Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 27, Issue 8, pp 495–499 | Cite as

Oocyte cryopreservation: a feasible fertility preservation option for reproductive age cancer survivors

  • Nicole NoyesEmail author
  • Patty Ann Labella
  • James Grifo
  • Jaime M. Knopman
fertility preservation



To compare oocyte cryopreservation cycles performed in cancer patients to those of infertile women.


Cancer patients referred for fertility preservation underwent counseling in compliance with the ASRM; those electing oocyte cryopreservation were included. Ovarian stimulation was achieved with injectable gonadotropins and freezing was performed using slow-cooling and vitrification methods.


Fifty cancer patients (mean age 31 y) underwent oocyte cryopreservation; adequate ovarian stimulation was achieved in 10 ± 0.3 days. The outcome from these cycles included a mean peak estradiol of 2,376 pg/ml and an average of 19 oocytes retrieved (15 mature oocytes were cryopreserved/cycle). All patients tolerated ovarian hyperstimulation. There were no significant differences noted between cryopreservation cycles performed in cancer patients and in women without malignancy.


Oocyte cryopreservation appears to be a feasible fertility preservation method for reproductive-age women diagnosed with cancer. This modality is not only effective but also, providing a multidiscipline effort, can be completed in timely fashion.


Cancer survivor Fertility preservation Oocyte cryopreservation Quality-of-life 



The authors would like to thank the entire IVF team at the NYUFC for their efforts and participation in the oocyte cryopreservation program and all the oncologists who referred patients for fertility preservation treatment. Dr. Noyes would also like to thank Dr. Eleonora Porcu of Bologna, Italy for introducing her to oocyte cryopreservation technology and its application as a fertility preservation measure in cancer patients.

Financial Support

Schering Plough provided fertility medication for some of the non-cancer patients.

Conflicts of Interest



  1. 1.
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun M. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:225–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results data. Accessed March 4, 2009.
  3. 3.
    Knopman JM, Papadopoulos E, Grifo J, Fino ME, Noyes N. Surviving childhood and reproductive-age malignancy: effects on fertility and future parenthood. Lancet Oncol. 15 Feb 2010. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70317-1, [Epup ahead of print].
  4. 4.
    American Society of Reproducitve Medicine. Practice Committee response to Rybak and Lieman: elective self-donation of oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1513–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Essential elements of informed consent for elective oocyte cryopreservation: a practice committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:S134–5.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Noyes N, Knopman J, Labella P, McCaffrey C, Clark-Williams M, Grifo J. Oocyte cryopreservation outcomes including pre-cryo and post-thaw meiotic spindle evaluation following slow cooling and vitrification of human oocytes. Fertil Steril. 26 Feb 2010. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.01.019, [Epub ahead of print].
  7. 7.
    Grifo JA, Noyes N. Delivery rate using cryopreserved oocytes is comparable to conventional in vitro fertilization using fresh oocytes: potential fertility preservation for female cancer patients. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:609–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carrell D, Kuneck P, Peterson C, Hatasaka H, Jones K, Campbell B. A randomized prospective analysis of five sperm preparation techniques before intrauterine insemination of husband sperm. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:122–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cobo A, Kuwayama M, Perez S, Ruiz A, Pellicer A, Remohi J. Comparison of concomitant outcome achieved with fresh and cryopreserved donor oocytes vitrified by the CryoTop method. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:1657–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nagy ZP, Chang CC, Shapiro DB, Bernal DP, Elsner CW, Mitchell-Leef D, et al. Clinical evaluation of the efficiency of an oocyte donation program using egg cryo-banking. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:520–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Skakkebaek NE, Rajpert-De Meyts E, Main KM. Testicular dysgenesis syndrome: an increasingly common development disorder with environmental aspects. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:972–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Magelseen H, Brydoy M, Fossa SD. The effects of cancer and cancer treatments on male reproductive function. Nat Clin Pract. 2006;3:312–22.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pal L, Leykin L, Schifren J, Isaacson K, Chang YC, Nikruil N, et al. Malignancy may adversely influence the quality and behaviour of oocytes. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1837–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knopman J, Noyes N, Talebian S, Krey L, Grifo J, Licciardi F. Women with cancer undergoing ART for fertility preservation: a cohort study of their response to exogenous gonadotropins. Fertil Steril. 2009;9:1476–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Engmann L, DiLuigi A, Schmidt D, Nulsen J, Maier D, Benadiva C. The use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to induce oocyte maturation after cotreatment with GnRH antagonist in high-risk patients undergoing in vitro fertilization prevents the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a prospective randomized controlled study. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:84–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Porcu E, Venturoli S, Damiano G, Ciotti PM, Notarangelo L, Paradisi R, et al. Healthy twins delivered after oocyte cryopreservation and bilateral ovariectomy for ovarian cancer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17:267–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole Noyes
    • 1
    Email author
  • Patty Ann Labella
    • 1
  • James Grifo
    • 1
  • Jaime M. Knopman
    • 1
  1. 1.NYU Fertility CenterNYU School of MedicineNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations