|Year : 2013 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 93-98
Current evidence supporting "letrozole" for ovulation induction
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kar Clinic and Hospital Pvt. Ltd, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
|Date of Submission||21-Jul-2013|
|Date of Decision||23-Jul-2013|
|Date of Acceptance||22-Jul-2013|
|Date of Web Publication||28-Aug-2013|
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kar Clinic and Hospital Pvt. Ltd, Bhubaneswar, Odisha - 751 001
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Aromatase inhibitor "letrozole" was first introduced as a potential ovulation induction (OI) drug almost a decade back. Large number of studies has been published using letrozole for OI: In polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) women, clomiphene citrate (CC) resistant women, for intrauterine insemination and also in various protocols of mild stimulation for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI). Letrozole appears to be a good option, with its oral route of administration, cost, shorter half-life and negligible side effects. However, the verdict on efficacy and safety of letrozole is still uncertain. This review explores the current scientific data supporting letrozole for OI.
Keywords: Aromatase inhibitor, congenital malformations, letrozole, ovulation induction
|How to cite this article:|
Kar S. Current evidence supporting "letrozole" for ovulation induction. J Hum Reprod Sci 2013;6:93-8
| Introduction|| |
The need for an alternative to clomiphene citrate (CC) for ovulation induction (OI) was realized since the 1990s. CC had many problems-antiestrogenic effects on the endometrium, cervical mucus, and prolonged accumulation in tissues leading to prolonged depletion of estrogen receptors. This could result in hot flushes, perimenopausal symptoms, in addition to the above side effects. Robert Casper and Mohamed F.M. Mitwally of Toronto General Hospital are credited for proposing the concept of aromatase inhibitors as an alternative to CC for OI, more than a decade ago. , They made attempts to synthesize orally active 4-hydroxy androstenedione (40H-A, the only known steroidal aromatase inhibitor). This did not work out and they had to abandon the idea for another decade. In 1998, the duo, learnt about 'Femara' (letrozole) an orally active potent aromatase inhibitor, marketed by "Novartis" for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Soon a pilot study was initiated to test letrozole for OI and also in women with CC failure, which was published in 2000. ,
Over the last decade, since the first few publications, letrozole was widely accepted for OI. Numerous original articles, reviews, and meta-analysis have been published. Especially, in women with failure or resistance to CC, letrozole was shown to be very effective both in ovulation rate and live birth rate. The year 2005, saw a major setback to the use of Letrozole in infertile women. Dr. Marinko Biljan of Montreal presented an oral abstract at the 2005 American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) annual meeting, reporting congenital anomalies in 150 babies born from infertile women treated with Letrozole.  Since then, larger studies with better design and multicentric, have been published comparing the safety of letrozole and CC in the infertile group and also in comparison with general population.
At this time, medical data available shows that letrozole is at least as effective as CC for ovulation and pregnancy rates in women with CC resistance or failure. Babies born to these women are at no higher risk for congenital anomalies, overall or specific (cardiac and locomotive).  Yet, in no country across the globe, is letrozole approved for OI. Its use is mostly "off label" and for research purposes. In countries like India letrozole is banned for use in premenopausal infertile women.
This article is a review of available evidence that supports letrozole as a drug for OI. The aim is to present convincing information, that letrozole should be accepted as an OI drug.
| Mechanism of Action of Letrozole and How it is Very Different from CC|| |
The major disadvantages of CC, are that: It depletes the estrogen receptors (ER) throughout the body, has a cumulative effect, and has a long half-life. In contrast, an aromatase inhibitor blocks the conversion of androgens to estrogens in the ovarian follicles, peripheral tissues, and in the brain. This result in two things: (a) Fall in circulating and local estrogens and (b) rise in intraovarian androgens. Fall in estrogen levels, releases the hypothalamopituitary axis from the negative feedback of estrogens. Thus, there is a surge in follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) release, which results in follicular growth. Since, the feedback mechanism is intact; normal follicular growth, selection of dominant follicle, and atresia of smaller growing follicle occurs; and thereby facilitating monofollicular growth and ovulation. ,,,,,
Another likely mechanism of action of the aromatase inhibitors is by the increasing intraovarian androgens. This likely increases the follicular sensitivity to FSH. Recent data shows the role of androgens in early follicular developments ,,, by augmenting FSH receptors and stimulating insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I; FSH and IGF-I act synergistically to promote follicular growth.
