Referral for fertility preservation counselling in female cancer patients

Window of Opportunity: Rate of Referral to Infertility Providers among Reproductive-Age Women with Newly Diagnosed Gynecologic Cancers

Background/Objective: Fertility preservation is an important part of oncologic care for newly diagnosed gynecologic cancers for reproductive-age women, as many treatment options negatively impact fertility. The goal of this study is to examine factors that influence access to fertility specialists for women with newly diagnosed gynecologic cancer. Methods: This institutional review board approved a retrospective cohort study investigating the impacting factors on the referral rate from gynecologic oncologists (GO) to reproductive endocrinologists and infertility (REI) specialists at a single academic institution between 2010-2022 for patients age 18-41 at diagnosis. Electronic medical records were used to identify demographics and referral patterns. Mixed logistic models were utilized to control cluster effects of the physicians. Results: Of 816 patients reviewed, 410 met the criteria for inclusion. The referral rate for newly diagnosed gynecologic malignancies was 14.6%. Younger patients were more likely to have an REI referral (p < 0.001). The median time from first GO visit to treatment was 18.5 days, and there was no significant difference in those who had REI referrals (p = 0.44). Only 45.6% of patients had fertility desire documented. A total of 42.7% had fertility-sparing treatment offered by a GO. REI referral did not significantly change the time to treatment (p = 0.44). An REI referral was more likely to be placed if that patient had no living children, no past medical history, or if the referring GO was female (OR = 11.46, 6.69, and 3.8, respectively). Conclusions: Fertility preservation counseling is a critical part of comprehensive cancer care; yet, the referral to fertility services remains underutilized in patients with newly diagnosed gynecologic cancer. By demonstrating these biases in REI referral patterns, we can optimize provider education to enhance fertility care coordination.

Current status of fertility preservation in a Spanish tertiary public hospital: multidisciplinary approach and experience in over 1500 patients

PURPOSE

Currently, 15% of gynaecological and 9% of haematological malignancies are diagnosed before the age of 40. The increased survival rates of cancer patients who are candidates for gonadotoxic treatments, the delay in childbearing to older ages, and the optimization of in vitro fertilisation techniques have all contributed to an increased interest in fertility preservation (FP) treatments. This study reviews the experience of the Fertility Preservation Programme (FPP) of a tertiary public hospital with a multidisciplinary approach.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all the available (FP) treatments, performed in patients of childbearing age between 2006 and 2022.

RESULTS

1556 patients were referred to the FPP: 332 oocyte vitrification cycles, 115 ovarian cortex cryopreservation with 11 orthotopic autotransplantations, 175 gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist treatments, 109 fertility-sparing treatments for gynaecological cancer, and 576 sperm cryopreservation were performed. Malignancy was the main indication for FP (the main indications being breast cancer in women and haematological malignancies in men), although non-oncological pathologies, such as endometriosis and autoimmune diseases, have increased in recent years. Currently, the most widely used FP technique is oocyte vitrification, the increase of which has been associated with a decrease in the use of cortex CP and GnRH agonists.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in FP treatment reflects the implementation of reproductive counselling in oncology programmes. A multidisciplinary approach in a tertiary public hospital allows individualised FP treatment for each patient. In recent years, there has been a change in trend with the introduction of new indications for FP and a change in techniques due to their optimisation.

Fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Brazil: perceptions and attitudes of infertility specialists

Objective

Fertility preservation is a priority in oncology for female cancer patients. However, there is a lack of communication between infertility specialists and oncologists. This study aimed to evaluate infertility specialists' perceptions and experiences regarding fertility preservation.

Methods

Conduct an online survey to profile infertility specialists. Participants were infertility affiliated with the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations (FEBRASGO). The specialists received an online survey, which response rate were 30.9%, most of whom were in southern and southeastern. The survey consisted on 14 questions about the infertility specialists' location, techniques in clinical practice, treatment successful rate, patients idea, etc.

Results

The average experience in human reproduction were 15.5 ± 10.2 years (mean ± standard deviation, range 1-40). Among reproductive-aged female cancer patients recommended for fertility preservation, 60.3 ± 28.8% (range 10-100%) underwent preservation procedures. Main barriers were cost (41%), oncologists' knowledge or acceptance (35%) and accessibility (9%). Most infertility specialists (58%) considered 40 years the limit for fertility preservation. Leukemia, lymphoma, breast and ovarian cancers were prioritized for fertility preservation, while lung, thyroid, gastric, and brain cancers were less relevant.

