Fertility preservation and reproduction in patients facing gonadotoxic therapies: a committee opinion

Standardized Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Consultation for Pediatric and Adolescent Oncology Patients

Purpose: To investigate the role of formal reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) consultation in fertility preservation counseling in a pediatric/adolescent oncology patient population. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed at an academic adult hospital from 2021 to 2022. Pre- and postpubertal patients admitted to the pediatric/adolescent oncology service with cancer diagnoses and imminent gonadotoxic chemotherapy plans were included. Baseline characteristics were collected, including patient age, sex, race, language, insurance, and cancer diagnosis. Primary outcomes were formal REI consultation and fertility preservation election. Results: Nineteen of 58 eligible patients received a formal REI consultation. Patients were more likely to elect fertility preservation if they received a consult. Females were more likely to receive a consult than males and more likely to elect fertility preservation. Patients of age ≥16 years were more likely to receive consultation than younger patients. However, all patients of age <16 years who received a consult elected fertility preservation. There was no difference in consultation based on race, language, or insurance. Thirteen of 19 patients who received an REI consultation elected fertility preservation. Ten of 11 female elections were ovarian suppression, an unproven method of fertility preservation. The two male elections were semen cryopreservation. Conclusion: Underutilization of formal REI consults and a relative lack of proven fertility preservation elections may shed light on a need for increased fertility preservation awareness among young oncology patients and the providers who care for them. A streamlined process that automates formal REI consultation for all eligible patients may maximize the potential for comprehensive counseling and improve patient participation in fertility preservation.

Investigating the potential role of α-SNAP in preventing chemotherapy-induced ovarian dysfunction: Insights from cellular and animal models

Background

The phosphoinositide 3-kinase/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (PI3K/Akt/mTORC1) pathway plays a crucial role in the activation of primordial follicles. However, excessive activation and the loss of primordial follicles can lead to ovarian dysfunction. The alpha-soluble N-ethylmaleimide sensitive factor attachment protein (α-SNAP) protein has been implicated in PI3K/Akt/mTORCl signaling, suggesting its potential involvement in follicle activation. Thus, this study aimed to explore the role of α-SNAP in the activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTORC1 signaling pathway and its ability to mitigate the effects of cisplatin on ovarian function, using both in vitro and in vivo models.

Methods

We transfected KGN human ovarian granulosa cells (GCs) with small interfering RNA (siRNA) targeting α-SNAP to investigate the effects of α-SNAP inhibition on GC proliferation and apoptosis, as well as on the activity of the PI3K/Akt/mTORC1 pathway. In a mouse model, α-SNAP siRNA was delivered via an adeno-associated virus before treatment with cisplatin to assess its effects on follicle activation and ovarian function. Follicle counts at various growth stages, western blotting, and immunohistochemistry analyses were conducted to detect the expression of cleaved caspase-3, Ki67, α-SNAP, and p-mTOR. Additionally, the serum concentrations of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) were measured through an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Results

In vitro, α-SNAP depletion prevented GC proliferation by inhibiting the PI3K/Akt/mTORC1 pathway, thereby indicating its role in the regulation of cell growth. In vivo, α-SNAP knockdown attenuated the cisplatin-induced overactivation of primordial follicles by suppressing the PI3K/Akt/mTORC1 signaling pathway and partially restoring AMH levels. In addition, the expression and distribution patterns of cleaved caspase-3, Ki67, α-SNAP, and p-mTOR varied across different follicular growth stages, suggesting a protective effect against chemotherapy-induced ovarian damage.

Conclusions

Inhibiting α-SNAP may attenuate GC proliferation by suppressing the PI3K/Akt/mTORC1 pathway, thereby mitigating the overactivation and loss of primordial follicles induced by cisplatin. Targeting α-SNAP may emerge as a novel strategy to prevent ovarian damage resulting from chemotherapy. However, these conclusions warrant repeated testing, and the mechanistic underpinnings of α-SNAP must be further elucidated in the future.

Identifying barriers individuals face in accessing fertility care after a gynecologic cancer diagnosis

Objective

To (1) identify the major barriers premenopausal individuals face in accessing fertility care at the time of gynecologic cancer diagnosis and (2) to assess patient experiences pertaining to fertility.

Methods

We distributed an online survey about cancer diagnosis and fertility goals to patients ages 18-40 who had been treated for ovarian, endometrial, or cervical cancer at a single, large academic hospital. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey results. Patients who completed the survey were given the option to participate in a follow-up virtual interview. We conducted semi-structured interviews to discuss their fertility goals and barriers to these. Grounded theory was used to qualitatively analyze the interviews.

Results

Fifty-five patients completed the survey, and 20 patients participated in the interview. The median age at diagnosis was 32 years old. Seventy-three percent of patients recalled that at the time of their diagnosis they were considering future childbearing, and 32% underwent fertility preservation. Patients reported the emotional response to their diagnosis as a barrier to receiving fertility care, with patients reporting lack of control (80%), shock (55%), and confusion (45%). Patients also identified inadequate counseling (60.0%), lack of time (60.0%), economic constraints (55.0%) and prioritization of cancer treatment (55.0%) as barriers. Nearly all patients had a positive interview experience and expressed desire to help patients in similar situations.

Conclusion

Many premenopausal patients diagnosed with gynecologic malignancies are considering future childbearing at the time of diagnosis. Both logistical and emotional barriers prevent them from undergoing fertility preservation before initiating oncologic treatment.

Oncofertility patient navigation: The frontlines of fertility and reproductive health care in cancer

Oncofertility is an emerging field that incorporates diverse disciplines working together to care for oncology patients from birth to adulthood who are facing surgery, radiation therapy, or chemotherapy that may impact their fertility potential and reproductive function. Providing this care to newly diagnosed oncology patients in an expedited manner can be challenging. There is currently a paucity of published data about how this care is provided, training and education of individuals providing this care, and patient-reported outcomes related specifically to oncofertility care. The role of the oncofertility patient navigator is to bridge the institutional and disciplinary boundaries so oncology patients of all ages can receive timely information regarding fertility risk and preservation options at diagnosis and throughout survivorship care. The purpose of this paper is to define the role of the oncofertility patient navigator within diverse models of care and health care systems, and provide a framework for ongoing efforts to improve reproductive care for those affected by cancer in their years of child-bearing potential.

Fertility preservation in pediatric healthcare: a review

Survival rates for children and adolescents diagnosed with malignancy have been steadily increasing due to advances in oncology treatments. These treatments can have a toxic effect on the gonads. Currently, oocyte and sperm cryopreservation are recognized as well-established and successful strategies for fertility preservation for pubertal patients, while the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists for ovarian protection is controversial. For prepubertal girls, ovarian tissue cryopreservation is the sole option. However, the endocrinological and reproductive outcomes after ovarian tissue transplantation are highly heterogeneous. On the other hand, immature testicular tissue cryopreservation remains the only alternative for prepubertal boys, yet it is still experimental. Although there are several published guidelines for navigating fertility preservation for pediatric and adolescent patients as well as transgender populations, it is still restricted in clinical practice. This review aims to discuss the indications and clinical outcomes of fertility preservation. We also discuss the probably effective and efficient workflow to facilitate fertility preservation.