Thus to summarize, an aromatase inhibitor has the following advantages over CC:
This pharmacodynamics of letrozole ensures improved endometrial thickness, cervical mucus, monofollicular, and better folliculogenesis. Therefore, these factors may lead to higher pregnancy rates and greater likelihood of singleton pregnancy. 
- It does not deplete ERs throughout the body
- It keeps the hypothalamopituitary axis intact
- It is short acting (45 min half-life).
| Review of Published Studies Using Letrozole for Ovulation Induction|| |
Following the first "Proof of Principle" report by Casper and Mitwally  letrozole gradually got attention of researchers and clinician, for use in various estrogen dependant conditions in gynecology. Although widespread, its use is still "off label". Apart from OI, letrozole is being used for endometriosis and adenomyosis ,, uterine fibroids,  endometrial stromal sarcoma,  and medical abortion.  This review will focus on use of letrozole for OI. Letrozole has been used in the following three situations:
- OI in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)
- OI in intrauterine insemination (IUI)
- Ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI.
| Letrozole in PCOS|| |
There is extensive literature available on this topic. Since the data is heterogeneous, they have been compared in subgroups: Letrozole versus CC; letrozole versus CC and metformin; letrozole versus ovarian drilling; and letrozole versus anastrozole.
Letrozole vs. clomiphene citrate
The results of individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing letrozole with CC have been presented in [Table 1]. Overall, women with PCOS who were therapy naive or CC resistant or those without clarification as to whether they were therapy naive or CC resistant, letrozole was better than CC for ovulation rate per patient (P < 0.0001).  There was no statistical difference between them for ovulation rate per cycle (P < 0.37).  There was no statistical difference between letrozole and CC for pregnancy rate per patient, miscarriage rate per pregnancy, live birth rate per pregnancy, or multiple pregnancy rates per patient.  High heterogeneity in the pregnancy rate was likely due to the difference in quality of the RCTs, which was used to categorize the levels of bias. 
|Table 1: Characteristics of few RCTs comparing letrozole with clomiphene citrate in PCOS women |
Click here to view
Letrozole vs. CC plus metformin
Only one RCT by Abu Hashim et al., which compared 250 CC resistant PCOS women, showed that there was no statistical difference between the two groups for ovulation and pregnancy rate per cycle, miscarriage rate, and multiple pregnancy rates per pregnancy. ,
Letrozole vs. LOD
Two RCTs comparing letrozole with laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) over 6 months in CC resistant PCOS women found that there was no difference between the two for all outcomes except ovulation rate per cycle. , Until further high quality studies are reported, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of letrozole over LOD. 
Letrozole vs. anastrazole
Two RCTs were found addressing this issue in CC resistant women. Badawy et al., reported no statistical difference between letrozole and anastrazole for ovulation rate, frequency or miscarriage rate.  Al-Omari et al., found letrozole better than anastrazole in ovulation and pregnancy rate. 
Letrozole was compared to placebo in a small but high quality RCT in CC resistant women. Ovulation rate was higher in letrozole group, however no difference in pregnancy and live birth rate.  No published study has compared letrozole or any aromatase inhibitor as first line therapy in PCOS women.
| Letrozole for OI for IUI|| |
Letrozole has been used for OI or controlled ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination. Indication for IUI ranging from unexplained infertility, mild moderate endometriosis to male factor. Primary advantage is reduced requirement of gonadotropins and reduced chance of multiple pregnancies. In a recent study by Abu Hashim et al.,  136 women who recently underwent surgery for minimal to mild endometriosis, were randomized to receive either CC or letrozole followed by IUI. There was no statistical difference for clinical pregnancy rate per cycle, cumulative pregnancy rate, miscarriage, or live birth rate. Badawy et al.,  randomized 280 women with unexplained infertility to either CC (100 mg) or letrozole 5 mg with gonadotropins and IUI. Both groups were comparable with letrozole having no advantage over CC.
