Utilizing the Experience of Consumers in Consultation to Develop the Australasian Oncofertility Consortium Charter

Fertility Concerns Related to Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: An Under-Discussed Topic

As the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) increases among younger adults, the need for discussions regarding treatment-related infertility is growing. The negative impacts of gonadotoxic chemotherapy and pelvic radiation are well documented, but the role that surgical intervention for CRC plays in infertility is less clear. Additionally, treatment-related infertility counseling occurs infrequently. This review provides an overview of the connection between abdominal and pelvic surgery on male and female infertility and elucidates the role of surgeons in counseling to alleviate psychological distress in newly diagnosed patients. A review of the literature revealed that pelvic surgery leads to increased adhesion formation, which is known to be associated with female infertility. Furthermore, nerve damage from pelvic surgery has significant implications for ejaculatory issues in males and sexual dysfunction in both males and females, which ultimately impact pregnancy success. Patients have significant distress related to treatment-related infertility, and pre-treatment fertility counseling has been shown to alleviate some of this psychological burden. Nevertheless, many patients do not receive counseling, particularly in surgical clinics, despite surgeons often being the first providers to see newly diagnosed non-metastatic patients. Efforts should be made to enact protocols that ensure fertility conversations are being had with patients in surgical clinics and that patients are being referred to fertility specialists appropriately. This patient-centered approach will lessen the psychological burden placed on patients during a vulnerable time in their lives.

Mapping ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of fertility preservation

RESEARCH QUESTION

The study examines the ethical, legal, and social implications of fertility preservation, highlighting its importance across oncofertility, elective egg freezing, and posthumous assisted reproduction, as well as its impact on transgender individuals undergoing gender-affirming surgeries.

DESIGN

A comprehensive analysis of 600 articles, focusing on a diverse range of disciplines, including bioethics, psychology, and sociology, to explore public and healthcare professionals' knowledge, patient experiences, and regulatory constraints.

RESULTS

The body of literature is growing, indicating increasing recognition of FP's significance. Key themes included the centrality of counseling and informed decision-making, especially in oncofertility and EEF, and ethical debates surrounding informed consent and the autonomy of involved individuals. The analysis underscored a western-centric bias in current research, emphasizing the need for more inclusive and culturally sensitive studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The study calls for a nuanced understanding of FP, advocating for policies that consider ethical, cultural, and social dimensions. It suggests the necessity for interdisciplinary research to address identified gaps, particularly in understanding non-Western perspectives and ensuring equitable access to FP services globally. Moreover, the review emphasizes the importance of integrating patient-centric approaches and ethical frameworks to guide FP practices and policies, ensuring they respect diverse values and meet individuals' needs.

Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient Experiences in Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review of the Literature on Adolescents and Young Adults (AYAs) with Cancer

With better survival rates for patients diagnosed with cancer, more attention has been focused on future risks, like fertility decline due to gonadotoxic treatment. In this regard, the emphasis during counselling regarding possible preservation options is often on the treatment itself, meaning that the medical and emotional needs of patients regarding counselling, treatment, and future fertility are often overlooked. This review focuses on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient experiences regarding fertility preservation (FP)-among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer. A systematic review of the literature, with a systematic search of online databases, was performed, resulting in 61 selected articles. A quality assessment was performed by a mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT). Based on this search, three important topics emerged: initiating discussion about the risk of fertility decline, acknowledging the importance of future fertility, and recognizing the need for more verbal and written patient-specific information. In addition, patients value follow-up care and the opportunity to rediscuss FP and their concerns about future fertility and use of stored material. A clear FP healthcare pathway can prevent delays in receiving a referral to a fertility specialist to discuss FP options and initiating FP treatment. This patient-centered approach will optimize FP experiences and help to establish a process to achieve long-term follow up after FP treatment.