Conclusion

This is the first Brazilian study about infertility specialists' perceptions on oncology patients access to fertility preservation. These patients primarily receive treatment in the public health system, while infertility specialists mainly work in the private healthcare. This healthcare mode is currently fragmented, but integrating these experts is enhancing patient access to fertility preservation. Studies on this topic are still warranted.

A Successful Pregnancy Following Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in a Breast Cancer Survivor: A Case Report

This report documents the case of a 36-year-old female diagnosed with stage I invasive ductal carcinoma of the left breast who, alongside her 39-year-old husband, sought fertility assistance at our center due to primary infertility. Having survived cancer twice in the span of their seven-year marriage, the couple faced the challenge of overcoming both the repercussions of cancer treatment and difficulties in conceiving. Initial attempts through three intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles proved unsuccessful, leading the couple to opt for in vitro fertilization (IVF). The fertility assessment of the husband revealed the presence of several pus cells and a high sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI). To address this, a medication regimen was administered to improve sperm quality. Concurrently, the female underwent controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with the anti-estrogen agent letrozole to mitigate the risk of estrogen surges that could compromise her health. Subsequently, oocytes were retrieved from the female, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was used to facilitate fertilization with her husband's sperm. Following successful embryo development, the patient underwent embryo transfer (ET), resulting in a positive beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-hCG) result, signifying a successful conception. This case report highlights the intricate challenges faced by individuals with a history of breast cancer, emphasizing the delicate balance required in managing infertility in such circumstances. The described approach, involving personalized treatments and meticulous care, underscores the possibility of achieving successful conception for females struggling with fertility issues post-cancer survival. The documented journey serves as a testament to the resilience of individuals facing the dual challenges of cancer survival and infertility, offering insights into the complexities of their reproductive healthcare.

Factors Associated With Adolescent and Young Adult Females Attending a Fertility Consultation Within 30 Days of a Cancer Diagnosis in Ontario, Canada

Purpose: To examine the factors associated with females attending a fertility consultation within 30 days of cancer diagnosis. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study, including females, 15 to 39 years of age, diagnosed with cancer in Ontario, Canada. Administrative data were used from the Institute of Clinical and Evaluative Sciences for the period 2006 to 2019. A backward selection multivariate logistic regression was performed, with a primary outcome of fertility consultation within 30 days of diagnosis. Results: A total of 20,556 females were included in the study, with 7% having attended a fertility visit within 30 days of diagnosis. Factors associated with being more likely to attend included: not currently having children (odds ratio [OR] = 4.3; confidence interval [95% CI 3.6-5.1]), later years of diagnosis (OR = 3.2; 95% CI [2.8-3.8]), having undergone chemotherapy (OR = 3.6; 95% CI [3.0-4.3]) or radiation therapy (OR = 1.9; 95% CI [1.6-2.2]), and less marginalization within dependency quintiles (OR 1.4; 95% CI [1.1-1.7]). Having a cancer with lower risk to fertility (OR = 0.3; 95% CI [0.2-0.3]), death within a year of diagnosis (OR = 0.4; 95% CI [0.3-0.6]), and residing in a northern region of Ontario (OR = 0.3; 95% CI [0.2-0.4]) were associated with being less likely to attend. For sociodemographic factors, lower levels of income (OR = 0.5; 95% CI [0.4-0.6]) and marginalization with residential instability (OR = 0.6; 95% CI [0.5-0.8]) were associated with being less likely to attend a fertility consultation. Conclusions: Rates for attendance of female fertility consultations after a cancer diagnosis remain low, with disparities by both clinical and demographic factors.