In the last 10 years, about 15 such articles have been published. Almost all have shown similar outcomes for both CC and letrozole. Letrozole being as effective as CC or letrozole offering no advantage over CC.
| Letrozole in Ovarian Stimulation for IVF/ICSI|| |
Letrozole has also been tried for ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction. With the concept of mild stimulation in IVF to improve implantation rate, letrozole is a potential agent. Very few trials, with limited number of patients are available. Letrozole has two potential uses in IVF: First, where it is used in the follicular phase usually with FSH/human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) for OI; second, it has also been used in luteal phase of stimulated IVF cycle and to reduce circulating E2 levels; thus, potentially reducing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) risk.
Through the year 2012, seven randomized controlled trials have been published on this subject [Table 2]. Only two, Verpoest et al., 2006  evaluated the addition of letrozole in patients with normal ovarian response undergoing IVF or ICSI. They showed higher implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates in the letrozole cotreatment group. However the results were not statistically significant, owing mainly to the small sample size. Improved endometrial thickness in the letrozole group was significant.
|Table 2: RCTs regarding use of letrozole for ovulation induction in IVF/ICSI cycles |
Click here to view
Five randomized trials, with a total of 265 patients, dealt with poor responders. They were randomized to receive letrozole combined with gonadotropins or gonadotropins alone, in an antagonist or agonist protocol. The gonadotropin dose used was consistently lower in the letrozole cotreatment group in all trials. Two trials, in which gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist was used, for both arms, letrozole cotreatment patients showed comparable pregnancy rates. , In another two, different GnRH analogues were used for down regulation. The results of the two trials with respect to pregnancy rate were totally discordant. Daval (2010)  had lower implantation and pregnancy rate in letrozole group, whereas Mohsen and EI Din  had similar results between the two groups.
| Luteal Phase Aromatase Inhibitors|| |
There are two randomized controlled trials that assess the effects of administration of letrozole during the luteal phase of stimulated IVF cycles in oocyte donors. , Both provide evidence that letrozole drastically reduces estradiol (E2) levels. Thus aromatase inhibitors have potential use in egg donors and women at high risk of OHSS.
Letrozole for fertility preservation in cancer patients
Letrozole has been explored as an OI agent in cancer patients undergoing ovarian stimulation to preserve fertility before starting chemotherapy, through embryo or oocyte cryopreservation.  Benefits of letrozole that have been reported are: Significantly lower estrogen exposure, lower dose trigger (GnRH agonist), lower estradiol levels, and no increase in recurrence risk of cancer. ,,,
To summarize, existing evidence for use of letrozole in IVF/ICSI protocol is heterogeneous, fragmented, and weak. Limited evidence supports aromatase inhibitors can be used for fertility preservation in cancer patients prior to chemotherapy. Its use in poor responders or even normoresponders requires more publications and research.
Letrozole and congenital anomaly risk
A major setback to letrozole use in OI happened in 2005. Dr. Marinko Biljan presented an oral abstract at ASRM of 150 babies born after letrozole use.  This was compared with 36,000 spontaneous conceptions of the normal population. It reported overall congenital anomaly rate of 3-4%, which was similar to general population, but cardiac and locomotor anomalies were higher in the letrozole babies. They also reported low birth weight babies in women with gestation diabetes who has taken letrozole. This abstract was later criticized on many counts. The major flaw was that pregnancy outcome of infertile older women was being compared to general fertile population comprising of much younger women. The abstract was never published in a peer reviewed journal. However, based on this report, Novartis (manufacturers of this compound "Femara") issued a letter to physicians worldwide that Femara is contraindicated in premenopausal women, during pregnancy, and/or lactation. Following this, essentially the use of letrozole for OI stopped worldwide.
Dr. Togas Tulandi and colleagues, published a multicentric Canadian study in 2006 designed to compare neonatal outcomes of 911 babies born to women conceiving with CC or letrozole;  514 letrozole babies and 397 CC babies. Overall, congenital malformations and chromosomal abnormalities were found in 14 of 514 in the letrozole group (2.4%) and in 19 of 397 in the CC group (4.8%). Major malformation rate was 1.2 and 3% in letrozole and CC groups, respectively. Congenital cardiac anomalies was significantly higher (P = 0.02) in the CC group (1.8%) against letrozole group (0.2%). More specifically ventricular septal defect 0.2% in letrozole and 1.8% in CC group. Thus, they concluded that there was no difference in the overall rates of major and minor congenital malformations among newborns conceived after letrozole or CC. Moreover, they concluded that congenital cardiac defects appear less frequently in letrozole group.
