Table 2.
Ovarian Function following Chemotherapy with and without GnRHa Cotherapy
| |
GnRHa |
No GnRHa |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author Location of study | n | n with ovarian function | % with ovarian function | n | n with ovarian function | % with ovarian function | RR of ovarian function RR 95% CI |
| Blumenfeld et al. 20056 Israel | 75 | 70 | 93 | 82 | 38 | 46 | 2.01 (1.58–2.56) |
| Blumenfeld et al. 200010 Israel | 8 | 8 | 100 | 9 | 4 | 44 | 2.23 (1.04–4.78) |
| Castelo-Branco et al. 200711 Spain | 30 | 27 | 90 | 26 | 6 | 23 | 3.91 (1.91–7.98) |
| Dann et al. 200512 Israel | 7 | 7 | 100 | 6 | 5 | 83 | 1.21 (0.76–1.92) |
| Loverro et al. 20077 Italy | 14 | 14 | 100 | 15 | 7 | 47 | 2.14 (1.23–3.73) |
| Pereyra Pacheco et al. 200113 Argentina | 12 | 12 | 100 | 4 | 0 | 0 | No RRa |
| Petri et al. 200414 Johns Hopkins | 4 | 4 | 100 | 17 | 11 | 65 | 1.41 (0.87–2.3) |
| Somers et al. 200515 University of Michigan | 20 | 19 | 95 | 20 | 14 | 70 | 1.36 (0.99–1.87) |
| Waxman et al 19875 U.K. | 8 | 4 | 50 | 9 | 6 | 67 | 0.75 (0.32–1.76) |
| Summary RR | 1.68 (1.34–2.1)b | ||||||
a
As we are unable to calculate this RR, this study is not included in the meta-analysis.
b
Empirical Bayes.