JBRA Assist. Reprod. 2025;29(Suppl 1):50-50
POSTER PRESENTATION
doi: 10.5935/1518-0557.20250104
1Halitus Instituto Médico, Argentina
2Sociedad Argentina para la Preservación de la Fertilidad (SAPREF), Argentina
1Centro de Estudios Biomédicos, Básicos, Aplicados y Desarrollo (CEBBAD), Universidad Maimónides, Argentina
Objective: To evaluate whether ovarian response during controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte vitrification is affected by oncological pathology.
Methods: This retrospective, analytical, case-control study analyzed data from 513 patients in Argentina between 2008-2025. Patients under 40 years were divided into the Oncological Group (OG) (n=134) and Control Group (CG) (n=379), who underwent elective oocyte vitrification. Data on total oocyte (TO) retrieval and mature oocytes (MII) were analyzed by age categories: ≤34 and ≥35 years.
Results: As for TO and MII retrieval, no significant differences were observed between CG and OG ≤ 34 years, 15.12±10.16 vs 14.88±9.35 and 9.49±7.12 vs 10.74±6.57. In patients ≥35, the number of TO and MII was significantly lower (p < 0.05) in OG than in CG. (9.76±6.57 vs 13.14±8.17) (6.27±4.97 vs 9.03±5.46). In patients ≥35 years the number of TO and MII was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in other tumors compared to breast cancer (TO 13.05 ±5.73 vs TO 10.02 ±6.69 and MII 9 ±5.41 vs 6.14± 4.97) The ovarian response in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy versus those who do not, shows no significant differences.
Conclusion: In women over 35, cancer appears to negatively impact oocyte quality, possibly due to age-related susceptibility and the biological effects of cancer. Patients with breast cancer may have a less favorable ovarian response compared to those with other types of cancer, especially in those over 35. Oocyte vitrification is recommended for fertility preservation, as future antitumor treatments are highly gonadotoxic.