MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119336309 · doi:10.1093/humrep/des143

Ovarian reserve and response to IVF and in vitro maturation treatment following chemotherapy

2012· article· en· W2119336309 on OpenAlex
Mukul K. Das, Fady Shehata, W.-Y. Son, Togas Tulandi, Hananel Holzer

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFertility preservationOvarian reserveChemotherapyAntral follicleInfertilityGynecologyRadiation therapyBreast cancerCancerOvarian cancerOncologyInternal medicineOvaryPregnancyFertilityBiologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy and radiotherapy can result in ovarian failure and premature menopause. However, there is still a paucity of information on the ovarian reserve and efficacy of assisted reproduction treatment (ART) procedures in patients with cancer previously exposed to chemotherapy or radiotherapy. The aim of our study was to evaluate the ovarian reserve and ovarian response to IVF or in vitro maturation (IVM) treatment in women who had previously been treated with chemotherapy. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we compared 23 women with cancer who had undergone chemotherapy and subsequently underwent fertility treatment with IVF (n=14) or IVM (n=9). In the IVF group, patients mostly had hematologic, gynecologic, gastro-intestinal, bone and soft tissue cancers, whereas in the IVM group patients had estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer, hematologic and brain cancers. The control (unexposed) group consisted of 70 age-matched women with male factor infertility undergoing the same treatment protocol (IVF n=42 and IVM n=28). All women were aged<42 years and undergoing their first cycle of ART. RESULTS: There were no differences in age and FSH levels between the cancer and the control groups. However, the antral follicle count (AFC) was lower in the cancer-IVF group (median: 5, range: 3-12) than in the control group (median: 15, range: 12-18; P=0.0009). Women with cancer treated with IVF had lower peak estradiol levels on the day of hCG administration than controls (P=0.006) and lower number of oocytes retrieved [median: 4.5, range: 2-7; versus 12 (8-16) in controls; P<0.0001]. In patients with cancer treated with IVM, the AFC was lower than in the control group (median: 14, range: 9.5-17; versus median: 20.5 range: 16-23, respectively; P=0.0007). Likewise, the number of oocytes retrieved was lower in the cancer-IVM group (median: 6, range: 4-10) than that in the control group (median 10.5, range: 7.5-17; P=0.01). The percentage of mature metaphase II oocytes was comparable in the cancer and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The ovarian reserve, response to gonadotrophins and number of oocytes retrieved are adversely affected by previous chemotherapy. This study reports the first series of IVM outcomes in cancer patients with a prior history of chemotherapy. In women with estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer, IVM of oocytes with cryopreservation of oocytes or embryos is a viable option. Since the efficacy of ART is significantly reduced after chemotherapy, early referral for fertility preservation before gonadotoxic treatment will give these young women the best chance to conceive.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it