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... Show moreSTUDY 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. Show less
The septate uterus has an estimated prevalence of 0.2% to 2.3% in women of reproductive age and is associated with impaired reproductive outcomes, the biologic basis of which is unclear. The... Show moreThe septate uterus has an estimated prevalence of 0.2% to 2.3% in women of reproductive age and is associated with impaired reproductive outcomes, the biologic basis of which is unclear. The standard-of-care treatment for septate uterus is hysteroscopic septum resection. The evidence base for this procedure entails observational studies and nonrandomized comparative studies, resulting in relatively low-quality evidence and conflicting professional society guidelines.This large, multicenter cohort study aimed to determine whether hysteroscopic septum resection improves reproductive outcomes compared with expectant management in women with a septate uterus who wish to conceive. Data on women with septate uterus between January 2000 and August 2018 were obtained from 18 centers in the Netherlands, 2 centers in the United States, and 1 center in the United Kingdom. Additionally, women declining participation in a separate 2015 randomized controlled trial examining differences between septum resection and expectant management were invited for participation prospectively. Data involving baseline characteristics, treatment, and pregnancies that occurred prior to identification of septate uterus (OB history) and following septate uterus diagnosis (follow-up) were obtained via medical record. Septate uterus was defined by the treating physician and ascertained with hysterosalpinography, 3D ultrasound, MRI, saline or gel infusion sonohysterography, or hysteroscopy combined with laparoscopy. The primary outcome measurement was live birth, and secondary outcomes included ongoing pregnancy, early pregnancy loss, preterm birth, and fetal malpresentation. Comparative analysis between septum resection and expectant management arms involved only the first live birth or ongoing pregnancy in follow-up. Cox proportional regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for differences in live birth and ongoing pregnancy rate between women in the 2 arms while accounting for follow-up time.A total of 257 women were confirmed eligible and included in the study for analysis, of which 151 underwent septum resection, and 106 underwent expectant management. In women who underwent resection compared with expectant management, a lower proportion was of White origin, more women had a history of subfertility, a lesser percentage had previous live birth (16.6% vs 36.8%, P < 0.001), and ascertainment of the septate uterus was significantly different (P < 0.001). Themedian duration of follow-up was 46 months, and 53% of women who had septum resection had at least 1 live birth compared with 71.7% who had expectant management (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-1.02). There was no significant difference in cumulative live birth between the groups. When restricting analysis to 1 year following septate uterus diagnosis, 32 women who underwent resection had a live birth (21.2%) compared with 36 women who underwent expectant management (37.1%) (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27-0.75). Womenwith 1 or more previous pregnancy losses undergoing septumresection were found to have an increased risk of pregnancy loss compared with women who had expectant management (OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.05-6.67).This multicenter cohort study demonstrates that more than 50% of women with a septate uterus who wish to conceive had a live birth. The results show that septum resection does not lead to improved birth outcomes or a decrease in risk of pregnancy loss or preterm birth compared with expectant management in these women. Show less
STUDY QUESTION: Does septum resection improve reproductive outcomes in women with a septate uterus?SUMMARY ANSWER: In women with a septate uterus, septum resection does not increase live birth rate... Show moreSTUDY QUESTION: Does septum resection improve reproductive outcomes in women with a septate uterus?SUMMARY ANSWER: In women with a septate uterus, septum resection does not increase live birth rate nor does it decrease the rates of pregnancy loss or preterm birth, compared with expectant management.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The septate uterus is the most common uterine anomaly with an estimated prevalence of 0.2-2.3% in women of reproductive age, depending on the classification system. The definition of the septate uterus has been a long-lasting and ongoing subject of debate, and currently two classification systems are used worldwide. Women with a septate uterus may be at increased risk of subfertility, pregnancy loss, preterm birth and foetal malpresentation. Based on low quality evidence, current guidelines recommend removal of the intrauterine septum or, more cautiously, state that the procedure should be evaluated in future studies.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an international multicentre cohort study in which we identified women mainly retrospectively by searching in electronic patient files, medical records and databases within the time frame of January 2000 until August 2018. Searching of the databases, files and records took place between January 2016 and July 2018. By doing so, we collected data on 257 women with a septate uterus in 21 centres in the Netherlands, USA and UK.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included women with a septate uterus, defined by the treating physician, according to the classification system at that time. The women were ascertained among those with a history of subfertility, pregnancy loss, preterm birth or foetal malpresentation or during a routine diagnostic procedure. Allocation to septum resection or expectant management was dependent on the reproductive history and severity of the disease. We excluded women who did not have a wish to conceive at time of diagnosis. The primary outcome was live birth. Secondary outcomes included pregnancy loss, preterm birth and foetal malpresentation. All conceptions during follow-up were registered but for the comparative analyses, only the first live birth or ongoing pregnancy was included. To evaluate differences in live birth and ongoing pregnancy, we used Cox proportional regression to calculate hazard rates (HRs) and 95% CI. To evaluate differences in pregnancy loss, preterm birth and foetal malpresentation, we used logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (OR) with corresponding 95% CI. We adjusted all reproductive outcomes for possible confounders.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In total, 257 women were included in the cohort. Of these, 151 women underwent a septum resection and 106 women had expectant management. The median follow-up time was 46 months. During this time, live birth occurred in 80 women following a septum resection (53.0%) compared to 76 women following expectant management (71.7%) (HR 0.71 95% CI 0.49-1.02) and ongoing pregnancy occurred in 89 women who underwent septum resection (58.9%), compared to 80 women who had expectant management (75.5%) (HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-1.06)). Pregnancy loss occurred in 51 women who underwent septum resection (46.8%) versus 31 women who had expectant management (34.4%) (OR 1.58 (0.81-3.09)), while preterm birth occurred in 26 women who underwent septum resection (29.2%) versus 13 women who had expectant management (16.7%) (OR 1.26 (95% CI 0.52-3.04)) and foetal malpresentation occurred in 17 women who underwent septum resection (19.1%) versus 27 women who had expectant management (34.6%) (OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.24-1.33)).LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our retrospective study has a less robust design compared with a randomized controlled trial. Over the years, the ideas about the definition of the septate uterus has changed, but since the 257 women with a septate uterus included in this study had been diagnosed by their treating physician according to the leading classification system at that time, the data of this study reflect the daily practice of recent decades. Despite correcting for the most relevant patient characteristics, our estimates might not be free of residual confounding.WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our results suggest that septum resection, a procedure that is widely offered and associated with financial costs for society, healthcare systems or individuals, does not lead to improved reproductive outcomes compared to expectant management for women with a septate uterus. The results of this study need to be confirmed in randomized clinical trials. Show less