Pregnancy attempts among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether demographic and cancer-related characteristics and factors such as fertility discussion with a medical provider and fertility preservation use are associated with attempting pregnancy after adolescent and young adult cancer.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional online survey.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Women with lymphoma, breast cancer, thyroid cancer, or gynecologic cancer diagnosed at 15-39 years from 2004 to 2016 were identified from the North Carolina Cancer Registry and the Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California health care systems and responded to an online survey addressing survivorship concerns, including fertility and reproductive outcomes.

EXPOSURES

Demographic characteristics, cancer characteristics, fertility discussion with a medical provider or fertility specialist between cancer diagnosis and starting cancer treatment, use of fertility preservation strategies (freezing embryos or oocytes) after cancer diagnosis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Pregnancy attempt after cancer diagnosis, defined by either a pregnancy or 12 months of trying to become pregnant without pregnancy.

RESULT(S)

Among 801 participants who had not reached their desired family size at diagnosis, 77% had a fertility discussion with any medical provider between cancer diagnosis and treatment initiation, and 8% used fertility preservation after cancer diagnosis. At survey (median =7 years after diagnosis; interquartile range, 4-10), 32% had attempted pregnancy. Neither fertility discussion with any medical provider nor fertility counseling with a fertility specialist was significantly associated with pregnancy attempts. However, the use of fertility preservation was significantly associated with attempting pregnancy (prevalence ratios = 1.74; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-2.32). Other characteristics positively associated with pregnancy attempts included younger age at diagnosis, longer time since diagnosis, having a partner (at diagnosis or at survey), and having a history of infertility before cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSION(S)

Use of fertility preservation strategies was uncommon in our cohort but was associated with attempting pregnancy after cancer. Ensuring access to fertility preservation methods may help adolescent and young adult cancer survivors to plan and initiate future fertility.

Expert consensus on fertility preservation in patients with breast cancer occurring during pregnancy

The prevalence of breast cancer currently ranks first among Chinese women with malignant tumors, occurring during premenopausal childbearing age in more than 60% of patients. With the increasing age of women at childbirth, the wide application of assisted reproductive technology (ART) and the rejuvenation of tumor patients, the prevalence of breast cancer occurring during pregnancy (PrBC) is gradually increasing. There are many domestic and foreign expert consensus articles and guidelines on fertility preservation for children and patients of childbearing age with malignant tumors, but there is a lack of expert consensus or guidelines on fertility preservation for patients with PrBC. Considering the uniqueness of PrBC patients, there is an urgent need for a standardized suggestion regarding their fertility preservation. The Committee of Fertility Protection and Preservation of China Association for the Promotion of Health Science and Technology together with the Chinese Society of Gynecological Endocrinology affiliated with the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology (CSGE-ISGE) organized relevant experts from different disciplines to formulate this consensus to guide fertility preservation of PrBC patients.

Fertility preservation in female cancer sufferers: (only) a moral obligation?

PURPOSE

Advances in cancer diagnostics and therapeutics have thankfully led to high numbers of young cancer survivors, although some interventions may sometimes threaten fertility. The authors aimed to assess how evidence-based oncofertility counselling can be adequately fulfilled for the sake of female cancer patients, in light of its complexities and multidisciplinary nature, which require thorough counselling and consent pathways.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search has been conducted in the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE and Google Scholar via search strings such as fertility preservation, reproductive counselling, oncofertility, cancer survivors, in order to identify relevant meaningful sources spanning the 2010-2021 period.

RESULTS

Counselling needs to be implemented in compliance with international guidelines, so as to avoid medicolegal repercussions. Albeit fertility preservation is supported by most health care institutions, actual conditions at health care facilities often reflect several lingering difficulties in the oncofertility process. Oncofertility counselling should foster access to fertility preservation procedures. To best serve that purpose, it should be implemented in a manner consistent with ethical and legal standards, so that patients can make an informed decision based on comprehensive and relevant data.

CONCLUSIONS

Counselling needs to be rooted in a close cooperation of oncologists, reproductive endocrinologists, mental health counsellors and clinical researchers. The provision of oncofertility services is grounded in the moral obligation to uphold individual autonomy, which is essential in a free society, unless the exercise thereof could pose a risk to the children conceived or to others.

Financing future fertility: Women's views on funding egg freezing

Like other assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures, the cost of egg freezing (EF) is significant, presenting a potential barrier to access. Given recent technological advancements and rising demand for EF, it is timely to reassess how EF is funded. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted in Victoria, Australia and was completed by 656 female individuals. Participants were asked their views on funding for both medical and non-medical EF. The median age of participants was 28 years (interquartile range 23-37 years) and most participants were employed (44% full-time, 28% part-time, 33% students). There was very high support for public funding for medical EF (n = 574, 87%), with 302 (46%) participants indicating support for the complete funding of medical EF through the public system. Views about funding for non-medical EF were more divided; 43 (6%) participants supported full public funding, 235 (36%) supported partial public funding, 150 (23%) supported coverage through private health insurance, and 204 (31%) indicated that non-medical EF should be self-funded. If faced with the decision of what to do with surplus eggs, a high proportion of participants indicated that they would consider donation (71% to research, 59% to a known recipient, 52% to a donor programme), indicating that eggs surplus to requirements could be a potential source of donor eggs. This study provides insights that could inform policy review, and suggests revisiting whether the medical/non-medical distinction is a fair criterion to allocate funding to ART.

Installing oncofertility programs for breast cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings: Empirical data from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II

PURPOSE

As a further step to elucidate the actual diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for breast cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for breast cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II.

METHODS

We surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia & Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the United States, Europe, Australia and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered to young female patients with breast cancer as well as the degree of utilization.

RESULTS

In the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for breast cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings especially for established options, (2) frequent utilization of egg freezing, embryo freezing, ovarian tissue freezing, GnRH analogs, and fractionation of chemo- and radiotherapy, (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM), (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings, (5) recognition that technical and ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options.

CONCLUSIONS

We presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to guide oncofertility teams in optimizing care for breast cancer patients in various resource settings.

Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017 for fertility preservation in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer patients: part 1

In 2017, the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JSCO) published the JSCO Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017 for Fertility Preservation in Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancer Patients. These were the first Japanese guidelines to address issues of oncofertility. In this field of medicine, sustained close cooperation between oncologists and reproductive specialists is essential from the diagnosis of cancer until many years after completion of cancer treatment. These JSCO guidelines were intended to guide multidisciplinary medical staff in considering the availability of fertility preservation options and to help them decide whether to provide fertility preservation to childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer patients before treatment starts, with the ultimate goal of improving patient survivorship. The guidelines are presented as Parts 1 and 2. This article (Part 1) summarizes the goals of the guidelines and the methods used to develop them and provides an overview of fertility preservation across all oncology areas. It includes general remarks on the basic concepts surrounding fertility preservation and explanations of the impacts of cancer treatment on gonadal function by sex and treatment modality and of the options for protecting/preserving gonadal function and makes recommendations based on 4 clinical questions. Part 2 of these guidelines provides specific recommendations on fertility preservation in 8 types of cancer (gynecologic, breast, urologic, pediatric, hematologic, bone and soft tissue, brain, and digestive).

