Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) ›› 2019, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (3): 536-541. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.03.024

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Anti-Müllerian hormone as a new marker of the ovarian reserve function preservation by goserelin during (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy for young breast cancer patients

Si-yuan WANG,Shu WANG()   

  1. Department of Breast Surgery, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China
  • Received:2019-03-15 Online:2019-05-09 Published:2019-06-26
  • Supported by:
    Supported by the Research and Development Fund of Peking University People’s Hospital(RD 2014-13 and 2015-Z-24)

Abstract: Objective: To observe the dynamic change of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) in 1 year after chemotherapy which is the best biochemical marker of ovarian reserve in reproductive medicine setting and to evaluate the effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa)goserelin to prevent ovarian reserve function during (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy for young breast cancer patients.Methods: Between December 2015 and June 2017, 101 breast cancer patients of age ≤ 45 years with stagesⅠtoⅢ had been enrolled. The patients were assigned without interference to receive either (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy with goserelin (goserelin group) or without goserelin (chemotherapy group) as their own selection. AMH and menstrual status were evaluated before, during and 0.5 year, 1 year after chemotherapy. Primary end point was the incidence of low AMH value (<0.4 μg/L) at the end of 1 year. Secondary end point was the incidence of amenorrhea(the absence of menses in the preceding 12 months after assignment). Results: In the study, 51 patients chose to join the chemotherapy group, while the other 50 patients selected goserelin to preserve their ovarian reserve function. More unmarried or childless, hormone receptors negative,receiving breast conservation therapy patients with earlier stage selected goserelin before chemotherapy. The incidence of low AMH value was significantly higher in chemotherapy group than in goserelin group (74.5% vs. 38.0%, P<0.001) in 1 year after chemotherapy. The incidence of amenorrhea was consistent with AMH (56.9% vs. 24.0%, P=0.001). And more patients’ menstruation (78.9% vs. 54.5%) and AMH value (71.0% vs. 53.8%) recovered in goserelin group within 6 months after chemotherapy. In sub-group analysis, AMH and menstruation seemingly recovered more in goserelin group independent of age, chemotherapy regimen and use of tamoxifen. Especially, AMH value of 36.4% (8/22) patients in chemotherapy group and 18.4% (7/38) patients in goserelin group still maintained low level (<0.4 μg /L) although their menstruation had recovered 1 year after chemotherapy. In addition, 41 patients (20 patients in chemotherapy group, 21 patients in goserelin group) could be evaluated for the dynamic change of AMH and menstrual status during chemotherapy. The mean level of AMH in chemotherapy group declined rapidly to very low level before the 3rd cycle, while 70% of the patients kept presence of menstruation. At the same time, the mean level of AMH in goserelin group was still above 0.4 μg /L, but all of the patients had menopause.Conclusion: Our study has offered evidence that Goserelin with chemotherapy could protect against ovarian reserve failure for young breast cancer patients, now that more patients’ AMH value recovered earlier who had selected co-treatment. AMH may be a more precise marker than menstrual status to clinically evaluate ovarian reserve function pre-, during and post- chemotherapy.

Key words: Anti-Müllerian hormone;, Goserelin, Young breast cancer patients, Ovarian reserve function

CLC Number: 

  • R737.9

Table 1

Baseline characteristics of the patients in the two groups"

Characteristic Chemotherapy group, n (N=51) Goserelin group, n (N=50) P value*
Age distribution/years 0.185 8
≤40 26 (51.0%) 32 (64.0%)
41-45 25 (49.0%) 18 (36.0%)
Marital status 0.015 8
Married 50 (98.0%) 42 (84.0%)
Unmarried 1 (2.0%) 8 (16.0%)
Full-term pregnancies before breast cancer diagnosis, No. 0.002 3
0 2 (3.9%) 11 (22.0%)
1 14 (27.5%) 21 (42.0%)
2 23 (45.1%) 9 (18.0%)
≥3 12 (23.5%) 9 (18.0%)
Fertility desires <0.000 1
Weak 49 (96.1%) 17 (34.0%)
Strong 2 (3.9%) 33 (66.0%)
Family history of cancer 0.777 1
No 14 (27.5%) 15 (30.0%)
Yes 37 (72.5%) 35 (70.0%)
Breast conserving therapy 0.003 9
Yes 16 (31.4%) 30 (60.0%)
No 35 (68.6%) 20 (40.0%)
Stage of cancer 0.015 8
10 (19.6%) 19 (38.0%)
31 (60.8%) 29 (58.0%)
10 (19.6%) 2 (4.0%)
ER 0.011 0
Negative 13 (25.5%) 25 (50.0%)
Positive 38 (74.5%) 25 (50.0%)
PR 0.034 4
Negative 15 (29.4%) 25 (50.0%)
Positive 36 (70.6%) 25 (50.0%)
HER-2 0.480 3
Negative 36 (70.6%) 32 (64.0%)
Positive 15 (29.4%) 18 (36.0%)
Subtypes 0.126 6
Luminal A 19 (37.3%) 11 (22.0%)
Luminal B 19 (37.3%) 17 (34.0%)
HER-2 overexpression 4 (7.8%) 11 (22.0%)
Triple negative 9 (17.6%) 11 (22.0%)
Chemotherapy regimens 0.479 0
AC 9 (17.6%) 9 (18.0%)
AC-T 25 (49.0%) 24 (48.0%)
AC-TH 11 (21.6%) 15 (30.0%)
Others 6 (11.8%) 2 (4.0%)
Taking tamoxifen 0.050 6
Yes 38 (74.5%) 28 (56.0%)
No 13 (25.5%) 22 (44.0%)

Figure 1

Rates of the low AMH value and amenorrhea at the end of 1 year after chemotherapy of the patients in the two groups A, overall; B, sub-groups of age; C, sub-groups of chemotherapy regimen; D, sub-groups of tamoxifen; CT, chemotherapy group; G, goserelin group."

