Cargando…

Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy

The only clinically accepted method of fertility preservation in young women facing gonadotoxic chemo- and/or radiotherapy for malignant or autoimmune diseases is cryopreservation of embryos or unfertilized ova, whereas cryopreservation of ovarian tissue for future reimplantation, or in vitro matura...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Blumenfeld, Zeev
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6710670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31488958
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1179558119870163
_version_ 1783446382647967744
author Blumenfeld, Zeev
author_facet Blumenfeld, Zeev
author_sort Blumenfeld, Zeev
collection PubMed
description The only clinically accepted method of fertility preservation in young women facing gonadotoxic chemo- and/or radiotherapy for malignant or autoimmune diseases is cryopreservation of embryos or unfertilized ova, whereas cryopreservation of ovarian tissue for future reimplantation, or in vitro maturation of follicles, and the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) are still considered investigational, by several authorities. Whereas previous publications have raised the fear of GnRHa’s possible detrimental effects in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers, recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that it either improves or does not affect disease-free survival (DFS) in such patients. This review summarizes the pros and cons of GnRHa co-treatment for fertility preservation, suggesting 5 theoretical mechanisms for GnRHa action: (1) simulating the prepubertal hypogonadotropic milieu, (2) direct effect on GnRH receptors, (3) decreased ovarian perfusion, (4) upregulation of an ovarian-protecting molecule such as sphingosine-1-phosphate, and (5) protecting a possible germinative stem cell. We try to explain the reasons for the discrepancy between most publications that support the use of GnRHa for fertility preservation and the minority of publications that did not support its efficiency.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6710670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67106702019-09-05 Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy Blumenfeld, Zeev Clin Med Insights Reprod Health Fertility Preservation: Present Practice and Future Endeavors The only clinically accepted method of fertility preservation in young women facing gonadotoxic chemo- and/or radiotherapy for malignant or autoimmune diseases is cryopreservation of embryos or unfertilized ova, whereas cryopreservation of ovarian tissue for future reimplantation, or in vitro maturation of follicles, and the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) are still considered investigational, by several authorities. Whereas previous publications have raised the fear of GnRHa’s possible detrimental effects in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers, recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that it either improves or does not affect disease-free survival (DFS) in such patients. This review summarizes the pros and cons of GnRHa co-treatment for fertility preservation, suggesting 5 theoretical mechanisms for GnRHa action: (1) simulating the prepubertal hypogonadotropic milieu, (2) direct effect on GnRH receptors, (3) decreased ovarian perfusion, (4) upregulation of an ovarian-protecting molecule such as sphingosine-1-phosphate, and (5) protecting a possible germinative stem cell. We try to explain the reasons for the discrepancy between most publications that support the use of GnRHa for fertility preservation and the minority of publications that did not support its efficiency. SAGE Publications 2019-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6710670/ /pubmed/31488958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1179558119870163 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Fertility Preservation: Present Practice and Future Endeavors
Blumenfeld, Zeev
Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy
title Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy
title_full Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy
title_fullStr Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy
title_full_unstemmed Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy
title_short Fertility Preservation Using GnRH Agonists: Rationale, Possible Mechanisms, and Explanation of Controversy
title_sort fertility preservation using gnrh agonists: rationale, possible mechanisms, and explanation of controversy
topic Fertility Preservation: Present Practice and Future Endeavors
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6710670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31488958
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1179558119870163
work_keys_str_mv AT blumenfeldzeev fertilitypreservationusinggnrhagonistsrationalepossiblemechanismsandexplanationofcontroversy