Oocyte Cryopreservation in Domestic Animals and Humans: Principles, Techniques and Updated Outcomes

Oocyte cryopreservation plays important roles in basic research and the application of models for genetic preservation and in clinical situations. This technology provides long-term storage of gametes for genetic banking and subsequent use with other assisted reproductive technologies. Until recently, oocytes have remained the most difficult cell type to freeze, as the oocytes per se are large with limited surface area to cytoplasm ratio. They are also highly sensitive to damage during cryopreservation, and therefore the success rate of oocyte cryopreservation is generally poor when compared to noncryopreserved oocytes. Although advancement in oocyte cryopreservation has progressed rapidly for decades, the improvement of cryosurvival and clinical outcomes is still required. This review focuses on the principles, techniques, outcomes and prospects of oocyte cryopreservation in domestic animals and humans.

Fertility preservation strategies for patients with lymphoma: a real-world practice survey among Fondazione Italiana Linfomi centers

BACKGROUND

Improvement in the prognosis of lymphomas in recent decades has allowed focus on reducing long-term toxicity of treatment, including infertility. The aim of this study was to assess the fertility preservation knowledge and practices among hematologic centers affiliated with Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL) in Italy.

METHODS

A survey questionnaire was provided to 152 FIL centers between December 2019 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Responses from 58 centers (38%) were received. All respondents reported informing patients about treatment-related gonadotoxicity. A minority of patients (10% female, 20% male) refused fertility preservation due to personal reasons. The most common fertility preservation options offered to female patients were mature oocyte cryopreservation (43.1%), ovarian tissue cryopreservation (6.9%), and mature oocyte or ovarian tissue cryopreservation (39.7%). Six centers (10.3%) did not perform any procedures. All centers offered sperm cryopreservation for male patients. Challenges regarding the time intervals between lymphoma diagnosis and fertility consultation (up to 20 days) as well as between consultation and fertility preservation procedure (up to 40 days) were revealed.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides insight into fertility preservation practices among Italian hematologic centers and points out an urgent need to improve close cooperation between hematologists and fertility preservation specialists in order to avoid unacceptable delays in lymphoma treatment.

Comparison of open and a novel closed vitrification system with slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation

PURPOSE

To investigate the differences concerning post-thawing/warming follicle survival, DNA damage and apoptosis in human ovarian tissues cryopreserved by slow freezing, open, or closed vitrification methods.

METHODS

A total of 50 pieces of 5 × 5 × 1 mm ovarian cortical pieces were harvested (5 donor ovaries; mean age 31 ± 6.62 years). From each donor, one cortical piece was used as baseline; the remaining were randomly assigned to slow freezing (SF), vitrification using open device (VF-open), or closed device (VF-closed) groups. After 8-10 weeks of cryostorage, tissues were evaluated 4 h after thawing/warming. Histological analysis was evaluated for follicle survival (primordial and primary follicle densities) by H&E staining. The percentages of primordial and primary follicles with DNA double-strand breaks (γH2AX) and apoptotic cell death pathway activation (AC3) were immunohistochemically assessed. Data were analysed using one-way ANOVA and LSD post hoc comparison.

RESULTS

Compared to the baseline, primordial follicle (pdf) densities significantly declined in all cryopreserved groups (SF, VF-open, and VF-closed, P < 0.05). However, the total and non-apoptotic pdf densities were similar among SF, VF-open, and VF-closed. SF and VF with either open or closed devices did not increase the percentages of primordial or primary follicles with DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) or apoptosis compared to the baseline or among the freezing methods in the present study.

CONCLUSION

Based on the intact primordial follicle survival, DNA damage, and apoptosis rates after thawing/warming, SF vs VF with either open or newly developed closed devices appear to be comparable.

Disparities in access to effective treatment for infertility in the United States: an Ethics Committee opinion

In the United States, economic, racial, ethnic, geographic, and other disparities prevent access to fertility treatment and affect treatment outcomes. This opinion examines the factors that contribute to these disparities, proposes actions to address them, and replaces the document of the same name, last published in 2015.

Development of Optimized Vitrification Procedures Using Closed Carrier System to Improve the Survival and Developmental Competence of Vitrified Mouse Oocytes

The open carrier system (OC) is used for vitrification due to its high efficiency in preserving female fertility, but concerns remain that it bears possible risks of cross-contamination. Closed carrier systems (CC) could be an alternative to the OC to increase safety. However, the viability and developmental competence of vitrified/warmed (VW) oocytes using the CC were significantly lower than with OC. We aimed to improve the efficiency of the CC. Metaphase II oocytes were collected from mice after superovulation and subjected to in vitro fertilization after vitrification/warming. Increasing the cooling/warming rate and exposure time to cryoprotectants as key parameters for the CC effectively improved the survival rate and developmental competence of VW oocytes. When all the conditions that improved the outcomes were applied to the conventional CC, hereafter named the modified vitrification/warming procedure using CC (mVW-CC), the viability and developmental competence of VW oocytes were significantly improved as compared to those of VW oocytes in the CC. Furthermore, mVW-CC increased the spindle normality of VW oocytes, as well as the cell number of blastocysts developed from VW oocytes. Collectively, our mVW-CC optimized for mouse oocytes can be utilized for humans without concerns regarding possible cross-contamination during vitrification in the future.

Pediatric and Adolescent Oncofertility in Male Patients-From Alpha to Omega

This article reviews the latest information about preserving reproductive potential that can offer enhanced prospects for future conception in the pediatric male population with cancer, whose fertility is threatened because of the gonadotoxic effects of chemotherapy and radiation. An estimated 400,000 children and adolescents aged 0–19 years will be diagnosed with cancer each year. Fertility is compromised in one-third of adult male survivors of childhood cancer. We present the latest approaches and techniques for fertility preservation, starting with fertility preservation counselling, a clinical practice guideline used around the world and finishing with recent advances in basic science and translational research. Improving strategies for the maturation of germ cells in vitro combined with new molecular techniques for gene editing could be the next scientific keystone to eradicate genetic diseases such as cancer related mutations in the offspring of cancer survivors.

Fertility preservation in men: a contemporary overview and a look toward emerging technologies

Cancer and oncologic therapies can have significant adverse effects on male reproductive potential, leaving many men permanently infertile. Fertility preservation has emerged as a key survivorship issue over the past 20 years, and numerous professional societies have published guidelines calling for fertility preservation to become a routine component of oncologic care. Most males with cancer are able to produce a semen specimen for fertility preservation, but numerous other methods of sperm procurement are available for patients who cannot provide a sufficient sample. Despite these options, fertility preservation will remain a challenge for prepubertal boys and men without sperm production. For these patients, experimental and investigational approaches offer the hope that one day they will translate to the clinical arena, offering additional pathways for successful fertility preservation care.

Contraception in cancer survivors: insights from oncofertility follow-up visits

OBJECTIVE

Current literature suggests that cancer survivors are less likely to receive adequate contraception counseling. However, limited data existed on barriers to contraception usage in this population and on the efficacy of dedicated consultations. This study aims to describe how contraception is perceived by cancer survivors after counseling and acceptance rates of highly effective contraceptives.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical records from 313 consecutive cancer survivors at their first follow-up visit at the Oncofertility Unit of a tertiary hospital, from 2014 to 2019. Contraception acceptance and choice were examined stratified for the type of malignancy (hormone-sensible or not). A multivariate logistic regression model was used to evaluate possible predictors of acceptance.

