In adults, in the primary and secondary follicles, collagen IV, laminin and to a lesser extent fibronectin were prominent in the follicular BM. CONCLUSIONS: The ECM-molecular niche compartimentalizes the female gonads from the time of germ cell colonization until adulthood. This knowledge may contribute to improve methods to recreate the environment needed for successful folliculogenesis in vitro and that would benefit a large number of infertility patients.

The inSIGHT study: costs and effects of routine hysteroscopy prior to a first IVF treatment cycle. A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment a large drop is present between embryo transfer and occurrence of pregnancy. The implantation rate per embryo transferred is only 30%. Studies have shown that minor intrauterine abnormalities can be found in 11-45% of infertile women with a normal transvaginal sonography or hysterosalpingography. Two randomised controlled trials have indicated that detection and treatment of these abnormalities by office hysteroscopy after two failed IVF cycles leads to a 9-13% increase in pregnancy rate. Therefore, screening of all infertile women for intracavitary pathology prior to the start of IVF/ICSI is increasingly advocated. In absence of a scientific basis for such a policy, this study will assess the effects and costs of screening for and treatment of unsuspected intrauterine abnormalities by routine office hysteroscopy, with or without saline infusion sonography (SIS), prior to a first IVF/ICSI cycle. METHODS/DESIGN: Multicenter randomised controlled trial in asymptomatic subfertile women, indicated for a first IVF/ICSI treatment cycle, with normal findings at transvaginal sonography. Women with recurrent miscarriages, prior hysteroscopy treatment and intermenstrual blood loss will not be included. Participants will be randomised for a routine fertility work-up with additional (SIS and) hysteroscopy with on-the-spot-treatment of predefined intrauterine abnormalities versus the regular fertility work-up without additional diagnostic tests. The primary study outcome is the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate resulting in live birth achieved within 18 months of IVF/ICSI treatment after randomisation. Secondary study outcome parameters are the cumulative implantation rate; cumulative miscarriage rate; patient preference and patient tolerance of a SIS and hysteroscopy procedure. All data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle, using univariate and multivariate logistic regression and cox regression. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed to evaluate the costs of the additional tests as routine procedure. In total 700 patients will be included in this study. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will help to clarify the significance of hysteroscopy prior to IVF treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01242852.

Searching for metastases in ovarian tissue before autotransplantation: a tailor-made approach.

OBJECTIVE: To exclude minimal residual disease in remaining ovarian tissue after harvesting the ovarian cortex for cryopreservation, by means of a tailor-made approach. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Hospital laboratory. PATIENT(S): We evaluated the ovarian and tubal tissue from 47 cancer patients (breast cancer, [non-]Hodgkin lymphoma; osteo-, Ewing, myxoid lipo-, and oropharyngeal synovial sarcoma; cervical, rectal, and esophageal cancer), who had stored ovarian tissue for fertility preservation. INTERVENTION(S): Immunohistochemistry (IHC) with tumor-related antibodies and genetic mutation analysis were performed to detect micrometastases by multiple sectioning at three levels of the paraffin-embedded formalin-fixed material. Molecular assays were performed with the use of tissue between these three levels of sectioning. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Detection of micrometastases in ovaries. RESULT(S): We analyzed 847 ovarian slides to detect isolated tumor cells (ITCs) or micrometastases by IHC. In only one case (1/47) were ITCs detected in the fallopian tube. That patient had an intra-abdominal metastatic esophageal carcinoma. Additional DNA analyses of breast and rectal cancer, Ewing sarcoma, and human papilloma virus in cervical patients did not show evidence of micrometastases in the ovarian tissue. CONCLUSION(S): The tailor-made approach consisted of patient-specific tumor markers which were used to search for ovarian micrometastases. We found evidence of metastatic disease within the fallopian tube of a patient with intraperitoneal metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma.

The clinical value of 3-dimensional saline infusion sonography in addition to 2-dimensional saline infusion sonography in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: work in progress.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical relevance of 3-dimensional saline infusion sonography (3D-SIS) in addition to conventional SIS in women with abnormal uterine bleeding suspected of having intrauterine abnormalities. METHODS: All women suspected of having intrauterine abnormalities were eligible. Before 3D-SIS, conventional SIS was performed. The results of these techniques were compared with the "combined method reference standard" (hysteroscopy, endometrial sampling, and clinical follow-up in cases with normal SIS findings). Diagnostic characteristics (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of 3D-SIS and SIS were calculated as well as their respective accuracy in evaluating the histologic nature, the intrauterine extension, and the location of intrauterine abnormalities. Moreover, the reliability (kappa value) and clinical relevance of 3D-SIS were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 49 women were included, and 4 women were excluded. The positive predictive values of 3D-SIS and SIS were, respectively, 1.00 and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99; P = .15), and the diagnostic accuracy values were 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94-1.0) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.83-0.99; P = .08). Saline infusion sonography and 3D-SIS were equally accurate in evaluating the histologic nature, intrauterine extent, and location of intrauterine abnormalities (respective kappa values: 0.85 versus 0.93; P = .88; 0.83 versus 0.83; and 0.77 versus 0.80; P = .81). The reliability of 3D-SIS was good: intraobserver and interobserver agreement (kappa) were 0.78 and 0.72. Three women (6.7%) had the benefit of additional 3D-SIS: in these women, SIS wrongly led to a diagnosis of intrauterine abnormalities (P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional saline infusion sonography is valid and reliable in women suspected of having intrauterine abnormalities and may indeed have relevant clinical value in addition to conventional SIS.