Figure 2

Dynamic changes of the mean anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) of the patients in the two groups during chemotherapy"

[1] Smigal C, Jemal A, Ward E , et al. Trends in breast cancer by race and ethnicity: update 2006[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2006,56(3):168-183.
doi: 10.3322/canjclin.56.3.168
[2] Ganz PA, Hahn EE . Implementing a survivorship care plan for patients with breast cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2008,26(5):759-767.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.2851
[3] Warne GL, Fairley KF, Hobbs JB , et al. Cyclophosphamide-induced ovarian failure[J]. N Engl J Med, 1973,289(22):1159-1162.
doi: 10.1056/NEJM197311292892202
[4] Anderson RA, Themmen AP, Al-Qahtani A , et al. The effects of chemotherapy and long-term gonadotrophin suppression on the ovarian reserve in premenopausal women with breast cancer[J]. Hum Reprod, 2006,21(10):2583-2592.
doi: 10.1093/humrep/del201
[5] Partridge AH, Gelber S, Peppercorn J , et al. Fertility and menopausal outcomes in young breast cancer survivors[J]. Clin Breast Cancer, 2008,8(1):65-69.
doi: 10.3816/CBC.2008.n.004
[6] Schover LR . Premature ovarian failure and its consequences: vasomotor symptoms, sexuality, and fertility[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2008,26(5):753-758.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.1655
[7] Del Mastro L, Catzeddu T, Boni L , et al. Prevention of chemotherapy-induced meno-pause by temporary ovarian suppression with goserelin in young, early breast cancer patients[J]. Ann Oncol, 2006,17(1):74-78.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdj029
[8] Moore HC, Unger JM, Phillips KA , et al. Goserelin for ovarian protection during breast-cancer adjuvant chemotherapy[J]. N Engl J Med, 2015,372(10):923-932.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1413204
[9] Lambertini M, Ceppi M, Poggio F , et al. Ovarian suppression using luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonists during chemotherapy to preserve ovarian function and fertility of breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized studies[J]. Ann Oncol, 2015,26(12):2408-2419.
[10] Lambertini M, Moore H, Leonard R , et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists during chemotherapy for preservation of ovarian function and fertility in premenopausal patients with early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient-level data[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2018,36(19):1981-1990.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2018.78.0858
[11] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer, Version 2. 2013 [S/OL]. ( 2013-03-11)[2019-03-01].https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp.
[12] Sun W, Stegmann BJ, Henne M , et al. A new approach to ovarian reserve testing[J]. Fertil Steril, 2008,90(6):2196-2202.
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.080
[13] La Marca A, Broekmans FJ, Volpe A , et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH): what do we still need to know[J]. Hum Reprod, 2009,24(9):2264-2275.
doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep210
[14] Himabindu Y, Sriharibabu M, Gopinathan K , et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count as predictors of ovarian response in assisted reproduction[J]. J Hum Reprod Sci, 2013,6(1):27-31.
doi: 10.4103/0974-1208.112377
[15] Del Mastro L, Boni L, Michelotti A , et al. Effect of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue triptorelin on the occurrence of chemotherapy-induced early menopause in premenopausal women with breast cancer[J]. JAMA, 2011,306(3):269-276.
[16] Gerber B, von Minckwitz G, Stehle H , et al. Effect of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist on ovarian function after modern adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy: the GBG 37 ZORO study[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2011,29(17):2334-2341.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.5704
[17] Munster PN, Moore AP, Ismailkhan R , et al. Randomized trial using gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triptorelin for the preservation of ovarian function during (neo) adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2012,30(5):533-538.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.34.6890
[1] Guo-hong SONG,Hui-ping LI,Li-jun DI,Ying YAN,Han-fang JIANG,Ling XU,Dong-gui WAN,Ying LI,Mo-pei WANG,Yu XIAO,Ru-yan ZHANG,Ran RAN,Huan WANG. Efficacy and safety of oral pyrotinib in HER2 positive metastatic breast cancer: real-world practice [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2020, 52(2): 254-260.
[2] LI Xiu-nan, LIU Ai-hui, TANG Xin, REN Yu. Urothelial carcinoma-associated 1 enhances tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer cells through competitively inhibiting miR-18a [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2017, 49(2): 295-302.
[3] SHAO Bin, LI Hui-ping, DI Li-jun, SONG Guo-hong, JIANG Han-fang, LIANG Xu, WANG Chao-ying, YAN Ying, LIN Xiao-lin, WANG Li-na, WAN Feng-ling, YUAN Yan-hua, YOU Miao-ning. Predictive and prognostic value of monitoring lymphocyte subsets in peripheral blood before and after chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2016, 48(2): 304-309.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(4): 456 -458 .
[2] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(2): 125 -128 .
[3] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(2): 135 -140 .
[4] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(2): 158 -161 .
[5] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(2): 217 -220 .
[6] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(1): 52 -55 .
[7] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(1): 109 -111 .
[8] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(3): 297 -301 .
[9] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(5): 505 -515 .
[10] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(5): 599 -601 .