RESULTS

Thity-three women were excluded from the analysis because trying to conceive or already pregnant. Out of the remaining 280, only 9 (3.2%) asked spontaneously for contraception, in all the other visits the issue was brought up by the physician. After counseling 44.3% of the women without contraindications still opted out effective methods for fear of hormones or refusal of more medications. Age < 33 years and being in a relationship were correlated with acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

Even after a complete counseling in a dedicated service, fears of hormones and refusal of more medications remain strong issues for these patients. Family planning needs to be discussed with cancer survivors, preferably in the context of a long-term healthcare relationship. The Oncofertility Unit should become a privileged place for this type of counseling.

Installing oncofertility programs for common cancers in optimum resource settings (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II): a committee opinion

PURPOSE

The main objective of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part 2 is to learn more about oncofertility practices in optimum resource settings to provide a roadmap to establish oncofertility best practice models.

METHODS

As an extrapolation for oncofertility best practice models in optimum resource settings, we surveyed 25 leading and well-resourced oncofertility centers and institutions from the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan. The survey included questions on the availability and degree of utilization of fertility preservation options in case of childhood cancer, breast cancer, and blood cancer.

RESULTS

All surveyed centers responded to all questions. Responses and their calculated oncofertility scores showed three major characteristics of oncofertility practice in optimum resource settings: (1) strong utilization of sperm freezing, egg freezing, embryo freezing, ovarian tissue freezing, gonadal shielding, and fractionation of chemo- and radiotherapy; (2) promising utilization of GnRH analogs, oophoropexy, testicular tissue freezing, and oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM); and (3) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, in vitro spermatogenesis, and stem cell reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings. Proper technical and ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and experimental oncofertility options to patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part 2 proposed installing specific oncofertility programs for common cancers in optimum resource settings as an extrapolation for best practice models. This will provide efficient oncofertility edification and modeling to oncofertility teams and related healthcare providers around the globe and help them offer the best care possible to their patients.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs: Mechanisms of action and clinical applications in female reproduction

Extra-hypothalamic GnRH and extra-pituitary GnRH receptors exist in multiple human reproductive tissues, including the ovary, endometrium and myometrium. Recently, new analogs (agonists and antagonists) and modes of GnRH have been developed for clinical application during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for assisted reproductive technology (ART). Additionally, the analogs and upstream regulators of GnRH suppress gonadotropin secretion and regulate the functions of the reproductive axis. GnRH signaling is primarily involved in the direct control of female reproduction. The cellular mechanisms and action of the GnRH/GnRH receptor system have been clinically applied for the treatment of reproductive disorders and have widely been introduced in ART. New GnRH analogs, such as long-acting GnRH analogs and oral nonpeptide GnRH antagonists, are being continuously developed for clinical application. The identification of the upstream regulators of GnRH, such as kisspeptin and neurokinin B, provides promising potential to develop these upstream regulator-related analogs to control the hypothalamus-pituitary-ovarian axis.

Advances in the Treatment and Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Ovarian Toxicity

Due to improvements in chemotherapeutic agents, cancer treatment efficacy and cancer patient survival rates have greatly improved, but unfortunately gonadal damage remains a major complication. Gonadotoxic chemotherapy, including alkylating agents during reproductive age, can lead to iatrogenic premature ovarian insufficiency (POI), and loss of fertility. In recent years, the demand for fertility preservation has increased dramatically among female cancer patients. Currently, embryo and oocyte cryopreservation are the only established options for fertility preservation in women. However, there is growing evidence for other experimental techniques including ovarian tissue cryopreservation, oocyte in vitro maturation, artificial ovaries, stem cell technologies, and ovarian suppression. To prevent fertility loss in women with cancer, individualized fertility preservation options including established and experimental techniques that take into consideration the patient's age, marital status, chemotherapy regimen, and the possibility of treatment delay should be provided. In addition, effective multidisciplinary oncofertility strategies that involve a highly skilled and experienced oncofertility team consisting of medical oncologists, gynecologists, reproductive biologists, surgical oncologists, patient care coordinators, and research scientists are necessary to provide cancer patients with high-quality care.

Equal opportunity for all? An analysis of race and ethnicity in fertility preservation in New York City

Purpose

To compare the racial and ethnic make-up of patients who accessed medically indicated fertility preservation services (MIFP) against the overall racial diversity (including Hispanic origin) across women of reproductive age diagnosed with cancer in New York City (NYC).

Methods

All patients who completed at least one MIFP between January 2017 and December 2018 were reviewed. Race was self-reported. A calculation of the expected racial distribution across women of reproductive age with cancer in NYC was determined using the most recent NYC census data. Statistical analysis included chi-square goodness of fit and test for independence and Kruskal-Wallis H test, with p < 0.05 considered significant.

Results

A total of 107 patients who accessed MIFP were included. A total of 55 (51.4%) identified as White, 3 (2.8%) as Black, 13 (12.2%) as Asian, 6 (5.6%) as Hispanic, 3 (2.8%) as other, and 27 (25.2%) did not report. A total of 78.5% of patients had insurance. There was no significant difference in racial distribution by cancer type (p = 0.255). A subgroup analysis excluding the BRCA+ patients and races not reported by the census (n = 69) was then performed, showing a statistically significant difference between observed (O) and expected (E) cases of fertility preservation (FP) by race at our center—White 47O/32E, Black 3O/15E, Asian 13O/7E, and Hispanic 6O/15E (p < 0.001). A statistically significant difference in racial distribution by FP type was observed.

Conclusions

There is a difference in the observed vs expected racial distribution of patients accessing MIFP. Further studies are needed to identify modifiable factors to better ensure equal opportunity to all patients.

Does type of cancer affect ovarian response in oncofertility patients?

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the influence of type of cancer and cancer itself on the ovarian response during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation (FP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study performed at a single academic tertiary-care infertility center. Women diagnosed with cancer who underwent COS with GnRH antagonist protocol between January 2009 and December 2018 were included in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups; breast/gynecologic, hematologic, and other cancers. We secondarily compared the COS parameters and ovarian reserve markers in oncofertility cases against non-cancer patients who pursued FP for deferred reproduction. The primary outcome was number of mature oocytes. Secondary outcomes included oocyte yield (number of retrieved oocytes/number of follicles aspirated at time of retrieval) and oocyte-maturity index, defined as number of mature oocytes/total oocytes retrieved.

RESULTS

A total of 96 cancer patients were referred for FP counseling before starting their anti-cancer therapy. Clinical characteristics and ovarian response parameters were comparable between the three groups. Type of cancer was not a predictor for number of mature oocytes (p = 0.329), oocyte-maturity index (p = 0.815), or oocyte yield, (p = 0.161) after adjustment to cycle covariates. Moreover, cancer did not have impact on the number of mature oocytes (p = 0.699), oocyte-maturity index (p = 0.251) and oocyte yield (p = 0.094).

DISCUSSION

There is no difference observed in outcomes of ovarian stimulation based on primary cancer diagnosis in oncofertility patients undergoing FP. Interestingly, no significant impact for cancer itself was observed on ovarian reserve or response to gonadotrophins stimulation.

