Loading…

Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles

Purpose To evaluate fertility preservation outcomes in breast cancer women with different hormonal receptor profiles before oncological treatment. Methods The study population included women with a diagnosis of breast cancer who underwent fertility preservation from 2009 until 2018 at a university-a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2020-04, Vol.37 (4), p.913-921
Main Authors: Balayla, Jacques, Tulandi, Togas, Buckett, William, Holzer, Hananel, Steiner, Naama, Shrem, Guy, Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3
container_end_page 921
container_issue 4
container_start_page 913
container_title Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics
container_volume 37
creator Balayla, Jacques
Tulandi, Togas
Buckett, William
Holzer, Hananel
Steiner, Naama
Shrem, Guy
Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander
description Purpose To evaluate fertility preservation outcomes in breast cancer women with different hormonal receptor profiles before oncological treatment. Methods The study population included women with a diagnosis of breast cancer who underwent fertility preservation from 2009 until 2018 at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital. Stimulation parameters and fertility preservation outcomes were compared among the following receptor-specific profile groups: (1) estrogen receptor positive (ER+) versus estrogen receptor negative (ER−), (2) triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) versus estrogen and progesterone receptor positive (ER+/PR+), and (3) TNBC versus non-TNBC. Primary outcome was the total number of mature oocytes. Secondary outcomes included the number of retrieved oocytes, the peak estradiol level, and the number of follicles > 14 mm on the final oocyte maturation trigger day. Results A total of 155 cycles were included in the final analysis. These were divided into the exposure groups of ER+ ( n  = 97), ER− ( n  = 58), ER+/PR+ ( n  = 85), TNBC ( n  = 57), and non-TNBC ( n  = 98). Cycle outcomes revealed similar number of retrieved oocytes and follicles > 14 mm on the trigger day. Women with TNBC had significantly lower number of mature oocytes compared with those with ER + PR+ (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–15); p  = 0.02) and non-TNBC (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–16); p  = 0.01) status. Triple-negative breast cancer profile was associated with a significant reduction in the chance of developing over 10 mature oocytes (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.92). Conclusion Among the different hormonal receptor profiles in breast cancer, the TNBC subtype has a negative effect on fertility preservation outcomes.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10815-020-01730-9
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7183026</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2374357707</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUtv1TAQhSNERUvhD7BAltiwCfUzTjZIqOIlVeoG1pZjj3tdJXawnVt1w2_Hl5QCXXTlx_nmzIxO07wi-B3BWJ5lgnsiWkxxi4lkuB2eNCdESNZKxvDTeseibzHv-uPmec7XGOOhp-xZc8wo4VxQftL8vFyLiTNkFB2Ke528DigXP6-TLj4GpINFDlLxky-3aEmQIe03yQc0JtC5IKODgYSW-g-hZHTjyw5Z72phfaNdTHMMekIJDCwlVjJF5yfIL5ojp6cML-_O0-b7p4_fzr-0F5efv55_uGgNl7y0lPaGOSZ5P3JjiO3Gfuh6pu0ohXXEOd5ZxyhISsFaAD1wiwUTVo6dMMKx0-b95rus4wzW1KmSntSS_KzTrYraq_-V4HfqKu6VJD3DtKsGb-8MUvyxQi5q9tnANOkAcc2K1uGYkBLLir55gF7HNdX1D9TAO9YxNlSKbpRJMecE7n4YgtUhXrXFq2q86ne86lD0-t817kv-5FkBtgG5SuEK0t_ej9j-Ar6AtQQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2394636339</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles</title><source>PubMed (Medline)</source><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Balayla, Jacques ; Tulandi, Togas ; Buckett, William ; Holzer, Hananel ; Steiner, Naama ; Shrem, Guy ; Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</creator><creatorcontrib>Balayla, Jacques ; Tulandi, Togas ; Buckett, William ; Holzer, Hananel ; Steiner, Naama ; Shrem, Guy ; Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To evaluate fertility preservation outcomes in breast cancer women with different hormonal receptor profiles before oncological treatment. Methods The study population included women with a diagnosis of breast cancer who underwent fertility preservation from 2009 until 2018 at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital. Stimulation parameters and fertility preservation outcomes were compared among the following receptor-specific profile groups: (1) estrogen receptor positive (ER+) versus estrogen receptor negative (ER−), (2) triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) versus estrogen and progesterone receptor positive (ER+/PR+), and (3) TNBC versus non-TNBC. Primary outcome was the total number of mature oocytes. Secondary outcomes included the number of retrieved oocytes, the peak estradiol level, and the number of follicles &gt; 14 mm on the final oocyte maturation trigger day. Results A total of 155 cycles were included in the final analysis. These were divided into the exposure groups of ER+ ( n  = 97), ER− ( n  = 58), ER+/PR+ ( n  = 85), TNBC ( n  = 57), and non-TNBC ( n  = 98). Cycle outcomes revealed similar number of retrieved oocytes and follicles &gt; 14 mm on the trigger day. Women with TNBC had significantly lower number of mature oocytes compared with those with ER + PR+ (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–15); p  = 0.02) and non-TNBC (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–16); p  = 0.01) status. Triple-negative breast cancer profile was associated with a significant reduction in the chance of developing over 10 mature oocytes (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.92). Conclusion Among the different hormonal receptor profiles in breast cancer, the TNBC subtype has a negative effect on fertility preservation outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-0468</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7330</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01730-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32144524</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>17β-Estradiol ; Adult ; Breast cancer ; Cryopreservation ; Estrogen receptors ; Estrogens - genetics ; Female ; Fertility ; Fertility Preservation ; Follicles ; Gynecology ; Human Genetics ; Humans ; Maturation ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Oocyte Retrieval - methods ; Oocytes ; Oocytes - growth &amp; development ; Oocytes - transplantation ; Ovulation Induction ; Population studies ; Preservation ; Progesterone ; Receptors, Estrogen - genetics ; Receptors, Progesterone - genetics ; Reproductive Medicine ; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - complications ; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - genetics ; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><ispartof>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2020-04, Vol.37 (4), p.913-921</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7901-3370</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7183026/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7183026/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32144524$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Balayla, Jacques</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulandi, Togas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buckett, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holzer, Hananel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steiner, Naama</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shrem, Guy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</creatorcontrib><title>Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles</title><title>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</title><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><description>Purpose To evaluate fertility preservation outcomes in breast cancer women with different hormonal receptor profiles before oncological treatment. Methods The study population included women with a diagnosis of breast cancer who underwent fertility preservation from 2009 until 2018 at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital. Stimulation parameters and fertility preservation outcomes were compared among the following receptor-specific profile groups: (1) estrogen receptor positive (ER+) versus estrogen receptor negative (ER−), (2) triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) versus estrogen and progesterone receptor positive (ER+/PR+), and (3) TNBC versus non-TNBC. Primary outcome was the total number of mature oocytes. Secondary outcomes included the number of retrieved oocytes, the peak estradiol level, and the number of follicles &gt; 14 mm on the final oocyte maturation trigger day. Results A total of 155 cycles were included in the final analysis. These were divided into the exposure groups of ER+ ( n  = 97), ER− ( n  = 58), ER+/PR+ ( n  = 85), TNBC ( n  = 57), and non-TNBC ( n  = 98). Cycle outcomes revealed similar number of retrieved oocytes and follicles &gt; 14 mm on the trigger day. Women with TNBC had significantly lower number of mature oocytes compared with those with ER + PR+ (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–15); p  = 0.02) and non-TNBC (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–16); p  = 0.01) status. Triple-negative breast cancer profile was associated with a significant reduction in the chance of developing over 10 mature oocytes (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.92). Conclusion Among the different hormonal receptor profiles in breast cancer, the TNBC subtype has a negative effect on fertility preservation outcomes.</description><subject>17β-Estradiol</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Cryopreservation</subject><subject>Estrogen receptors</subject><subject>Estrogens - genetics</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Fertility Preservation</subject><subject>Follicles</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Human Genetics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Maturation</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Oocyte Retrieval - methods</subject><subject>Oocytes</subject><subject>Oocytes - growth &amp; development</subject><subject>Oocytes - transplantation</subject><subject>Ovulation Induction</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Preservation</subject><subject>Progesterone</subject><subject>Receptors, Estrogen - genetics</subject><subject>Receptors, Progesterone - genetics</subject><subject>Reproductive Medicine</subject><subject>Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - complications</subject><subject>Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><issn>1058-0468</issn><issn>1573-7330</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kUtv1TAQhSNERUvhD7BAltiwCfUzTjZIqOIlVeoG1pZjj3tdJXawnVt1w2_Hl5QCXXTlx_nmzIxO07wi-B3BWJ5lgnsiWkxxi4lkuB2eNCdESNZKxvDTeseibzHv-uPmec7XGOOhp-xZc8wo4VxQftL8vFyLiTNkFB2Ke528DigXP6-TLj4GpINFDlLxky-3aEmQIe03yQc0JtC5IKODgYSW-g-hZHTjyw5Z72phfaNdTHMMekIJDCwlVjJF5yfIL5ojp6cML-_O0-b7p4_fzr-0F5efv55_uGgNl7y0lPaGOSZ5P3JjiO3Gfuh6pu0ohXXEOd5ZxyhISsFaAD1wiwUTVo6dMMKx0-b95rus4wzW1KmSntSS_KzTrYraq_-V4HfqKu6VJD3DtKsGb-8MUvyxQi5q9tnANOkAcc2K1uGYkBLLir55gF7HNdX1D9TAO9YxNlSKbpRJMecE7n4YgtUhXrXFq2q86ne86lD0-t817kv-5FkBtgG5SuEK0t_ej9j-Ar6AtQQ</recordid><startdate>20200401</startdate><enddate>20200401</enddate><creator>Balayla, Jacques</creator><creator>Tulandi, Togas</creator><creator>Buckett, William</creator><creator>Holzer, Hananel</creator><creator>Steiner, Naama</creator><creator>Shrem, Guy</creator><creator>Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7901-3370</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200401</creationdate><title>Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles</title><author>Balayla, Jacques ; Tulandi, Togas ; Buckett, William ; Holzer, Hananel ; Steiner, Naama ; Shrem, Guy ; Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>17β-Estradiol</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Cryopreservation</topic><topic>Estrogen receptors</topic><topic>Estrogens - genetics</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Fertility Preservation</topic><topic>Follicles</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Human Genetics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Maturation</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Oocyte Retrieval - methods</topic><topic>Oocytes</topic><topic>Oocytes - growth &amp; development</topic><topic>Oocytes - transplantation</topic><topic>Ovulation Induction</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Preservation</topic><topic>Progesterone</topic><topic>Receptors, Estrogen - genetics</topic><topic>Receptors, Progesterone - genetics</topic><topic>Reproductive Medicine</topic><topic>Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - complications</topic><topic>Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Balayla, Jacques</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulandi, Togas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buckett, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holzer, Hananel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steiner, Naama</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shrem, Guy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Balayla, Jacques</au><au>Tulandi, Togas</au><au>Buckett, William</au><au>Holzer, Hananel</au><au>Steiner, Naama</au><au>Shrem, Guy</au><au>Volodarsky-Perel, Alexander</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles</atitle><jtitle>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</jtitle><stitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</stitle><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><date>2020-04-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>913</spage><epage>921</epage><pages>913-921</pages><issn>1058-0468</issn><eissn>1573-7330</eissn><abstract>Purpose To evaluate fertility preservation outcomes in breast cancer women with different hormonal receptor profiles before oncological treatment. Methods The study population included women with a diagnosis of breast cancer who underwent fertility preservation from 2009 until 2018 at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital. Stimulation parameters and fertility preservation outcomes were compared among the following receptor-specific profile groups: (1) estrogen receptor positive (ER+) versus estrogen receptor negative (ER−), (2) triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) versus estrogen and progesterone receptor positive (ER+/PR+), and (3) TNBC versus non-TNBC. Primary outcome was the total number of mature oocytes. Secondary outcomes included the number of retrieved oocytes, the peak estradiol level, and the number of follicles &gt; 14 mm on the final oocyte maturation trigger day. Results A total of 155 cycles were included in the final analysis. These were divided into the exposure groups of ER+ ( n  = 97), ER− ( n  = 58), ER+/PR+ ( n  = 85), TNBC ( n  = 57), and non-TNBC ( n  = 98). Cycle outcomes revealed similar number of retrieved oocytes and follicles &gt; 14 mm on the trigger day. Women with TNBC had significantly lower number of mature oocytes compared with those with ER + PR+ (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–15); p  = 0.02) and non-TNBC (7 (5–11) versus 9 (7–16); p  = 0.01) status. Triple-negative breast cancer profile was associated with a significant reduction in the chance of developing over 10 mature oocytes (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.92). Conclusion Among the different hormonal receptor profiles in breast cancer, the TNBC subtype has a negative effect on fertility preservation outcomes.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>32144524</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10815-020-01730-9</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7901-3370</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1058-0468
ispartof Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2020-04, Vol.37 (4), p.913-921
issn 1058-0468
1573-7330
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7183026
source PubMed (Medline); Springer Nature
subjects 17β-Estradiol
Adult
Breast cancer
Cryopreservation
Estrogen receptors
Estrogens - genetics
Female
Fertility
Fertility Preservation
Follicles
Gynecology
Human Genetics
Humans
Maturation
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Oocyte Retrieval - methods
Oocytes
Oocytes - growth & development
Oocytes - transplantation
Ovulation Induction
Population studies
Preservation
Progesterone
Receptors, Estrogen - genetics
Receptors, Progesterone - genetics
Reproductive Medicine
Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - complications
Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - genetics
Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms - pathology
title Outcomes of ovarian stimulation and fertility preservation in breast cancer patients with different hormonal receptor profiles
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T13%3A19%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Outcomes%20of%20ovarian%20stimulation%20and%20fertility%20preservation%20in%20breast%20cancer%20patients%20with%20different%20hormonal%20receptor%20profiles&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20assisted%20reproduction%20and%20genetics&rft.au=Balayla,%20Jacques&rft.date=2020-04-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=913&rft.epage=921&rft.pages=913-921&rft.issn=1058-0468&rft.eissn=1573-7330&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10815-020-01730-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2374357707%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-228c3f3748b4cc1d6b89683adb75df1ff46df32e722eddeea94d0535d7b65c5f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2394636339&rft_id=info:pmid/32144524&rfr_iscdi=true