P-409 Oocyte cryopreservation following ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation in transgender men: a French case series

Abstract

Abstract Study question To evaluate the feasibility and results of a fertility preservation program for transgender men. Summary answer Ovarian stimulation outcomes are similar between transgender men and oocyte donation candidates, leading to a satisfactory mean number of cryopreserved oocytes. What is known already The reproductive potential of transgender people may be impaired by gender-affirming hormone treatment (GAHT) and is obviously suppressed in case of gender-affirming surgery involving bilateral ovariectomy and/or hysterectomy. The evolution of medical support for transgender people has made fertility preservation strategies possible. Fertility preservation in transgender men mainly relies on oocyte cryopreservation following controlled ovarian stimulation. However, few data are available to date on the subject, concerning small sample sizes, so no reliable conclusions can be drawn about the feasibility and efficiency of fertility preservation procedures in trans men. Study design, size, duration This retrospective study reports the results of fertility preservation counselling in 118 transgender men referred to our fertility centre from September 2018 to December 2022. Among them, 16 benefited from oocyte cryopreservation. Ovarian stimulation outcomes were compared with those of cisgender oocyte donors. Participants/materials, setting, methods Sixteen transgender men benefited from oocyte cryopreservation following ovarian stimulation and were matched 1:1 to cisgender oocyte donors according to age and body mass index. Antral follicle count and serum AMH levels were systematically measured. Primary outcomes included duration of the stimulation, total FSH dose, peak serum estradiol, oocyte yield, number of mature oocytes, and maturity rate (mature oocytes/total oocytes collected). Results were compared using Fisher’s exact or Wilcoxon’s rank sum tests. Main results and the role of chance One hundred and eighteen transgender men were referred in our centre for fertility preservation counselling. Among them, 95 asked for a medical consultation, and 86 came to the appointment. Following the consultation, only 16 (18.6%) finally decided to benefit from oocyte cryopreservation following ovarian stimulation, including 2 that had already started testosterone therapy. Sixteen presumably fertile oocyte donors were matched based on age and BMI. Mean age of trans’ men was 23.9 ± 5.0. Basal ovarian reserve tests showed satisfactory results in trans’ men and oocyte donors, with similar AMH (4.5 ± 2.3 vs. 4.4 ± 3.2, respectively, NS) but lower AFC in trans’men than in oocyte donors (13.8 ± 11.0 vs. 26.7 ± 10.1, p = 0.033). This result may be explained by a more frequent use of the abdominal approach to assess AFC in the transgender group. Ovarian stimulation outcomes were comparable, with no differences in the duration of stimulation, total FSH dose and peak estradiol levels, leading to a comparable mean number of mature oocyte (15.4 ± 9.9 vs. 17.2 ± 10.6, respectively, NS). Thirteen out 16 transgender men had 10 or more cryopreserved mature oocyte following a single procedure. Limitations, reasons for caution Only a low percentage of trans men that were referred to our centre finally chose to perform oocyte cryopreservation, leading to a small sample size. The majority of them had not started any GAHT, preventing us to evaluate the potential consequences of these treatments on ovarian stimulation outcomes. Wider implications of the findings While parenthood strategies for transgender people have long been ignored, fertility preservation is an important issue to consider, especially because medical treatments and surgeries may be undertaken in very young adults. Oocyte cryopreservation seems to represent a feasible way for trans men to preserve their fertility for future biological parenting. Trial registration number N/A