Safety of fertility preservation techniques before and after anticancer treatments in young women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: Is it safe to perform controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation before starting anticancer therapies or ART after treatments in young breast cancer patients? SUMMARY ANSWER: Performing COS before, or ART following anticancer treatment in young women with breast cancer does not seem to be associated with detrimental prognostic effect in terms of breast cancer recurrence, mortality or event-free survival (EFS). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: COS for oocyte/embryo cryopreservation before starting chemotherapy is standard of care for young women with breast cancer wishing to preserve fertility. However, some oncologists remain concerned on the safety of COS, particularly in patients with hormone-sensitive tumors, even when associated with aromatase inhibitors. Moreover, limited evidence exists on the safety of ART in breast cancer survivors for achieving pregnancy after the completion of anticancer treatments. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The present systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out by three blinded investigators using the keywords 'breast cancer' and 'fertility preservation'; keywords were combined with Boolean operators. Eligible studies were identified by a systematic literature search of Medline, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane library with no language or date restriction up to 30 June 2021. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: To be included in this meta-analysis, eligible studies had to be case-control or cohort studies comparing survival outcomes of women who underwent COS or ART before or after breast cancer treatments compared to breast cancer patients not exposed to these strategies. Survival outcomes of interest were cancer recurrence rate, relapse rate, overall survival and number of deaths. Adjusted relative risk (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI were extracted. When the number of events for each group were available but the above measures were not reported, HRs were estimated using the Watkins and Bennett method. We excluded case reports or case series with <10 patients and studies without a control group of breast cancer patients who did not pursue COS or ART. Quality of data and risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 1835 records were retrieved. After excluding ineligible publications, 15 studies were finally included in the present meta-analysis (n = 4643). Among them, 11 reported the outcomes of breast cancer patients who underwent COS for fertility preservation before starting chemotherapy, and 4 the safety of ART following anticancer treatment completion. Compared to women who did not receive fertility preservation at diagnosis (n = 2386), those who underwent COS (n = 1594) had reduced risk of recurrence (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73) and mortality (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.76). No detrimental effect of COS on EFS was observed (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.55-1.06). A similar trend of better outcomes in terms of EFS was observed in women with hormone-receptor-positive disease who underwent COS (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20-0.65). A reduced risk of recurrence was also observed in patients undergoing COS before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.80). Compared to women not exposed to ART following completion of anticancer treatments (n = 540), those exposed to ART (n = 123) showed a tendency for better outcomes in terms of recurrence ratio (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17-0.70) and EFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17-1.11). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This meta-analysis is based on abstracted data and most of the studies included are retrospective cohort studies. Not all studies had matching criteria between the study population and the controls, and these criteria often differed between the studies. Moreover, rate of recurrence is reported as a punctual event and it is not possible to establish when recurrences occurred and whether follow-up, which was shorter than 5 years in some of the included studies, is adequate to capture late recurrences. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our results demonstrate that performing COS at diagnosis or ART following treatment completion does not seem to be associated with detrimental prognostic effect in young women with breast cancer, including among patients with hormone receptor-positive disease and those receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Partially supported by the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC; grant number MFAG 2020 ID 24698) and the Italian Ministry of Health-5 × 1000 funds 2017 (no grant number). M.L. acted as consultant for Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, MSD, Exact Sciences, Gilead, Seagen and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Ipsen, Takeda, Libbs, Knight, Sandoz outside the submitted work. F.S. acted as consultant for Novartis, MSD, Sun Pharma, Philogen and Pierre Fabre and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Merck, Sun Pharma, Sanofi and Pierre Fabre outside the submitted work. I.D. has acted as a consultant for Roche, has received research grants from Roche and Ferring, has received reagents for academic clinical trial from Roche diagnostics, speaker's fees from Novartis, and support for congresses from Theramex and Ferring outside the submitted work. L.D.M. reported honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, Novartis and had an advisory role for Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, MSD, Genomic Health, Pierre Fabre, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, AstraZeneca, Eisai outside the submitted work. The other authors declare no conflict of interest. The funding organizations had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Risk of contamination of semen, vaginal secretions, follicular fluid and ovarian medulla with SARS-CoV-2 in patients undergoing ART.