Transient impact of paclitaxel on mouse fertility and protective effect of gonadotropin‑releasing hormone agonist

Paclitaxel (PXL) is a chemotherapeutic agent widely used in solid tumors. However, whether PXL causes premature ovarian insufficiency in women of reproductive age remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to answer how and for how long PXL affects fertility, and to identify the protective effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) in mice. A single dose of PXL was administered to 7-week-old female ICR mice. Mice were treated with GnRHa for 1 estrous cycle prior to chemotherapy, and for another following chemotherapy. On the days 1, 6, 11 and 16 following the administration of PXL, mice were assessed by ovarian histology, ovarian stimulation and mating experiment. Multiple doses of PXL were also administered to verify the duration of the gonadotoxicity of PXL. It was determined that PXL only destroyed antral follicles on day 1 following chemotherapy without reducing primordial follicles. In vitro experiments revealed that PXL impaired oocytes in metaphase, excluding those at the germinal vesicle stage. The number and quality of retrieved metaphaseII(MII) oocytes in PXL-exposed mice were reduced on day 1 following chemotherapy, which was recovered on day 11. MII oocytes from mice pretreated with GnRHa recovered on day 6 following chemotherapy. Following 3 estrous cycles in mice after the last dose of the 3-dose paclitaxel administration, follicles in all stages and retrieved MII oocytes were recovered. It was concluded that the impairment caused by PXL on follicles and oocytes in mice lasted for <3 estrous cycles, which was shortened by pretreatment of GnRHa.

Beyond fertility preservation: role of the oncofertility unit in the reproductive and gynecological follow-up of young cancer patients

STUDY QUESTION

Are there reasons that motivate young cancer survivors to ask for follow-up visits at an oncofertility unit?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Cancer survivors request oncofertility follow-up visits for the management of treatment-related side effects or ovarian reserve evaluation, even if not (or not yet) wishing for a pregnancy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Personalised oncofertility counselling before gonadotoxic therapies is considered standard of care for young women with newly diagnosed cancer. However, the long-term follow-up of these patients in an oncofertility unit is not described in the literature other than for the use of cryopreserved material.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We retrospectively examined rates and reasons for the first follow-up visits of 154 consecutive young female cancer patients (age range: 18-40 years) who underwent a pre-treatment consultation between January 2012 and June 2017. Demographic and clinical data were collected, as well as information about the chosen fertility preservation method, if any.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Rates and reasons for follow-up visits were collected and expressed as percentages. Different reasons were examined in the whole cohort and stratified for type of malignancy. Possible predictive factors for return to the follow-up visit (age, nulliparity, presence of a partner, neoplasm, having cryopreserved material) were investigated through logistic regression.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Out of 154 patients, 74 returned to the oncofertility unit (48.1%) for a follow-up visit. The first visit was requested mostly at the end of anticancer therapies (51.3% versus 40.5% during therapies and 8.1% after cancer relapse). Among these patients, only 10.8% returned for the first time because they were actively desiring a pregnancy. For the others, the most common reasons for consultations were management of gynecological adverse effects of therapies (29.7%) and evaluation of ovarian reserve not linked to an immediate desire for a pregnancy (39.2%). Other patients asked for contraception (4.1%), menopause counselling (5.4%), or new fertility preservation counselling because of cancer relapse (10.8%). None of the examined factors were significantly predictive of return to the oncofertility unit.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

These findings represent the experience of a single centre. A longer duration of follow-up would be needed to provide more precise information on this regard.

WIDER IMPLICATION OF THE FINDINGS

The role of an oncofertility unit should not be limited to proposing fertility preservation procedures. In the management of young adult cancer patients, the reproductive medical specialist should be considered a key figure not only before but also during and after anticancer treatments to explore salient aspects of gynecological and reproductive health.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research did not receive any specific funding. M.L. served as a consultant for Teva and received honoraria from Theramex outside the submitted work. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N.A.

Preservation of fertility in patients with hematological malignancies

Oncofertility is the medical field that bridges oncology and reproduction that seeks to give healthcare providers and patients the opportunity to optimize residual fertility. The treatment for hematological malignancies carries gonadal toxicity, so that the preservation of fertility should be considered in all patients in childhood, adolescence and young adulthood. Most patients who receive only chemotherapy remain fertile, whereas those who receive regimens consisting of high-dose alkylating agents or total body irradiation can develop permanent infertility. In postpubertal patients, there are established methods for preserving fertility, such as the cryopreservation of sperm, oocytes and embryos. Although ideally performed before the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment, these procedures for fertility preservation can be performed any time prior to the loss of gonadal function. In contrast, a standard option is not available in prepubertal patients, and the preservation of fertility must be sought through experimental methods. Future advances in reproductive medicine may overcome this limitation. Gonadal tissue cryopreservation might be performed in the hope that sperm or mature oocytes could later be extracted from cryopreserved tissue. Healthcare providers, including hematologists, reproductive endocrinologists, nurses, clinical psychotherapists and embryologists, need to optimize the patient's fertility through shared decision-making while always remaining aware of the rapidly progressing developments in reproductive medicine.

Fertility education for adolescent cancer patients: Gaps in current clinical practice in Europe

OBJECTIVE

As adolescent cancer patients may suffer from infertility following treatment, fertility counselling is essential. Our aim was to explore the current situation in four European countries in terms of (I) education about the risk for infertility, (II) counselling on fertility preservation, (III) patients' knowledge on fertility, (IV) sufficiency of information and (V) uptake of cryopreservation.

METHODS

In total, 113 patients (13-20 years) at 11 study centres completed a self-report questionnaire three and six months after cancer diagnosis. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

As many as 80.2% of participants reported having received education about the risk for infertility prior to treatment, 73.2% recalled counselling on fertility preservation. Only 52.3% stated they felt sufficiently informed to make a decision. Inability to recall counselling on fertility preservation (OR = 0.03, CI: 0.00-0.47) and female gender (OR = 0.11, CI: 0.03-0.48) was associated with lower use of cryopreservation, whereas older age was associated with higher use.

CONCLUSION

Fertility counselling was available to a relatively high proportion of patients, and it did influence the utilisation of cryopreservation. However, many patients did not feel sufficiently informed. Further improvement is needed to enable adolescent cancer patients to make an informed decision on fertility preservation.

Participation of Pediatric Surgery Training Programs in Fertility Preservation Initiatives

Purpose: The significant reduction in childhood cancer mortality has allowed for greater emphasis on survivorship issues, including infertility. This study evaluated the participation of pediatric surgery training programs in fertility preservation (FP) and exposure of fellows to adnexal cases. Materials and Methods: A survey was distributed to pediatric surgery fellowship program directors in the United States and Canada through email. Questions focused on FP participation, operative cases, FP program limitations, and fellow completion of adnexal cases. Results: Survey participation was 49% (28/57). Overall, 43% (12/28) of training programs report participation in FP initiatives. Of those who participated, the most common procedures performed were testicular tissue biopsy (58%) and testicular sperm extraction (42%) in males, and surgical transposition of the ovaries (83%) and laparoscopic oophorectomy (67%) in females. The greatest cited limitations on participation were that FP was another department's responsibility (50%) and lack of multidisciplinary team (31%). Notably, lack of operative experience in benign ovarian and testicular procedures (0%) was not a limitation. All programs, regardless of participation in FP, noted that their fellows performed benign and malignant adnexal cases. Conclusion: Less than half of pediatric surgery training programs participate in FP initiatives, despite adequate advanced minimally invasive training of fellows to perform these procedures.

