Table 3.
Pregnancies following Chemotherapy with and without GnRHa Cotherapy
| |
GnRHa |
No GnRHa |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author Location of study | n | n of pregnant womena | % pregnant | n | n of pregnant women | % pregnant | RR of pregnancy RR (95% CI) |
| Blumenfeld et al. 2005.6 Israel | 75 | 21 | 28 | 82 | 13 | 16 | 1.76 (0.95–3.27) |
| Castelo-Branco et al. 200711 Spain | 30 | 1 | 3 | 26 | 0 | 0 | No RR2 |
| Dann et al. 200512 Israel | 7 | 5 | 71 | 6 | 3 | 50 | 1.44 (0.55–3.79) |
| Loverro et al. 20077 Italy | 14 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 13 | 0.07 (0–6.74) |
| Pereyra Pacheco et al. 200113 Argentina | 12 | 2 | 17 | 4 | 0 | 0 | No RRb |
| Somers et al. 200515 University of Michigan | 20 | 7 | 35 | 20 | 3 | 15 | 2.32 (0.7–7.72) |
| Waxman et al. 19875 U.K. | 8 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 1 | 11 | 0.15 (0–15.9) |
| Summary RR | 1.65 (1.03–2.6)c | ||||||
a
If a woman had more than one pregnancy, only the first pregnancy was counted in this analysis.
b
As we are unable to calculate this RR, this study is not included in the meta-analysis.
c
Empirical Bayes.