STUDY QUESTION: Can severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA be detected in the reproductive tract of asymptomatic patients undergoing ART? SUMMARY ANSWER: SARS-CoV-2 mRNA is not detectable in semen, follicular fluid, vaginal secretions or residual medulla from ovarian tissue cryopreservation procedures in asymptomatic patients who undergo ART, irrespective of the results of a triage questionnaire and a nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection test. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a huge impact on the activities of fertility clinics. Although some studies reported the presence of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA in the reproductive system during or after acute COVID-19 symptomatic infections, uncertainties remain regarding the presence of viral mRNA in the reproductive material and follicular fluid of asymptomatic patients undergoing ART. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An observational cohort trial of residual material samples including semen, follicular fluid, vaginal secretions and ovarian medulla was conducted during the second pandemic wave in Brussels from September 2020 to April 2021. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All patients who underwent ART (IUI, IVF/ICSI, oocyte and ovarian tissue cryopreservation) responded to a triage questionnaire at the beginning and end of the cycle and underwent nasopharyngeal swab collection for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection by RT-PCR before the procedure according to standard recommendations. For semen analysis, only the questionnaire was requested the day before the sample collection. The ART cycles of patients with positive nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection tests and/or questionnaires were cancelled except for those that could not be postponed. After providing informed consent, swabs on residual materials were collected the day of the oocyte, ovarian tissue or semen collection and were processed for RT-qPCR. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 394 samples from 291 patients were analysed. Amongst them, 20 samples were obtained from patients with a positive questionnaire but negative nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 test and 20 others were from patients with a positive nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 test. The remaining samples were collected from patients with a negative or unknown nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 test and/or a negative or unknown triage questionnaire. Viral RNA for SARS-CoV-2 was undetectable in all of the samples. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Considering the cancellation policy, only a limited number of samples from patients with positive triage questionnaires or nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 tests were included in the analysis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The study suggested that there was no risk of reproductive tract contamination by SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic patients, irrespective of the results from a triage questionnaire or nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 test. The results suggested that no additional measures to prevent staff or cross-patient contamination need to be implemented in the IVF and andrology laboratories. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the Université Libre de Bruxelles and by a grant from Ferring. A.D. and I.D. received a grant from Ferring for the study. The authors have no other conflict of interest to declare related to this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Reproductive potential and performance of fertility preservation strategies in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients.

Background: Preclinical evidence suggests a possible negative impact of deleterious BRCA mutations on female fertility. However, limited and rather conflicting clinical data are available. This study assessed the reproductive potential and performance of fertility preservation strategies in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of two prospective studies investigating oocyte cryopreservation and ovarian tissue cryopreservation in newly diagnosed early breast cancer patients. In the current analysis, baseline anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and performance of cryopreservation strategies were compared between patients with or without germline deleterious BRCA mutations. Results: Out of 156 patients included, 101 had known BRCA status of whom 29 (18.6%) were BRCA-mutated and 72 (46.1%) had no mutation. Median age in the entire cohort was 31 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28-33). Median AMH levels were 1.8 µg/l (IQR 1.0-2.7) and 2.6 µg/l (IQR 1.5-4.1) in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.109). Among patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation (N = 29), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to retrieve (6.5 versus 9; P = 0.145) and to cryopreserve (3.5 versus 6; P = 0.121) less oocytes than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Poor response rate (i.e. retrieval of ≤4 oocytes) was 40.0% and 11.1% in the BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative cohorts, respectively (P = 0.147). Among patients who underwent ovarian tissue cryopreservation (N = 72), women in the BRCA-positive cohort tended to have a numerically lower number of oocytes per fragment (0.08 versus 0.14; P = 0.193) and per square millimeter (0.33 versus 0.78; P = 0.153) than those in the BRCA-negative cohort. Two BRCA-mutated patients were transplanted after chemotherapy and one delivered at term a healthy baby. No difference between BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutated patients was observed in any of the above-mentioned outcomes. Conclusion: A consistent trend for reduced reproductive potential and performance of cryopreservation strategies was observed in BRCA-mutated breast cancer patients. Independent validation of these results is needed.

Progesterone levels in letrozole associated controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation in breast cancer patients.

STUDY QUESTION: Are progesterone levels after letrozole-associated controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation in breast cancer patients, lower than after standard in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles? SUMMARY ANSWER: During the luteal phase of letrozole-associated COS cycles (triggered with human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG)) progesterone levels are similarly elevated to those obtained after standard COS without letrozole. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Current fertility preservation strategies for breast cancer patients include association of COS with the aromatase inhibitor letrozole to harvest several mature oocytes while maintaining low estradiol levels. Data on progesterone levels are however lacking despite growing evidence of the role of progesterone in breast tumorigenesis. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a prospective observational study comparing estradiol and progesterone levels of 21 breast cancer patients undergoing letrozole-associated COS with 21 infertile patients undergoing standard COS for IVF and/or intra cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All patients underwent COS with a GnRH antagonist protocol. In the fertility preservation group, ovulation induction was started in the follicular or luteal phase depending on the chemotherapy schedule and in 10 cases a GnRH antagonist was administered during luteal phase to induce luteolysis. Final oocyte maturation was induced by hCG in all patients. Estradiol and progesterone levels were measured on the day of hCG, at oocyte retrieval, and on days 3 and 8 after oocyte retrieval. Hormone levels in fertility preservation patients were compared with those observed in infertility patients. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: While estradiol levels were significantly lower in the fertility preservation group compared with the control group (P < 0.001), progesterone levels were similar at all times, including patients receiving a GnRH antagonist during the luteal phase. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The studied populations (breast cancer and infertile patients) are different, which may induce selection bias. The small sample size limits the study's statistical power and the possibility to perform multivariate analysis. Recruitment of the study and control patients was completed at the same time; however, enrollment of controls started at a later time. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: While the use of letrozole in fertility preservation patients has a favorable effect on estrogen levels, no benefit is seen for progesterone levels which are high and comparable with progesterone levels after standard COS in IVF patients. As progesterone has been associated with tumor cell proliferation, caution is mandatory. Modified protocols including GnRH agonist triggering should be investigated.