Fertility and Endocrine Preservation in the Management of Colorectal Cancer in Women

A 28-year-old nulliparous woman presented with rectal bleeding. Colonoscopy revealed a 4-cm malignant-appearing mass in the proximal rectum, and biopsies confirmed invasive adenocarcinoma of the rectum. Computed tomography scan showed no evidence of metastatic disease. Staging MRI found transmural extension with minimal stranding in the adjacent fat, as well as no evidence of pathological pelvic adenopathy, consistent with a T3N0 lesion. The proposed treatment plan involved neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy before primary surgical resection. The patient desired fertility preservation and was referred immediately to Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. She underwent assisted reproduction with oocyte and blastocyst cryopreservation followed by laparoscopic ovarian transposition. Nine months after surgical low anterior resection of the tumor and completion of her cancer treatment, her ovaries were repositioned to their normal pelvic position during an ileostomy takedown procedure. She underwent a frozen embryo transfer but did not conceive. She resumed menses and later conceived spontaneously. Her pregnancy was complicated by cervical incompetence, requiring cervical cerclage. She delivered a live male infant via cesarean delivery at 32 weeks gestation, approximately 2 years after completion of cancer therapy. Four years after diagnosis, the patient remains in remission with undetectable CEA levels.

Novel aspects on gonadotoxicity and fertility preservation in lymphoproliferative neoplasms

The topic of fertility preservation in patients with a lymphoproliferative disease offers new aspects of debate, due to the introduction of novel chemotherapeutic regimens and small molecules in the clinical landscape. Cancer related infertility is mostly dependent on gonadotoxic treatments and fertile female patients are today addressed to the oocyte cryopreservation or to ovarian cortex fragment cryopreservation. These methods present advantages and disadvantages, which will be discussed in the present review, together with the options for male patients. The recent discovery of functional ovarian stem cells (OCSs) in woman ovarian cortex, opens new avenues offering a innovative procedure for fertility preservation through as model of regenerative medicine. Here, we review the gonadotoxic potential of "classical" chemotherapeutic treatments as well as of "novel" targeted therapies actually employed for lymphoproliferative neoplasms in young patients and revisit both the today available and future chances to preserve and restore fertility after the cancer healing.

COVID-19 and assisted reproductive technology services: repercussions for patients and proposal for individualized clinical management

The prolonged lockdown of health services providing high-complexity fertility treatments -as currently recommended by many reproductive medicine entities- is detrimental for society as a whole, and infertility patients in particular. Globally, approximately 0.3% of all infants born every year are conceived using assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments. By contrast, the total number of COVID-19 deaths reported so far represents approximately 1.0% of the total deaths expected to occur worldwide over the first three months of the current year. It seems, therefore, that the number of infants expected to be conceived and born -but who will not be so due to the lockdown of infertility services- might be as significant as the total number of deaths attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic. We herein propose remedies that include a prognostic-stratification of more vulnerable infertility cases in order to plan a progressive restart of worldwide fertility treatments. At a time when preventing complications and limiting burdens for national health systems represent relevant issues, our viewpoint might help competent authorities and health care providers to identify patients who should be prioritized for the continuation of fertility care in a safe environment.

Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: an observational study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the outcome of fertility preservation (FP) using vitrified oocytes in patients with endometriosis and to determine the impact of ovarian surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

University-affiliated private in vitro fertilization (IVF) center.

PATIENT(S)

Four hundred and eighty-five women with endometriosis who underwent FP from January 2007 to July 2018.

INTERVENTION(S)

Vitrification of metaphase II (MII) oocytes for future use.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Oocyte survival rate and cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR).

RESULT(S)

Mean age at vitrification was 35.7 ± 3.7 years. The women undergoing operations were younger than the nonsurgical patients (33.4 ± 3.6 years vs. 36.7 ± 3.7 years). The survival rate and CLBR were 83.2% and 46.4%, respectively. The number of vitrified oocytes per cycle (6.2 ± 5.8) was higher for the nonsurgical patients compared with the unilateral (5.0 ± 4.5) or bilateral (4.5 ± 4.4) surgery groups, but was comparable among the surgical patients. The effect of age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.904; 95% CI, 0.858-0.952), number of oocytes (adjusted OR 1.050; 95% CI, 1.025-1.091), and survival (adjusted OR 1.011; 95% CI, 1.001-1.020) on the CLBR was confirmed. However, the effect of surgery was not observed (adjusted OR 1.142; 95% CI, 0.778-1.677). Nonetheless, the ovarian response (vitrified oocytes = 8.6 ± 6.9 vs. 5.1 ± 4.8) and CLBR (72.5% vs. 52.8%) were higher in young (≤35 years) nonsurgical patient versus the surgical patients; older women showed similar outcomes.

CONCLUSION(S)

Fertility preservation gives patients with endometriosis a valid treatment option to help them increase their reproductive chances. We suggest performing surgery after ovarian stimulation for FP in young women. In older women, an individualized treatment should be considered.

Barriers and Opportunities of Oncofertility Practice in Nine Developing Countries and the Emerging Oncofertility Professional Engagement Network

PURPOSE

Oncofertility practice continues to grow in developing countries despite the lack of health care services, especially those related to cancer care. The purpose of this study is to further explore oncofertility practice in these countries and identify opportunities for field-wide coalescence.

METHODS

We generated a survey to learn more about oncofertility practice in nine developing countries within our Oncofertility Consortium Global Partners Network-Mexico, Colombia, Guatemala, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, and India. Their responses were collected, reviewed, and discussed.

RESULTS

Surveyed centers from the nine developing countries continue to experience a similar set of common challenges, including a lack of awareness among providers and patients, cultural and religious constraints, lack of insurance coverage and funding to help to support oncofertility programs, and high out-of-pocket costs for patients. Despite these barriers, many opportunities exist and there is great potential for the future.

CONCLUSION

The current need is to unify the new technologies and best practices that emerge from rural communities and developing countries with those in large metropolitan cities, both domestically (US based) and abroad, into a functional unit: the Oncofertility Professional Engagement Network. The Oncofertility Professional Engagement Network will bridge the gap between domestic and international programs to establish a strong global network in which members share resources, methodologies and experiences and further build cultural competency.

Survey of Fertility Preservation Options Available to Patients With Cancer Around the Globe

Oncofertility focuses on providing fertility and endocrine-sparing options to patients who undergo life-preserving but gonadotoxic cancer treatment. The resources needed to meet patient demand often are fragmented along disciplinary lines. We quantify assets and gaps in oncofertility care on a global scale.

Oncofertility in adult and pediatric populations: options and barriers

Cancer and its treatments can affect fertility in a variety of ways, and recent advances in cancer detection and treatment have led to an increasing number of cancer survivors for whom future fertility is a primary concern. Oncofertility is the study of interactions between cancer, anti-cancer therapy, fertility, and reproductive health. Fertility preservation aims to optimize fertility potential before initiation of gonadotoxic therapies. Sperm cryopreservation from an ejaculated sample is the gold standard for adults and post-pubertal adolescents, though added maneuvers such as medical therapy, penile vibratory stimulation, and electroejaculation can be employed when appropriate. When all these approaches fail, testicular sperm extraction can be used to obtain and cryopreserve testicular sperm from the azoospermic patient. Fertility preservation in the pre-pubertal pediatric patient is still experimental, but recent scientific breakthroughs with use of spermatogonial stem cells and testicular tissue transplantation offer great promise for the future. While there may be several practical, cultural, religious, and other barriers to fertility preservation, the establishment of a dedicated fertility preservation team can help to overcome these obstacles and optimize the utilization of fertility preservation in cancer patients of all ages.