Current Status and Issues of the Japan Oncofertility Registry

Purpose: Fertility preservation (FP) is becoming increasingly common among child, adolescent, and young-adult (CAYA) patients with cancer. However, Japan has long lacked definite estimates of utilization rates for FP services among CAYA patients with cancer, and little is known about disease/FP outcomes among users. Therefore, the Japan Society for Fertility Preservation (JSFP) launched the Japan Oncofertility Registry (JOFR) in 2018 and started the online registration of information regarding primary disease, FP, and data on prognosis and pregnancy outcomes. This study reports the analytical results of FP data registered in the JOFR as of 2021. Methods: Data about patients' primary disease(s), treatment courses, cancer and pregnancy outcomes, and specific procedures were extracted from the JOFR and analyzed. Results: In 2021, 1244 patients received counseling or treatment related to FP (540 males, 704 females). While the numbers of males in each age group were approximately equal, most females were aged between 31 and 40 years. In total, 490 male and 540 female patients underwent FP procedures. Leukemia, testicular cancer, and malignant lymphoma accounted for the majority of male cases seeking treatment, whereas breast cancer was the primary disease in two-thirds of the females. Since 1999, 395 patients have accumulatively experienced subsequent pregnancy. Conclusions: As of January 2022, >7000 cases from >100 fertility facilities have been registered in the JOFR. In the future, maintaining JOFR to disseminate information on cancer prognoses, pregnancy rates, and other oncofertility outcomes is expected to drive further expansion of oncofertility services in Japan.

Immunochemotherapy for life-threatening haematological malignancies in pregnancy: a systematic review of the literature and cross-sectional analysis of clinical trial eligibility

The management of potentially life-threatening malignancies in pregnancy is complicated by a lack of robust safety and efficacy evidence. This data shortage stems from a historical exclusion of women of childbearing potential from prospective clinical trials due to concerns around potential teratogenicity and toxicity of investigational agents. We conducted a systematic review of published data on immunochemotherapeutic treatment of life-threatening haematological malignancies in pregnancy between 2010 and 2022, and the maternal and neonatal outcomes. We then performed a cross-sectional observational study of clinical trial protocols on ClinicalTrials.gov, between 2016 and 2022, recruiting women of childbearing potential with potentially life-threatening haematological malignancies, collecting trial demographic data, and documenting whether pregnant or lactating women were explicitly excluded, along with the type and duration of contraception required for women of childbearing potential. We included 17 studies for analysis in our systematic review. A total of 595 women were treated with immunochemotherapy during pregnancy, with a median age of 29 years (range 14-48). Of these, 81 women (14%) were treated in the first trimester, and 514 (86%) were treated in the second and third trimesters collectively. In total, 68 trials for acute myeloid leukaemia, acute lymphocytic leukaemia, high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma (40%, 26%, 21%, and 13%, respectively) were included in our ClinicalTrials.gov analysis. Most protocols (66 [97%]) explicitly excluded pregnant women, with 40 (69%) not providing a rationale for exclusion. The potential harm to the fetus from anti-cancer therapy has historically been given greater moral precedence than a pregnant woman's autonomy. This pattern is reflected in the lack of rigorous evidence for immunochemotherapy in pregnancy and a universal exclusion of pregnant and lactating women from clinical trial protocols in this study. Nonetheless, the administration of systemic chemotherapy in the second and third trimesters was not associated with an increased rate of congenital malformations or perinatal mortality in our systematic review cohort, with maternal outcomes broadly comparable to those of the non-pregnant population.

Consumers' and health providers' views and perceptions of partnering to improve health services design, delivery and evaluation: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Partnering with consumers in the planning, delivery and evaluation of health services is an essential component of person-centred care. There are many ways to partner with consumers to improve health services, including formal group partnerships (such as committees, boards or steering groups). However, consumers' and health providers' views and experiences of formal group partnerships remain unclear. In this qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), we focus specifically on formal group partnerships where health providers and consumers share decision-making about planning, delivering and/or evaluating health services. Formal group partnerships were selected because they are widely used throughout the world to improve person-centred care. For the purposes of this QES, the term 'consumer' refers to a person who is a patient, carer or community member who brings their perspective to health service partnerships. 'Health provider' refers to a person with a health policy, management, administrative or clinical role who participates in formal partnerships in an advisory or representative capacity. This QES was co-produced with a Stakeholder Panel of consumers and health providers. The QES was undertaken concurrently with a Cochrane intervention review entitled Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

