Evaluation of ovarian reserve before and after chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Progress in oncology has improved patient survival. However, cancer chemotherapy can be gonadotoxic and affect their fertility. Recourse to fertility preservation before starting these treatments is therefore necessary in order to allow a better life quality after survival. The aim of this work was to study the impact of chemotherapy on ovarian reserve by AMH measurement. METHODS: This is a descriptive and longitudinal study from 2015 to 2018 carried out at Aziza Othmana hospital ART center in Tunis on patient aged less than 41 years who were candidates for fertility preservation. Patients included had AMH measurement prior to cancer treatment. We called them back to follow up the AMH level after chemotherapy. The AMH assay was performed by electrochemilumiescence technique. At the end, only 66 patients met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The most frequent pathologies were Hodgkin's lymphoma and breast cancer. The mean age of patients was 26.7 ± 6.8. The most used chemotherapy protocols were BEACOPP, ABVD or the combination of both in lymphoma and FEC + TXT for breast cancer treatment. A significant difference between AMH before and after chemotherapy was found for BEACOPP and FEC + TXT protocols (p < 10 3). The patient's age was correlated with the AMH decrease after chemotherapy (r = 0.577, p < 10 3). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that the high risk gonadotoxicity protocols were BEACOPP for lymphoma treatment and FEC + TXT for breast cancer treatment. However, studies with a larger sample and more time extended monitoring are necessary for a better gonadotoxicity understanding of the cancer treatments available today.

Progesterone for Luteal Phase Support in In Vitro Fertilization: Comparison of Vaginal and Rectal Pessaries to Vaginal Capsules: A Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: In IVF, Luteal phase support is usually performed using vaginal progesterone. A part of patients using this route reports being uncomfortable with this route. We tried to study whether the rectal route could be an effective alternative and associated with less discomfort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled study. All patient were eligible for IVF treatment for infertility. After oocyte pickup, 186 patients were allocated to one the following protocols for luteal phase support: (i) rectal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered rectally 200 mg three times a day, (ii) vaginal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day), and (iii) vaginal capsules group: natural micronized progesterone capsules administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day. On the day of pregnancy test, patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire conducted by an investigator in order to assess the tolerability and side effects of the LPS treatment taken. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of perineal irritation. RESULTS: Fifty eight patients were assigned to the rectal pessaries group, 68 patients to the vaginal pessaries group, and 60 patients to the vaginal capsules group. All patients adhered to their allocated treatment. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates per transfer did not differ between the three groups. Perineal irritation, which was our primary endpoint, was the same for all the three groups (respectively 1.7 % versus 5.9 % versus 11.7%). Regarding the other side effects, more patients experienced constipation and flatulence with the rectal route, whereas more patients reported vaginal discharge in the vaginal capsules group. CONCLUSION: Rectal administration for luteal phase support is effective and well accepted alternative to vaginal route.