1.Complete remission of maxillary and infratemporal squamous cellcarcinoma after induction chemotherapy.
Jong Ryoul KIM ; One Ryong MOON ; Sang Jun PARK ; Uk Kyu KIM ; Dong Kyu YANG
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 1992;18(1):91-97
No abstract available.
Induction Chemotherapy*
2.The role of combined induction chemotherapy and radical radiation therapy in the treatment of advanced nasopharyngeal cancer.
Jin Hyuk CHOI ; Jae Kyung ROH ; Ho Young LIM ; Hyun Chul JUNG ; Nae Choon YOO ; Shin Ki AHN ; Eun Hee KOH ; Joo Hang KIM ; Chang Ok SEO ; Kwi Un KIM ; Joon Kyoo ROH ; Byung Soo KIM
Journal of the Korean Cancer Association 1993;25(3):403-416
No abstract available.
Induction Chemotherapy*
;
Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms*
3.Ovulation Induction.
Chung Hoon KIM ; Seung Hwa HONG
Journal of Korean Society of Endocrinology 2002;17(6):841-862
No abstract available.
Female
;
Ovulation Induction*
;
Ovulation*
4.Ovarian stimulation by FSH-HCG
Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Information 2002;10():35-36
The authors studied on 242 infertile cases due to an ovulation in 296 cycles of treatment by FSH-HCG from 1995 to 1997. The pregnancy rate is 28,51% of cases and 23,31% of cycles. The rate of spontaneous abortion plus embryos death in utero is high 52,7%. The rate of ovarian hyperstimulation is 8,45%. The monitoring of ovarian function by ultrasound and serum estradiol level is very important to prevent the risk of severe hyperstimulation. It is difficult to decrease the rate of abortion and embryo death in utero
Ovulation Induction
;
Abortion, Spontaneous
5.Effect of induction chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.
Tchan Kyu PARK ; Hyung Min CHOI ; Soo Nyung KIM ; Hyeong Soon KIM ; Gyung Soo KIM ; Jeong Yeon KIM
Journal of the Korean Cancer Association 1992;24(5):724-729
No abstract available.
Induction Chemotherapy*
;
Ovarian Neoplasms*
7.Induction chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer.
Yong Hak KIM ; Byung Gyu YOO ; Ki Tae KIM ; Hyun Chan KIM
Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1992;35(9):1288-1299
No abstract available.
Induction Chemotherapy*
;
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms*
8.Induction chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer.
Sam Gee CHOI ; You Sah KIM ; Joong Shin KANG
Journal of the Korean Surgical Society 1992;42(1):21-29
No abstract available.
Breast Neoplasms*
;
Breast*
;
Induction Chemotherapy*
9.Remission induction therapy with TAD for acute myeloid leukemia.
Korean Journal of Hematology 1991;26(2):323-330
No abstract available.
Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute*
;
Remission Induction*
10.Optimizing the use of GnRH antagonists in ovarian stimulation protocols
Philippine Journal of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility 2005;2(2):88-
Unlike the GnRH agonists, which have been routinely used in ovarian stimulation protocols for almost 20 years, the GnRH-antagonist acts via a dose-dependent competetive blockade of the pituitary GnRH receptors. This results in an immediate suppression of gonadotrophin secretion (in particular LH) from the anterior pituitary. Despite the new advantages of this new class of substances, the controversial discussion about the influence of the antagonist of the implantation and embryo quality has been ongoing for the last few years. New data from recent meta analysis have demonstrated that the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle is equivalent between antagonist protocols, however there is a sugnificant reduction in the amount of FSH used and the incidence of OHSS.
Recently, flexible protocols where the GnRH antagonist is applied according to leading follicle size rather than a fixed of stimulation have been developed in order to prevent a premature LH surge. A recent meta-analysis of four randomised trials comparing fixed vs flexible starting day for the GnRH antagonist concluded there was no statistically significant difference in pregnancy rates, but a significant reduction in the amount of FSH utilized in favour of the flexible protocol.
A series of studies have however raised concern about late administration of the GnRH antagonist, as used in a flexible protocol. In the three studies, the implantation and pregnancy rates were higher when the antagonist was initiated on a fixed day (stimulation day 6) compared to administration in a flexible protocol according to follicle size (-15mm).
Whilst Kolibianakis, et al. reported no difference in overall pregnancy rate in flexible over fixed day antagonist administration, the implantation rate was lower in the flexible protocol, when there were no follicles of -15mm on the stimulation day 6. In this group, higher concentrations of LH and oestradiol were observed to antagonist administration. In a second study, Kolibianakis, et al reported that profound suppression of LH after GnRH antagonist suppression was associated with a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy rate. They argued that exposure of the genital tract/oocyte to LH may adversely affect the implantation rate, mainly by altering endometrial receptivity. One issue here that ma have complicated the interpretation of the results is the very late administration of the GnRH antagonist (-15mm). It is generally recommended that the antagonist should administered when the leading follicle is 14mm at he very latest.
Co-treatment with oral contraceptive pill (OCP) programming can also be utilized with GnRH antagonists in order to facilitate scheduling the start of FSH therapy, rather than waiting for the patient to have spontaneous menses. There are now a number of studies reporting the use of OCP pill programming with either daily 0.25mg or single dose 3mg Cetrotide in routine ART and also poor responder patients. Future studies in this area are needed to elucidate the optimal preparation protocol in GnRH antagonist cycles. However, the data that are emerging seem to support that previous cycle preparation can make a clinical contribution to the outcome of the antagonist treatment cycle.
GONADOTROPIN-RELEASING HORMONE
;
OVULATION INDUCTION