1. To synthesise the views and experiences of consumers and health providers of formal partnership approaches that aimed to improve planning, delivery or evaluation of health services. 2. To identify best practice principles for formal partnership approaches in health services by understanding consumers' and health providers' views and experiences.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL for studies published between January 2000 and October 2018. We also searched grey literature sources including websites of relevant research and policy organisations involved in promoting person-centred care.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative studies that explored consumers' and health providers' perceptions and experiences of partnering in formal group formats to improve the planning, delivery or evaluation of health services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Following completion of abstract and full-text screening, we used purposive sampling to select a sample of eligible studies that covered a range of pre-defined criteria, including rich data, range of countries and country income level, settings, participants, and types of partnership activities. A Framework Synthesis approach was used to synthesise the findings of the sample. We appraised the quality of each study using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skill Program) tool. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach. The Stakeholder Panel was involved in each stage of the review from development of the protocol to development of the best practice principles.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 182 studies that were eligible for inclusion. From this group, we selected 33 studies to include in the final synthesis. These studies came from a wide range of countries including 28 from high-income countries and five from low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). Each of the studies included the experiences and views of consumers and/or health providers of partnering in formal group formats. The results were divided into the following categories. Contextual factors influencing partnerships: government policy, policy implementation processes and funding, as well as the organisational context of the health service, could facilitate or impede partnering (moderate level of confidence). Consumer recruitment: consumer recruitment occurred in different ways and consumers managed the recruitment process in a minority of studies only (high level of confidence). Recruiting a range of consumers who were reflective of the clinic's demographic population was considered desirable, particularly by health providers (high level of confidence). Some health providers perceived that individual consumers' experiences were not generalisable to the broader population whereas consumers perceived it could be problematic to aim to represent a broad range of community views (high level of confidence). Partnership dynamics and processes: positive interpersonal dynamics between health providers and consumers facilitated partnerships (high level of confidence). However, formal meeting formats and lack of clarity about the consumer role could constrain consumers' involvement (high level of confidence). Health providers' professional status, technical knowledge and use of jargon were intimidating for some consumers (high level of confidence) and consumers could feel their experiential knowledge was not valued (moderate level of confidence). Consumers could also become frustrated when health providers dominated the meeting agenda (moderate level of confidence) and when they experienced token involvement, such as a lack of decision-making power (high level of confidence) Perceived impacts on partnership participants: partnering could affect health provider and consumer participants in both positive and negative ways (high level of confidence). Perceived impacts on health service planning, delivery and evaluation: partnering was perceived to improve the person-centredness of health service culture (high level of confidence), improve the built environment of the health service (high level of confidence), improve health service design and delivery e.g. facilitate 'out of hours' services or treatment closer to home (high level of confidence), enhance community ownership of health services, particularly in LMICs (moderate level of confidence), and improve consumer involvement in strategic decision-making, under certain conditions (moderate level of confidence). There was limited evidence suggesting partnering may improve health service evaluation (very low level of confidence). Best practice principles for formal partnering to promote person-centred care were developed from these findings. The principles were developed collaboratively with the Stakeholder Panel and included leadership and health service culture; diversity; equity; mutual respect; shared vision and regular communication; shared agendas and decision-making; influence and sustainability.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Successful formal group partnerships with consumers require health providers to continually reflect and address power imbalances that may constrain consumers' participation. Such imbalances may be particularly acute in recruitment procedures, meeting structure and content and decision-making processes. Formal group partnerships were perceived to improve the physical environment of health services, the person-centredness of health service culture and health service design and delivery. Implementing the best practice principles may help to address power imbalances, strengthen formal partnering, improve the experiences of consumers and health providers and positively affect partnership outcomes.

Does patient and public involvement influence the development of competency frameworks for the health professions? A systematic review

Competency frameworks typically describe the perceived knowledge, skills, attitudes and other characteristics required for a health professional to practice safely and effectively. Patient and public involvement in the development of competency frameworks is uncommon despite delivery of person-centered care being a defining feature of a competent health professional. This systematic review aimed to determine how patients and the public are involved in the development of competency frameworks for health professions, and whether their involvement influenced the outcome of the competency frameworks. Studies were identified from six electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science and ERIC). The database search yielded a total of 8,222 citations, and 43 articles were included for data extraction. Most studies were from the United Kingdom (27%) and developed through multidisciplinary collaborations involving two or more professions (40%). There was a large variation in the number of patients and members of the public recruited (range 1–1,398); recruitment sources included patients and carers with the clinical condition of interest (30%) or established consumer representative groups (22%). Common stages for involving patients and the public were in generation of competency statements (57%) or reviewing the draft competency framework (57%). Only ten studies (27%) took a collaborative approach to the engagement of patients and public in competency framework development. The main ways in which involvement influenced the competency framework were validation of health professional-derived competency statements, provision of desirable behaviors and attitudes and generation of additional competency statements. Overall, there was a lack of reporting regarding the details and outcome of patient and public involvement. Further research is required to optimize approaches to patient and public involvement in competency framework development including guidance regarding who, how, when and for what purposes they should be engaged and the requirements for reporting.