A recent multicentric study for the national birth defects prevention study, published in Human Reproduction 2011, reported on association between CC use and birth defects.  Data from the National Birth Defects Prevention study, a population-based study, was used. Close to 25,000 women with or without children with congenital defects were interviewed. They were specifically asked about CC use in the period from 2 months before conception to the first month of pregnancy. They concluded significantly increased adjusted odds ratio for the use of CC and cardiac anomalies, including septal heart defects, muscular ventricular septal defects, and coarctation of the aorta.
Davies et al., reported birth defects with assisted reproductive technologies.  They too found increased risk for birth defects in babies born to mothers using CC. After controlling many confounding factors, the odds ratio for CC use and any birth defect was 3.19 (1.32-7.69). They however did not specify types of birth defects.
In summary, the concerns raised about letrozole safety have not yet been resolved. Available data suggests similar or higher risks with CC use also. Although CC has been in use for 40 years or more. Letrozole data is scant.
Currently, two large randomized multicentric studies by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) are underway, the results of which are eagerly awaited. These could provide definitive data for pregnancy outcome with CC and letrozole.
The first study, Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome-II (PPCOS-II), is a randomized controlled trial comparing CC with letrozole for OI in PCOS women.  They propose to enroll 750 women, across 11 centers. The primary outcome measure would be cumulative live birth rate.
The second study Assessment of Multiple Intra Uterine Gestations from ovarian stimulation (AMIGOS) trial will determine multiple pregnancy rates from OI and intrauterine insemination and is double blinded for CC or aromatase use.  Cumulative and multiple pregnancy rates will be calculated in a total of 240 women. It is hoped that this trial will answer the issue of whether letrozole has a lower chance of multiple pregnancies, compared to CC or gonadotropins.
| Conclusion|| |
To conclude, available data shows that letrozole is at least as effective as CC for ovulation and has comparable live birth rates. Importantly, it has definite advantages over CC. Many studies have shown letrozole to be as effective as gonadotropins, with added advantage of low cost and lower multiple pregnancy rates. However, the quality of medical evidence supporting aromatase inhibitors for OI, are inadequate, small in sample size, and inappropriate design. Moreover, there is very limited data on potential teratogenic effects, oocyte, embryo quality, and any effect on implantation.
There is no doubt that the issue of teratogenicity of letrozole needs further clarification with large scale studies. Such a study would require approximately 3,500 newborns conceived with and without letrozole. This obviously implies that the same has to be shown in case of CC. No such study has ever been conducted to prove the safety of CC.
Letrozole deserves a fair trial. At least, it should be made available in a research context, so that adequate data is collected to show its efficacy and safety.
| References|| |
|1.||Mitwally MF, Casper RF. Aromatase Inhibition: A novel method of ovulation induction in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome. Reprod Technol 2000;10:244-7. |
|2.||Mitwally MF, Casper RF. Use of an aromatase inhibitor for induction of ovulation in patients with an inadequate response to clomiphene citrate. Fertil Steril 2000;75:305-9. |
|3.||Biljan MM, Hemmings R, Brassard N. The outcome of 150 babies following the treatment with letrozole or letrozole and gonadotropins. Fertil Steril 2005;84 (Suppl 1):S95. |
|4.||Casper RF, Mitwally MF. A historical perspective of aromatase inhibitors for ovulation induction. Fertil Steril 2012;98:1352-5. |
|5.||Kamat A, Hinshelwood MM, Murry BA, Mendelson CR. Mechanisms in tissue-specific regulation of estrogen biosynthesis in humans. Trends Endocrionol Metab 2002;133:122-8. |
|6.||Naftolin F, MacLusky NJ. Aromatization hypothesis revisisted. In: Serio M, editor. Differentiation; Basic and Clinical Aspects. New York: Raven Press; 1984. p. 79-91. |
|7.||Naftolin F, MacLusky NJ, Leranth CZ, Sakamoto HS, Garcia-Segura LM. The cellular effects of estrogens on neuroendocrine tissue. J Steroid Biochem 1988;30:195-207. |