Efficient pathway for men fertility preservation in testicular cancer or lymphoma: a cross-sectional study of national 2018 data

BACKGROUND

In 15-49 years-old men, the main cancers are testicular cancer (TC) and lymphomas (L): freezing of ejaculated sperm is primarily used for male fertility preservation (FP) before cancer treatment. Our objective was to analyze the French FP rate in 15-49 years-old men diagnosed with TC or L in 2018. We designed a national descriptive cross-sectional study of sperm banking rate in men with a diagnosis of TC, Hodgkin L (HL) or non-Hodgkin L (NHL). From the French National Cancer Institute (INCa) 2018 data, we extracted the estimated incidence of TC and L in metropolitan France. From the 2018 activity report of CECOS network (Centers for Study and Banking of Eggs and Sperm), we extracted the number of men with TC or L who banked ejaculated sperm. We estimated the proportion of 15-49 years-old men diagnosed with TC or L who banked sperm.

RESULTS

Among 15-49 years-old men, INCa estimated 38,048 new cancer diagnoses in metropolitan France in 2018: 2,630 TC and 3,913 L (943 HL and 2,970 NHL). The CECOS network provided data from 26/27 metropolitan centers (96% response rate): 1,079 sperm banking for men with TC, 375 for HL and 211 for NHL. We estimated that the 2018 sperm banking rate in France was 41% for TC, 40% for HL, and 7% for NHL.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, our paper is the first cross-sectional study with multicenter and national data analyzing FP rate in cancer men: it suggests an efficient pathway for men to FP before cancer treatment, compared to previously published studies. Although sperm banking rate in 15-49 years-old men could definitely be improved, further studies should evaluate the information given to patients before gonadotoxic treatments, the factors associated with the absence of sperm banking and whether this lack of referral induces a loss of chance for these men.

Polish Female Cancer Survivors' Experiences Related to Fertility Preservation Procedures

Purpose: The aim of the study was to assess the experience of Polish female cancer patients related to fertility preservation (FP) after gonadotoxic treatment. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among young women, who were diagnosed with a neoplasm. The questionnaire was distributed via the Internet. Results: The study group consisted of 299 women. Most of them had breast cancer (34%) or Hodgkin lymphoma (20%). The most popular treatment regimen was a combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation (30%). Almost 78% of study participants underwent potentially gonadotoxic treatment. Fifty-seven percent of study participants admitted that oncologist had not informed them about FP methods, while only 19% were encouraged to visit fertility specialists. Seventeen percent of women decided to preserve fertility before malignancy treatment, 11.8% of women cryopreserved oocytes, 16% cryopreserved embryos, 16% cryopreserved ovarian tissue and 55% had ovarian suppression. Conclusion: The access to fertility counseling in Poland is limited. Emphasis should be placed on the coordination between cancer treatment centers and reproductive specialists.

Fertility restoration in mice with chemotherapy induced ovarian failure using differentiated iPSCs

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) are limited to hormone replacement and donor oocytes. A novel induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) transplant paradigm in a mouse model has potential translational applications for management of POI.

METHODS

Mouse ovarian granulosa cell derived-iPSCS were labelled with green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter and differentiated in vitro into oocytes. Differentiated cells were assayed for estradiol and progesterone secretion by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. After Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting (FACS) for the cell surface marker anti-Mullerian hormone receptor (AMHR2), enriched populations of differentiated cells were surgically transplanted into ovaries of mice that had POI secondary to gonadotoxic pre-treatment with alkylating agents. A total of 100 mice were used in these studies in five separate experiments with 56 animals receiving orthotopic ovarian injections of either FACS sorted or unsorted differentiated iPSCSs and the remaining animals receiving sham injections of PBS diluent. Following transplantation surgery, mice were stimulated with gonadotropins inducing oocyte development and underwent oocyte retrieval. Nine transplanted mice were cross bred with wild-type mice to assess fertility. Lineage tracing of resultant oocytes, F1 (30 pups), and F2 (42 pups) litters was interrogated by GFP expression and validation by short tandem repeat (STR) lineage tracing.

FINDINGS

[1] iPSCs differentiate into functional oocytes and steroidogenic ovarian cells which [2] express an ovarian (GJA1) and germ cell (ZP1) markers. [3] Endocrine function and fertility were restored in mice pretreated with gonadotoxic alkylating agents via orthotopic transplantation of differentiated iPSCS, thus generating viable, fertile mouse pups.

INTERPRETATION

iPSC-derived ovarian tissue can reverse endocrine and reproductive sequelae of POI.

FUNDING

Center for Infertility and Reproductive Surgery Research Award, Siezen Foundation award (RMA). Reproductive Scientist Development Program, Marriott Foundation, Saltonstall Foundation, Brigham Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (K.E).