"We Have All This Knowledge to Give, So Use Us as a Resource": Partnering with Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors to Determine Consumer-Led Research Priorities

Purpose: Involvement of adolescent and young adult (AYAs) cancer survivors as consumers in research is increasingly encouraged, yet few studies have identified the feasibility and acceptability of methods used to involve them. We aimed to identify: (1) How feasible and acceptable is a consumer-driven, workshop-based research priority-setting approach? And (2) what research priorities do Australian AYA consumers endorse? Methods: AYA cancer survivors diagnosed 15-30 years old and currently younger than 35 years were invited to participate. The AYAs completed a pre-workshop survey to rank their top three priorities from the United Kingdom-based James Lind Alliance list, participated in a 90-minute focus group, and completed a post-workshop evaluation survey. We assessed the workshop feasibility by reviewing considerations, challenges, and enablers of success in the planning and conduct processes. Acceptability was assessed through participants' evaluation surveys and facilitators' informal reflections. The top three priorities were determined from pre-workshop surveys and focus group data. Results: Six survivors participated (M age = 24.2 years, M = 5 years post-treatment, 83% female). All reported that the workshop was an acceptable way to engage with researchers. Costs and recruitment challenges limited the workshop's feasibility. The AYAs' top priority was: What psychological support package improves psychological well-being, social functioning, and mental health during and after treatment? Discussion: The AYA survivors found our workshop to be an acceptable way to engage in research priority-setting. However, the feasibility of this approach depends on the resources available to researchers. Future research is needed to define the optimal method of engagement: What is most acceptable for AYAs and feasible for researchers?

The Development of an International Oncofertility Competency Framework: A Model to Increase Oncofertility Implementation

BACKGROUND

Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. Currently, oncofertility competencies do not exist. The aim of this study was to develop an oncofertility competency framework that defines the key components of oncofertility care, develops a model for prioritizing service development, and defines the roles that health care professionals (HCPs) play.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A quantitative modified Delphi methodology was used to conduct two rounds of an electronic survey, querying and synthesizing opinions about statements regarding oncofertility care with HCPs and patient and family advocacy groups (PFAs) from 16 countries (12 high and 4 middle income). Statements included the roles of HCPs and priorities for service development care across ten domains (communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, oncofertility training, reproductive survivorship care and fertility-related psychosocial support, supportive care, and ethical frameworks) that represent 33 different elements of care.

RESULTS

The first questionnaire was completed by 457 participants (332 HCPs and 125 PFAs). One hundred and thirty-eight participants completed the second questionnaire (122 HCPs and 16 PFAs). Consensus was agreed on 108 oncofertility competencies and the roles HCPs should play in oncofertility care. A three-tier service development model is proposed, with gradual implementation of different components of care. A total of 92.8% of the 108 agreed competencies also had agreement between high and middle income participants.

CONCLUSION

FP guidelines establish best practice but do not consider the skills and requirements to implement these guidelines. The competency framework gives HCPs and services a structure for the training of HCPs and implementation of care, as well as defining a model for prioritizing oncofertility service development.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. The competency framework gives 108 competencies that will allow health care professionals (HCPs) and services a structure for the development of oncofertility care, as well as define the role HCPs play to provide care and support. The framework also proposes a three-tier oncofertility service development model which prioritizes the development of components of oncofertility care into essential, enhanced, and expert services, giving clear recommendations for service development. The competency framework will enhance the implementation of FP guidelines, improving the equitable access to medical and psychological oncofertility care.

Fertility preservation in oncology patients: A literature review examining current fertility preservation techniques and access to oncofertility services in Australia

BACKGROUND

In Australia, between the years 2010 and 2014, over 4500 adolescents and young adults (15-25 years old) were diagnosed with cancer. Treatment regimens are often gonadotoxic and are well known to induce ovarian and testicular failure. Oncofertility is an emerging discipline in obstetrics and gynaecology which seeks to preserve and restore the reproductive future of cancer patients.

AIM

To perform a systematic literature review to assess the current fertility preservation techniques available to patients and examine access and uptake of fertility preservation in Australia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases, including Medline, Cochrane Review, SCOPUS and CINHAL, were searched for peer-reviewed publications and national guidelines examining oncofertility practices from 2008 to July 2018. Three hundred and seventy-five articles were initially screened, with 158 articles for full text review and an additional five clinical guidelines were identified.