|8.||Naftolin F. Brain aromatization of androgens. J Reprod Med 1994;39:257-61. |
|9.||Roberts V, Meunier H, Vaughan J, Rivier J, Rivier C, Vale W, et al. Production and regulation of inhibin subunits in pituitary gonadotropes. Endocrinology 1989;124:552-4. |
|10.||Mason AJ, Berkemeier LM, Schmelzer CH, Schwall RH. Activin B: Precursor sequences, genomic structure and in vitro activities. Mol Endocrinol 1989;3:1352-8. |
|11.||Weil SJ, Vendola K, Zhou J, Adesanya OO, Wang J, Okafor J, et al. Androgen receiptor gene expression in the primate ovary: Cellular localization, regulation, and functional correlations. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998;837:2479-85. |
|12.||Weil S, Vendola K, Zhou J, Bondy CA. Androgen and follicle-stimulating hormone interactions in primate ovarian follicle development. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999;848:2951-6. |
|13.||Vendola KA, Zhou J, Adesanya OO, Weil SJ, Bondy CA. Androgens stimulate early stages of follicular growth in the primate ovary. J Clin Invest 1998;101:2622-9. |
|14.||Legro RS, Kunselman AR, Brzyski RG, Casson PR, Diamond MP, Schlaff WD, et al. NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network. The pregnancy in polycystic ovary syndrome II (PPCOS II) trial: Rationale and design of a double-blind randomized trial of clomiphene citrate and letrozole for the treatment of infertility in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Contemp Clin Trials 2012;33:470-81. |
|15.||Dietrich JE. An update on adenomyosis in the adolescent. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2010;22:388-92. |
|16.||Mousa NA, Bedaiwy MA, Casper RF. Aromatase inhibitors in the treatment of severe endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:1421-3. |
|17.||Nawathe A, Patwardhan S, Yates D, Harrison GR, Khan KS. Systematic review of the effects of aromatase inhibitors on pain associated with endometriosis. BJOG 2008;115:818-22. |
|18.||Parsanezhad ME, Azmoon M, Alborzi S, Rajaeefard A, Zarei A, Kazerooni T, et al. A randomized, controlled clinical trial comparing the effects of aromatase inhibitor (letrozole) and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (triptorelin) on uterine leiomyoma volume and hormonal status. Fertil Steril 2010;93:192-8. |
|19.||Sylvestre VT, Dunton CJ. Treatment of recurrent endometrial stromal sarcoma with letrozole: A case report and literature review. Horm Cancer 2010;1:112-5. |
|20.||Lee VC, Tang OS, Ng EH, Yeung WS, Ho PC. A pilot study on the use of letrozole with either misoprostol or mifepristone for termination of pregnancy up to 63 days. Contraception 2011;83:62-7. |
|21.||Misso ML, Wong JL, Teede HJ, Hart R, Rombauts L, Melder AM, et al. Aromatase inhibitors for PCOS: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2012;18:301-12. |
|22.||Abu Hashim H, Mashaly AM, Badawy A. Letrozole versus laparoscopic ovarian diathermy for ovulation induction in clomiphene-resistant women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2010;282:567-71. |
|23.||Abu Hashim H, Shokeir T, Badawy A. Letrozole versus combined metformin and clomiphene citrate for ovulation induction in clomiphene-resistant women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. Fertile Steril 2010;94:1405-9. |
|24.||Abdellah MS. Reproductive outcome after letrozole versus laparoscopic ovarian drilling for clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2011;113:218-21. |
|25.||Badawy A, Mosbah A, Shady M. Anastrozole or letrozole for ovulatin induction in clomiphene-resistant women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: A prospective randomize trial. Fertil Steril 2008;89:1209-12. |
|26.||AI-Omari WR, Sulaiman WR, AI-Hadithi N. Comparison of two aromatase inhibitors in women with clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004;85:289-91. |
|27.||Kamath MS, Aleyamma TK, Chandy A, George K. Aromatase inhibitors in women with clomiphene citrate resistant: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2010;94:2857-9. |
|28.||Abu Hashim H, EI Rakhawy M, Abd Elaal I. Randomized comparison of superovulation with letrozole vs. clomiphene citrate in an IUI program for women with recently surgically treated minimal to mild endometriosis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2012;91:338-45. |