[Oncofertility and breast cancer]

Over the past decades, progresses in oncology have improved the recovery rates after numerous malignant diseases, including breast cancer, that strike young adults in childbearing age. Quality of life of young cancer survivors has become a major issue. However, anticancer therapies can have a detrimental impact on fertility. It is now well-established that all patients should receive information about the fertility risks associated with their cancer treatment and the fertility preservation options available. These techniques aim to limit the negative impact of chemotherapy on the ovaries or to preserve gametes before treatment. Currently, oocyte or embryo freezing after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation represents the most effective method for preserving female fertility. Over the past years innovative protocols of ovarian stimulation have been developed to enable breast cancer patients to undergo oocyte or embryo cryopreservation irrespective of the phase of the cycle or without exogenous follicle-stimulating hormone related increase in serum estradiol levels. When controlled ovarian hyperstimualtion cannot be implemented, other techniques such as cryopreservation of ovarian cortex, in vitro maturation or the use of GnRH agonists may be proposed. However, it is important to inform patients that all these fertility preservation techniques do not represent a guarantee of pregnancy.

Prognostic role of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in medically indicated fertility preservation

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) among patients pursuing embryo banking (EB) for medically indicated fertility preservation (FP).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

University-affiliated fertility center.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent in vitro fertilization with or without PGT-A for medically indicated FP between January 2014 and April 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

None MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: EB cycle characteristics, subsequent cycle pursuit/outcomes, and frozen embryo transfer (FET) outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 58 medical EB cycles were compared; 34 cycles used PGT-A. Of the EB patients with breast cancer, 67% used PGT-A; other indications were evenly divided between PGT-A (FP/PGT-A) and no PGT-A (FP). PGT-A use increased over the study period. Groups were similar in age, days of stimulation, and days from initial FP consultation to treatment initiation. Number of oocytes (14.5 [2-63] FP vs. 17.5 [1-64] FP/PGT-A), 2PN zygotes (7 [1-38] FP vs. 9 [0-36] FP/PGT-A), and blastocysts (5.5 [0-22] FP vs. 5 [0-18] FP/PGT-A) cryopreserved were similar between groups. Equal numbers cryopreserved both oocytes and embryos (5 vs. 3). Five FP/PGT-A patients underwent a second EB cycle. Among FP/PGT-A patients, an average of 6.7 ± 5 blastocysts underwent PGT-A, with 3.5 ± 3 (48.2%) euploid embryos cryopreserved for future FET compared to an average of 7.2 ± 7 untested embryos in the FP group.

CONCLUSION

PGT-A in medical EB cycles increased over time and did not limit the use of other FP methods such as oocyte cryopreservation. In some cases, poor PGT-A results informed patients to pursue a second EB cycle. When counseling patients, the prognostic benefits of PGT-A must be weighed against the financial costs and potential for "terminal" fertility diagnosis.

Fertility counseling and sperm banking among adolescents and adults treated for cancer with curative intent in a developing country

PURPOSE

In developing countries, a higher percentage of patients develop cancer at a younger age. Cancer survival rates have significantly improved, highlighting the importance of survivorship programs that address late complications related to cancer itself or its treatment. The purpose of this study is to estimate the prevalence of fertility counseling and sperm banking and related factors among at-risk males newly diagnosed with cancer and planning to receive a potentially curative anticancer therapy.

METHODS

Medical records and hospital database of young male patients with newly diagnosed cancers and planned to start chemotherapy were reviewed for fertility counseling and sperm cryopreservation. Additionally, a self-administered questionnaire was utilized.

RESULTS

A total of 186 patients, mean age 32.9 (range: 18-53) years, were included. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma 59 (31.7%), leukemia 48 (25.8%), and Hodgkin's lymphoma 26 (14.0%) were the most common tumors encountered. A total of 129 (75.0%) respondents received fertility counseling prior to their treatment, and this rate was higher among patients with early-stage disease (82.4% vs. 58.1%, p = 0.038). However, sperm banking was performed by 33.1% of the whole study group but was significantly higher among single patients (53.4% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001), those who had no children (51.8% vs. 14.3%, p < 0.001), and among highly educated patients (47.6% vs. 17.1%, p = 0.001). Patients failed to do sperm banking because they were not informed about the risk of infertility (26.2%) or service availability (25.4%). Fear of treatment delay was a reason in 20.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Fertility counseling and sperm banking among cancer patients are not optimal. Many patients failed to do sperm banking because of avoidable reasons. Better communication and patients' education will probably improve the utilization of this vital service.

A fertility preservation toolkit for pediatric surgeons caring for children with cancer

Survival for children with cancer has improved significantly in recent decades, prompting an increasing emphasis on minimizing late effects of therapy, including infertility and premature gonadal insufficiency. The time interval after diagnosis and before therapy initiation can be stressful and overwhelming for patients and their families coming to terms with the implications of the diagnosis, but is also the optimal time to address oncofertility options. Pediatric surgeons are often an integral part of the care team for these patients during this vulnerable time period and play a key role in advocating for and performing oncofertility procedures. Children with cancer have both non-experimental and experimental fertility preservation options available depending on their pubertal status and a risk assessment performed based on their anticipated therapy. This review provides an oncofertility toolkit for pediatric surgeons to perform a risk assessment, counsel families on fertility preservation options, and establish an oncofertility program tailored to the resources available at their institutions.

Preserving fertility in female patients with hematological malignancies: a multidisciplinary oncofertility approach

Oncofertility is a new interdisciplinary field at the intersection of oncology and reproductive medicine that expands fertility options for young cancer patients. The most common forms of hematological malignancies that occur in girls and young women and therefore necessitate oncofertility care are acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myeloid leukemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and Hodgkin's lymphoma. Aggressive gonadotoxic anticancer regimens including alkylating chemotherapy and total body irradiation are used often in treating girls and young women with hematological malignancies. The risks of gonadotoxicity and subsequent iatrogenic premature ovarian insufficiency and fertility loss depend mainly on the type and stage of the disease, dose of anticancer therapy as well as the age of the patient at the beginning of treatment. To avoid or at least mitigate the devastating complications of anticancer therapy-induced gonadotoxicity, effective and comprehensive strategies that integrate different options for preserving and restoring fertility ranging from established to experimental strategies should be offered before, during, and after chemotherapy or radiotherapy. A multidisciplinary approach that involves strong coordination and collaboration between hemato-oncologists, gynecologists, reproductive biologists, research scientists, and patient navigators is essential to guarantee high standard of care.