Reproductive Results in Cancer Survivors after Fertility Sparing Management: The Need for the Standardization of Definitions

In fertility-sparing management (FSM), two different issues can be distinguished: the risk of recurrence/death and the chance of childbearing. Survival is the principal outcome in oncology, and definitions of overall survival and progression-free survival are therefore well defined and widely accepted. The introduction of FSM to clinical practice was determined by the desire of young cancer patients to still have children. Initially, in small groups of patients, any pregnancy and/or childbirth were considered successes. Nowadays, FSM occupies an important place in cancer treatment, with thousands of young women treated successfully. However, in contrast to survival, no definition has been established for evaluating the reproductive outcomes of FSM. This review article evaluates the current pregnancy and birth rates of cancer patients. Differences between fertility-sparing and conservative treatment are analyzed, and improper and confusing interchangeable applications of these terms are pointed out. Additionally, various reasons for choosing FSM as a treatment method-which are not directly related to fertility preservation (treatment mismatch)-are presented. Uniform definitions of reproduction after FSM should be established to enable the comparison of results and facilitate the counseling of patients regarding the chances of reproduction.

Fertility discussions and concerns in childhood cancer survivors, a systematic review for updated practice

PURPOSE

To provide ways to improve the clinical practice of fertility preservation (FP) for children, adolescents, and young adults (AYA) with cancer.

DESIGN

A systematic research of online databases was undertaken in March 2020 following the PRISMA criteria, including Medline and Web of Science.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine articles were included. Surveys, interviews, and focus groups were used to collect data from patients, parents, and health care providers (HCPs). Four themes worth exploring emerged: (a) what do patients and professionals think of and know about FP? (b) what makes the fertility discussion happen or not? (c) what, retrospectively, led to FP being pursued or not? and (d) how do patients and HCPs feel about fertility issues?

CONCLUSION

A minority of AYAs preserve their fertility (banking assay for 45% of boys and 23% of girls). Yet fertility concerns have a significant impact on the quality of life of young cancer survivors. Although recommendations and guidelines regarding FP are available internationally, there are no specific guidelines as to how to conduct fertility counseling for children and adolescents. Some barriers are not removable, such as a poor prognosis of an obvious severe disease, time constraints for starting treatment, and cultural and religious beliefs. In response to aspects hindering patients and families to be receptive to any discussion at the time of diagnosis, psychological support could reduce the level of emotional distress and help restore a degree of open-mindedness to open a window for discussion. Moreover, as the lack of knowledge of professionals about fertility is frequently pointed out as a limiting factor for fertility discussion, reinforcing professional training regarding FP could be proposed to promote fertility discussion and eventually referral for FP.

Access to information and oncofertility consultation for young women with breast cancer: a population-based study

Non-menopausal women with breast cancer treated with chemotherapy are at intermediate risk of post-treatment amenorrhea and decreased fertility. Although they should receive appropriate information, studies until now show that this is inadequate. We investigated the proportion of women who received information about this risk during the pre-treatment consultation, and those who received an oncofertility consultation to preserve their gametes. We also analysed the medical and non-medical factors influencing the transmission of information to patients and their uptake of oncofertility consultations. We included women aged 18-40 years treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer between 2012 and 2017 in the Midi-Pyrénées region (ca. 3 million inhabitants), France. Studied variables were included in a multilevel model. Among the 575 women, 41% of the women received information and 28% received an oncofertility consultation. These two steps on the care pathway were significantly influenced by the type of care structure, the woman's age, her parity at the time of diagnosis, and the metastatic status of the cancer. Female oncologist gender was significantly associated with higher transmission rate. We found no association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy status, level of deprivation (EDI), triple-negative status, marital status, and first-degree family history of cancer and information transmission or uptake of oncofertility consultation. Our study shows that not enough women are informed and have recourse to an oncofertility consultation. Despite a legal obligation, the health care system does not offer the necessary conditions for access to oncofertility care.