RESULTS

There is a paucity of Australian data on oncofertility with <50% of data included for analysis reflecting the Australian experience. The majority of primary research included retrospective papers with small cohort numbers. Key areas addressed included live birth outcomes, uptake of services and patient and physician perspectives on fertility preservation. Few articles sought to examine the positive and negative side effects of fertility preservation in oncology, social challenges of oncofertility and access to services worldwide.

CONCLUSION

Oncofertility is an emerging discipline which seeks to provide safe, efficient and effective fertility preservation options for young adults and adolescents diagnosed with cancer. A multi-disciplinary approach with collaborative communication with oncologists is key to providing this service within Australia.

How can we improve oncofertility care for patients? A systematic scoping review of current international practice and models of care

BACKGROUND

Fertility preservation (FP) is an important quality of life issue for cancer survivors of reproductive age. Despite the existence of broad international guidelines, the delivery of oncofertility care, particularly amongst paediatric, adolescent and young adult patients, remains a challenge for healthcare professionals (HCPs). The quality of oncofertility care is variable and the uptake and utilization of FP remains low. Available guidelines fall short in providing adequate detail on how oncofertility models of care (MOC) allow for the real-world application of guidelines by HCPs.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the components of oncofertility care as defined by patient and clinician representatives, and identify the barriers, facilitators and challenges, so as to improve the implementation of oncofertility services.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic scoping review was conducted on oncofertility MOC literature published in English between 2007 and 2016, relating to 10 domains of care identified through consumer research: communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, training, supportive care during treatment, reproductive care after cancer treatment, psychosocial support and ethical practice of oncofertility care. A wide range of electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, AEIPT, Education Research Complete, ProQuest and VOCED) were searched in order to synthesize the evidence around delivery of oncofertility care. Related citations and reference lists were searched. The review was undertaken following registration (International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42017055837) and guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

OUTCOMES

A total of 846 potentially relevant studies were identified after the removal of duplicates. All titles and abstracts were screened by a single reviewer and the final 147 papers were screened by two reviewers. Ten papers on established MOC were identified amongst the included papers. Data were extracted from each paper and quality scores were then summarized in the oncofertility MOC summary matrix. The results identified a number of themes for improving MOC in each domain, which included: the importance of patients receiving communication that is of a higher quality and in different formats on their fertility risk and FP options; improving provision of oncofertility care in a timely manner; improving access to age-appropriate care; defining the role and scope of practice of all HCPs; and improving communication between different HCPs. Different forms of decision aids were found useful for assisting patients to understand FP options and weigh up choices.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This analysis identifies core components for delivery of oncofertility MOC. The provision of oncofertility services requires planning to ensure services have safe and reliable referral pathways and that they are age-appropriate and include medical and psychological oncofertility care into the survivorship period. In order for this to happen, collaboration needs to occur between clinicians, allied HCPs and executives within paediatric and adult hospitals, as well as fertility clinics across both public and private services. Training of both cancer and non-cancer HCPs is needed to improve the knowledge of HCPs, the quality of care provided and the confidence of HCPs with these consultations.

Fertility Preservation for Child and Adolescent Cancer Patients in Asian Countries

Background: At present, fertility is one of the main concerns of young cancer patients. Following this trend, "fertility preservation (FP)" has been established and has become a new field of reproductive medicine. However, FP for child and adolescent (C-A) cancer patients is still developing, even in advanced countries. The aim of the present study was to assess the barriers to FP for C-A patients by investigating the current status of FP for C-A patients in Asian countries, which just have started FP activities. Method: A questionnaire survey of founding members of the Asian Society for Fertility Preservation (ASFP) was conducted in November 2018. Main findings: Of the 14 countries, 11 country representatives replied to this survey. FP for C-A patients is still developing in Asian countries, even in Australia, Japan, and Korea, which have organizations or academic societies specialized for FP. In all countries that replied to the present survey, the patients can receive embryo cryopreservation (EC), oocyte cryopreservation (OC), and sperm cryopreservation (SC) as FP. Compared with ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC), testicular tissue cryopreservation (TTC) is an uncommon FP treatment because of its still extremely experimental status (7 of 11 countries provide it). Most Asian countries can provide FP for C-A patients in terms of medical technology, but most have factors inhibiting to promote FP for C-A patients, due to lack of sufficient experience and an established system promoting FP for C-A patients. "Don't know how to provide FP treatment for C-A" is a major barrier. Also, low recognition in society and among medical staff is still a particularly major issue. There is also a problem with cooperative frameworks with pediatric departments. To achieve high-quality FP for C-A patients, a multidisciplinary approach is vital, but, according to the present study, few paramedical staff can participate in FP for C-A patients in Asia. Only Australia and Korea provide FP information by video and specific resources. Conclusion: The present study demonstrated the developing status of FP for C-A patients in Asian countries. More intensive consideration and discussion are needed to provide FP in Asian societies based on the local cultural and religious needs of patients.