|29.||Badawy A, Elnashar A, Totongy M. Clomiphene citrate or aromatase inhibitors combined with gonadotropins for superovulation in women undergoing intrauterine insemination: A prospective randomized trial. J Obstet Gynaecol 2010;30:617-21. |
|30.||Verpoest WM, kolibianakis E, Papanikolaou E, Smitz J, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P. Aromatase inhibitors in ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI: A pilot study. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;13:166-72. |
|31.||Garcia-Velasco JA, Moreno L, Pacheco A, Guillen A, Duque L, Requena A, et al. The aromatase inhibitor letrozole increases the concentration of intraovarian androgens and improves in vitro fertilization outcome in low responder patients: A pilot study. Fertil Steril 2005;84:82-7. |
|32.||Ozmen B, Sonmezer M, Atabekoglu CS, Olmus H. Use of aromatase inhibitors in poor-responder patients reseiving GnRH antagonist protocols. Reprod Biomed Online 2009;19:478-85. |
|33.||Goswami SK, Das T, Chattopadhyay R, Sawhney V, Kumar J, Chaudhury K, et al. A randomized single-blind controlled trial of letrozole as a low-cost IVF protocol in women with poor ovarian response: A preliminary report. Hum Reprod 2004;19:2031-5. |
|34.||Mohsen IA, EI Din RE. Minimal stimulation protocol using letrozole versus microdose flare up GnRH agonist protocol in women with poor ovarian response undergoin ICSI. Gynecol Endocrinol 2013;29:105-8. |
|35.||Fatemi HM, Popovic-Todorovic B, Donoso P, Papanikolaou E, Smitz J, Devroey P. Luteal phase oestradiol suppression by letrozole: A pilot study in oocyte donors. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;17:307-11. |
|36.||Garcia-Velasco JA, Quea G, Piro M, Mayoral M, Ruiz M, Toribio M, et al. Letrozole administration during the luteal phase after ovarian stimulatin impacts corpus luteum function: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2009;92:222-5. |
|37.||Maltaris T, Weigel M, Mueller A, Schmidt M, Seufert R, Fisch F, et al. Cancer and fertility preservation: Fertility preservation in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res 2008;10:206. |
|38.||Oktay K, Hourvitz A, Sahin G, Oktem O, Safro B, Cil A, et al. Letrozole reduce estrogen and gonadotropin exposure in women with breast cancer undergoing ovarian stimulation before chemotherapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:3885-90. |
|39.||Azim AA, Costantini-Ferrando M, Lostritto K, Oktay K. Relative potencies of anastrozole and letrozole to suppress estradiol in breast cancer parients undergoing ovarian stimulation before in vitro fertilization. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007;92:2197-200. |
|40.||Oktay K, Turkcuoglu I, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA. GnRH agonist trigger for women with breast cancer undergoing fertility preservation by aromatase inhibitor/FSH stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online 2010;20:783-8. |
|41.||Azim AA, Costantini-ferrando M, Oktay K. Safety of fertility preservation by ovarian stimulation with letrozole and gonadotropins in patients with breast cancer: A prospective controlled study. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2630-5. |
|42.||Tulandi T, Martin J, Al-Fadhli R, Kabli N, Forman R, Hitkari J, et al. Congenital malformations among 911 newborns conceived after infertility treatment with letrozole or clomiphene citrate. Fertil Steril 2006;85:1761-5. |
|43.||Reefhuis J, Honein MA, Schieve LA, Rasmussen SA. National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Use of clomiphene citrate and birth defects, National Birth Defects prevention Study, 1997-2005. Hum Reprod 2011;26:451-7. |
|44.||Davies MJ, Moore VM, Willson KJ, Van Essen P, Priest K, Scott H, et al. Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1803-13. |
|45.||Diamond MP, Mitwally M, Casper R, Ager J, Legro RS, Brzyski R, et al. NICHD Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Network. Estimating rates of multiple gestation pregnancies; sample size calculation from the assessment of multiple intrauterine gestations from ovarian stimulation (AMIGOS) trial. Contemp Clin Trials 2011;32:902-8. |
[Table 1], [Table 2]
|This article has been cited by|
||Effects of different doses of letrozole on the incidence of early-onset ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome after oocyte retrieval
| ||Qiaohua He,Linlin Liang,Cuilian Zhang,Hangsheng Li,Zhaojia Ge,Lu Wang,Shihong Cui |
| ||Systems Biology in Reproductive Medicine. 2014; : 1 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|