Fertility and hormone preservation and restoration for female children and adolescents receiving gonadotoxic cancer treatments: A systematic review

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review by the American Pediatric Surgical Cancer Committee was to summarize evidence from the current medical literature regarding fertility restoration and hormone replacement for female children and adolescents treated with gonadotoxic treatments.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guidelines, questions were addressed by searching Medline, Cochrane, Embase Central and National clearing house databases using relevant search terms. Eligible studies included those that addressed ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC), oocyte harvest, ovarian transposition, and ovarian tissue auto-transplantation for females under the age of 20. Four reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Study outcomes were summarized in a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred seventy-six studies were identified by database search and manual review and 2185 were eliminated based on defined exclusion criteria. Ninety-one studies served as the basis for the systematic review. There were 1019 patients who underwent OTC with ages ranging from 0.4 to 20.4 years old, with 298 under the age of 13. Twenty patients aged 13-20 years old underwent successful oocyte harvest. Thirty-seven children underwent ovarian transposition as a means of fertility preservation. Eighteen patients underwent auto-transplantation of thawed ovarian cortical tissue that was harvested before the age of 21 years resulting in 10 live births.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically accepted and experimental fertility preservation options such as OTC, oocyte cryopreservation, and ovarian transposition are available to females aged 20 years and younger who are at risk for premature ovarian insufficiency and infertility due to gonadotoxic treatments. There is a large cohort of pediatric-aged patients, with a wide variety of diagnoses and treatments, who have undergone fertility preservation. Currently, fertility and hormone restoration experience for patients who were 20- years of age or younger at the time of fertility preservation remains limited.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A Discussion of Options, Outcomes, and Future Recommendations for Fertility Preservation for Transmasculine Individuals

The process of gender affirmation may have an impact on fertility. Counseling on the impact of affirmation and opportunities for fertility, future family building, and reproductive health is an important first step in the affirmation process. This article discusses the options for fertility preservation for transmen. The barriers and outcomes in this unique population are also considered. In addition, insights are provided on the future of fertility preservation and suggestions are made for how to build a comprehensive team for male transgender patients.

Use of fertility preservation services in female reproductive-aged cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to determine the rates and predictors of fertility preservation services among reproductive-aged women with common cancers in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

We used the MarketScan database to identify women 18-45 years of age with lung, breast, colorectal, or cervical cancer who underwent surgery and chemotherapy from 2009 through 2016. Services from 3 months before to 3 months after chemotherapy for evaluation for fertility preservation, laboratory testing for fertility evaluation, and fertility-preserving procedures were captured. Multivariable models were used to assess the factors associated with the use of fertility-preservation services.

RESULTS

A total of 18,781 women, including 386 cervical, 1372 colorectal, 246 lung, and 16,777 with breast cancer, were identified. In women 18-35 years old, 11.7% underwent evaluation for fertility preservation, 13.7% underwent laboratory testing, and 6.3% pursued fertility-preserving procedures. The rates of office evaluation, laboratory testing, and performance of procedure were 3.3%, 7.5%, and 1.9 % in women aged 36-40 years and 0.5%, 7.2%, and 0.3% in those aged 41-45 years, respectively. The rate of fertility preservation evaluation rose from 1.0% in 2009 to 5.5% in 2016 (risk ratio, 4.66, 95% confidence interval, 2.38-9.11) while use of fertility-preserving procedures increased from 1.0% to 4.6% (risk ratio, 3.84, 95% confidence interval, 1.94-7.59) during the same time period. In a multivariable model, use of any fertility-preserving interventions were more common in patients with breast cancer (adjusted risk ratio, 2.30, 95% confidence interval, 1.30-4.06), those in the Northeast (adjusted risk ratio, 1.24, 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.40), and in younger women (18-35 years) (adjusted risk ratio, 2.59, 95% confidence interval, 2.32-2.89).

CONCLUSION

Although limited by lack of information regarding cancer stage and desire for future fertility, only a small fraction of reproductive-aged female cancer patients receiving chemotherapy are evaluated in a nationwide sample for fertility preservation or undergo fertility-preserving procedures.

Fertility preservation in patients with hematologic malignancies and recipients of hematopoietic cell transplants

Patients with hematologic malignancies and those undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) face a complex set of challenges when considering options for fertility preservation (FP). There are no standard options for prepubertal children, and women with hematologic malignancies may not be eligible for standard FP options. Fortunately, initial therapies for most blood cancers are not highly gonadotoxic, affording an important opportunity for postremission counseling and referrals to fertility specialists. These patients face a high risk of relapse, and many will be referred for autologous or allogeneic HCT, which carries an extremely high risk of infertility. The expanding indications for HCT to include benign hematologic disorders as well as autoimmune diseases mandate that all hematologists are familiar with these risks. Oncofertility researchers are continually pushing the boundaries of what may be possible for our patients; in the meantime, communication and shared decision-making between hematologists and patients, as well as program-building, education, and outreach are essential to ensure that these patients, many of whom will be cured, maintain all of their options for a fulfilling life after intensive therapy.

Fertility preservation in female oncology patients: the influence of the type of cancer on ovarian stimulation response

STUDY QUESTION

Does the type of cancer influence on the ovarian response to stimulation for fertility preservation (FP) in female oncology patients?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Patients with gynaecological cancer have less number of retrieved mature oocytes compared with haematological and breast cancer patients.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Concerns about the impact of cancer therapy on future fertility have been raised and FP has become an important component in cancer management. Previous studies analysing FP results in cancer patients have shown conflicting findings.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This was a retrospective analytical study performed in the Centre for Reproductive Medicine, at St Bartholomew's Hospital, between January 2000 and December 2014. The aim of this study was to analyse the response to ovarian stimulation in cancer patients before undergoing cancer treatment and to determine whether any difference can be attributed to underlying cancer diagnosis. We also report the pregnancy outcomes.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A total of 531 female patients recently diagnosed with cancer were referred for counselling on FP. A total of 306 patients underwent ovarian stimulation for oocyte or embryo cryopreservation. We compared the baseline characteristics and ovarian response in five main subgroups: breast cancer, haematological cancer, gynaecological cancer, gastrointestinal cancer and others. The primary outcome was the total number of mature oocytes retrieved and pregnancy outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The main cancer diagnosis was breast cancer with 145 patients (47.4%); 79 patients (25.8%) had haematological malignancies; 42 (13.7%) had gynaecological malignancies; 20 (6.5%) had gastrointestinal cancer and 20 (6.5%) had other types of cancer. Patients with breast cancer were older (P < 0.001). Patients with haematological malignancies had higher number of mature oocytes retrieved (P = 0.003). The number of mature oocytes retrieved was lower in patients with gynaecological malignancy compared with haematological and breast cancer patients (P = 0.005 and P = 0.045, respectively). The fertilization rate and the number of cycles cancelled were comparable between all the groups. Thirty-two embryo transfer cycles have been done in 22 patients who have returned to attempt pregnancy. Pregnancy rate per transfer cycle was 43.75%, and cumulative pregnancy rate per patient was 54.5%. Live birth rate per patient was 22.72%.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Apart from the retrospective nature of the study, patients were included over the period of 15 years, and over that time technology has changed and protocols have evolved. The results obtained from subcategory analyses should be interpreted with caution, as in each subgroup there are different types of malignancies with different number of patients in different age groups. Different ovarian stimulation protocols were applied. Only a few patients have come back to attempt pregnancy after being cured from their disease. We do not have follow-up data on these patients; as a result, we are not able to report the survival rate and the reason for non-return for embryo transfer. In addition, we cannot report information on spontaneous conceptions and births. Slow freezing used for embryo cryopreservation, high miscarriage rate and low live birth rate per transfer are other limitations of this study.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The current study is the largest series analysing each group of cancer separately and showing pregnancy outcomes in oncology patients undergoing FP. These results provide valuable information about the success of this technique in oncology patients.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The authors have not received any funding to support this study. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.