Reproductive Outcomes After a Childhood and Adolescent Young Adult Cancer Diagnosis in Female Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Improvements in cancer therapy for childhood and adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors have increased in excess of 80% among pediatric patients and in excess of 85% among AYA cancer patients. Our research group explored the late effects consequences of cancer treatment on pregnancy and birth outcomes subsequent to a childhood (0-14 years) or AYA (15-25 years) diagnosis of cancer in female cancer survivors. Embase and Medline databases were searched. There were 17 review (n = 10 matched and n = 7 unmatched) studies that met the inclusion criteria. Subanalyses were conducted on 10 matched studies. The median age for all studies for patients at diagnosis and birth was 11 and 27 years, respectively. In matched cohort studies, female childhood and AYA cancer patients, who received chemotherapy alone, had a pooled estimated rate of 18% of experiencing a live birth compared with 10% of females who received radiotherapy alone and subsequently had a live birth. Females who received surgery alone reported higher pooled estimated rates of 44% for a live birth. For matched retrospective review studies, 79% (n = 973) of women experienced a live birth, of which 22% of these babies were born preterm. This meta-analysis found lower birth rates for survivors. Access to fertility-related information and discussions around fertility preservation options and oncofertility psychosocial support should be offered to all cancer patients and their families before starting cancer treatment.

Fertility and pregnancy in cancer survivors

Cancer survivors are increasing as improvements in cancer diagnosis and treatment translate to improved outcomes. As cancer survivors in their reproductive years contemplate pregnancy, it is important to understand the impact of cancer and its treatment on fertility and pregnancy outcomes. Cancer treatments such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy can affect patients' fertility, and strategies are available to help preserve the future fertility of survivors. The potential impact of previous cancer diagnoses and treatments on pregnancy and maternal and fetal outcomes needs to be assessed and discussed with survivors, with support from materno-fetal medicine specialists and high-risk antenatal services as needed.

Improvements in Clinical Trials Information Will Improve the Reproductive Health and Fertility of Cancer Patients

There are a number of barriers that result in cancer patients not being referred for oncofertility care, which include knowledge about reproductive risks of antineoplastic agents. Without this information, clinicians do not always make recommendations for oncofertility care. The objective of this study was to describe the level of reproductive information and recommendations that clinicians have available in clinical trial protocols regarding oncofertility management and follow-up, and the information that patients may receive in clinical trials patient information sheets or consent forms. A literature review of the 71 antineoplastic drugs included in the 68 clinical trial protocols showed that 68% of the antineoplastic drugs had gonadotoxic animal data, 32% had gonadotoxic human data, 83% had teratogenic animal data, and 32% had teratogenic human data. When the clinical trial protocols were reviewed, only 22% of the protocols reported the teratogenic risks and 32% of the protocols reported the gonadotoxic risk. Only 56% of phase 3 protocols had gonadotoxic information and 13% of phase 3 protocols had teratogenic information. Nine percent of the protocols provided fertility preservation recommendations and 4% provided reproductive information in the follow-up and survivorship period. Twenty-six percent had a section in the clinical trials protocol, which identified oncofertility information easily. When gonadotoxic and teratogenic effects of treatment were known, they were not consistently included in the clinical trial protocols and the lack of data for new drugs was not reported. Very few protocols gave recommendations for oncofertility management and follow-up following the completion of cancer treatment. The research team proposes a number of recommendations that should be required for clinicians and pharmaceutical companies developing new trials.

Oncofertility in Japan: advances in research and the roles of oncofertility consortia

In Japan, an important issue is to be able to provide young cancer patients with timely and accurate information about the indications and options for fertility preservation when it is applicable. Therefore, it is necessary to create an environment that assists young cancer patients to make a decision about whether or not to choose fertility preservation. The Japan Society for Fertility Preservation was established in 2012, as Japan's first oncofertility association. Its purpose is to create an environment in which cancer patients can receive evidence-based oncofertility care. Accordingly, the mantra of the Japan Society for Fertility Preservation is: 'While anticancer treatment should be prioritized, fertility preservation may also be chosen to allow the patient to fight cancer without losing hope of a normal future'.