An Educational Need Regarding Treatment-Related Infertility and Fertility Preservation: a National Survey Among Members of the Dutch Society for Medical Oncologists

Cancer diagnosis and treatment may influence reproductive planning and impact fertility in patients of reproductive age. Although guidelines have been established in the past decade, education, practice, and attitudes of medical oncologists regarding fertility preservation remain undecided. A nationwide survey was performed among members of the Dutch Society for Medical Oncology. Demographics, practice, knowledge, and barriers were measured regarding information provision of fertility preservation towards cancer patients of childbearing age. From 392 members, 120 oncologists completed the questionnaire (30.6%). Majority of oncologists was convinced it is their responsibility to discuss impact of cancer treatment to fertility (93.2%), yet 68.3% discussed the subject often or always (n = 82). Oncologists employed in district general hospitals were less likely to discuss fertility (p = 0.033). On average, 44.6% of reproductive men and 28.9% of reproductive women is referred to fertility specialists. Half of the respondents declared to possess sufficient knowledge regarding fertility preservation (n = 57, 47.5%). Poor prognosis (53%), unlikely survival (43.1%), and high chances on fertility recovery (28.7%) were identified as barriers to discussing fertility preservation. Among oncologists, impact of cancer treatment on fertility is a well-accepted responsibility to counsel. Despite, self-reported knowledge regarding fertility preservation is strongly varying. In practice, fertility is discussed to some extent, influenced by several barriers and depending on prognosis and type of hospital. Patients benefit from knowledge improvement among oncology care providers concerning fertility effects of cancer treatment. Education during medical school, residency, and among practicing oncologists may raise awareness, together with enhancement of referral possibilities.

Perspectives and Knowledge about Fertility Preservation Strategies among Female Cancer Patients in Turkey

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the knowledge level and perspectives of female cancer patients regarding fertility preservation techniques before gonadotoxic treatment. Material and Methods. This was a prospective observational survey-based study conducted between 2016 and 2020 in Izmir Economy University Medical Park Hospital. A total of 150 female cancer patients aged 18-42 years were included. The participants completed a 17-item questionnaire, developed by the research team to evaluate their knowledge and perspectives on fertility preservation techniques.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 39.5 ± 4.9 years. Only 64.7% of the patients were referred to fertility counseling by a gynecologist, while 72.6% of the patients knew of the risk of infertility after cancer treatment. There was a significant correlation between the health status and cancer stage of the patient (p=0.003). The estimated future chance of becoming pregnant spontaneously or through fertility preservation techniques was significantly higher in patients with a higher education level (p=0.041 or 0.008, respectively). Satisfaction with the counseling process was reported as high or low by 66.7% or 20% of the patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of referral of reproductive-age cancer patients to fertility preservation counseling is still not satisfactory. Education level was the only variable significantly associated with a motivation to become pregnant after cancer treatment, either spontaneously or through fertility preservation techniques.

Non-physician's challenges in sexual and reproductive health care provision for women of reproductive age with cancer: a scoping review of barriers and facilitators

PURPOSE

The American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice guidelines recommend that non-physicians such as nurses, social workers, and psychologists should be prepared to discuss fertility and sexual concerns with patients. However, literature showed that the utilization rate of sexual and reproductive care for women with cancer remained low. We conducted a scoping review to describe non-physicians' roles, barriers, and facilitators providing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care to women of reproductive age with cancer.

METHODS

We searched six databases for articles that met the following criteria: (1) English language; (2) original research; (3) non-physician providers; (4) women with cancer under age 50. We categorized barriers and facilitators at the system-, individual-, and clinical encounter-levels from providers' and patients' perspectives.

RESULTS

We included 27 studies from 3451 retrieved articles. The majority of studies have a focus on fertility preservation or sexuality (n = 25). At the system level, the main barriers for non-physicians were lack of SRH care guidelines and collaborating experts. Concerns for patients included socioeconomic and geographic constraints in obtaining care. At the encounter level, providers and patients lacked experience discussing SRH. At the individual level, providers' lack of knowledge in SRH treatment options and interprofessional collaboration and patients' lack of awareness about treatment effects hindered SRH discussions. Facilitators include the availability of SRH programs and specialists, and rapport between providers and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Supporting non-physicians to provide SRH services to women with cancer requires investment in clinical guidelines, interprofessional collaboration, and training in patient communication.

