Oocyte cryopreservation and reciprocal in vitro fertilization in a transgender man on long term testosterone gender-affirming hormone therapy: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To report a successful case of oocyte cryopreservation and subsequent in vitro fertilization (IVF) in a transgender male receiving continued testosterone gender-affirming hormone therapy, followed by reciprocal embryo transfer (ET). Design: A case report of a rare case of fertility preservation in a transgender man with concomitant use of testosterone therapy for 4 years before and during ovarian stimulation. Setting: Private fertility clinic with university affiliation. Patients: A 26-year-old transgender man undergoing oocyte cryopreservation before gender-affirming surgery. Interventions: Fertility preservation using oocyte cryopreservation and IVF with reciprocal fresh ET into a cisfemale partner. Main Outcome Measures: Successful oocyte cryopreservation, oocyte thawing, and reciprocal IVF cycle. Results: Oocyte cryopreservation of 29 mature oocytes. Sixteen mature oocytes survived the thaw, and 12 were fertilized with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. A fresh ET of an advanced blastocyst resulted in a clinical pregnancy and live birth. Conclusions: Fertility preservation with oocyte cryopreservation or IVF with embryo cryopreservation is feasible for patients on continued long-term testosterone gender-affirming therapy. Future studies on egg quality and reproductive outcomes are required. Our case report demonstrates a promising outcome in this patient population.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".