Quality of integrated female oncofertility care is suboptimal: A patient-reported measurement

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines recommend to inform female cancer patients about their infertility risks due to cancer treatment. Unfortunately, it seems that guideline adherence is suboptimal. In order to improve quality of integrated female oncofertility care, a systematic assessment of current practice is necessary.

METHODS

A multicenter cross-sectional survey study in which a set of systematically developed quality indicators was processed, was conducted among female cancer patients (diagnosed in 2016/2017). These indicators represented all domains in oncofertility care; risk communication, referral, counseling, and decision-making. Indicator scores were calculated, and determinants were assessed by multilevel multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-one out of 344 female cancer patients participated. Eight out of 11 indicators scored below 90% adherence. Of all patients, 72.7% was informed about their infertility, 51.2% was offered a referral, with 18.8% all aspects were discussed in counseling, and 35.5% received written and/or digital information. Patient's age, strength of wish to conceive, time before cancer treatment, and type of healthcare provider significantly influenced the scores of three indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Current quality of female oncofertility care is far from optimal. Therefore, improvement is needed. To achieve this, improvement strategies that are tailored to the identified determinants and to guideline-specific barriers should be developed.

Oncofertility Knowledge Among Internal Medicine Residents in an Academic Center in Mexico

Guidelines recommend discussing fertility preservation with patients with cancer. In Mexico, internists frequently are the primary care provider (PCP) for adults in reproductive age. The knowledge of oncofertility among PCPs in low and middle income countries is poorly known. Internal medicine residents in a tertiary care hospital in Mexico City participated in a survey regarding fertility concepts in cancer patients. Sixty-three residents participated; their median age was 27. Thirty percent reported 0% self-perceived confidence for providing counseling about fertility issues, and 26% reported more than 50% self-perceived confidence. Twenty-eight percent reported not asking patients in reproductive age about satisfied parity/paternity. Eighty-one percent correctly identified patients that should receive fertility counseling, and 68% identified alkylating chemotherapy as having the highest risk of infertility. Fifty-four percent were able to name at least one fertility preservation (FP) strategy for males, whereas 49% were able to name at least one strategy in females. Residents who reported at least 50% self-perceived confidence for providing fertility counseling were more likely to name at least one FP strategy for men (64.7%) versus those who reported less than 50% self-perceived confidence (52.1%), but this result was not statistically significant (p = 0.378). This was similar for FP strategies in women, with 64.7% of more confident residents naming at least one, compared with 43.4% of less confident residents (p = 0.134). Knowledge of FP in patients with cancer is insufficient among internal medicine residents in our institution. Inclusion of oncofertility concepts in the internal medicine program is needed.

Factors Associated With a High Motivation to Undergo Fertility Preservation in Female Cancer Patients

Objective: Fertility loss due to cancer treatment can be a devastating experience for women and the couple. Undergoing fertility preservation can be a complex decision from both a medical and emotional point of view. The aim of the present study was to evaluate which socio-demographic and psychological factors predict a high motivation to undergo fertility preservation.

Methods: Fifty-eight female cancer patients who accessed an Oncofertility Unit completed: a questionnaire to collect socio-demographic characteristics and the level of motivation, the Beck-Depression Inventory-II, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Y, and the Fertility Problem Inventory.

Results: Almost half of the sample (44.8%) declared a high motivation. At multiple logistic regression analysis only the “Need for parenthood” subscale of the FPI predicted a high motivation. We alternatively evaluated as possible predictor the construct “Representations about the importance of parenthood” (i.e., the sum of the “Need for Parenthood” and “Rejection of childfree lifestyle” subscales) in place of the two separate subscales. At multiple logistic regression analysis, only this variable predicted a high motivation to undergo fertility preservation.

Conclusion: The most important predictor of a high motivation to undergo fertility preservation is the individual desire for parenthood. This implies that, regardless of socio-demographic characteristics, any woman of childbearing age should receive an appropriate counseling about fertility preservation.

Evaluation of Fertility Preservation Counseling and Treatments for Female Oncology Patients in an Urban Pediatric Canadian Center

Purpose: Several international organizations and guidelines have recommended implementation of structured fertility preservation (FP) discussions with patients and their families before initiation of chemotherapy and radiation treatments in children. This study aimed to identify current trends and rates in FP counseling and treatments at a Canadian pediatric tertiary care center. Objectives were to measure guideline adherence for FP counseling at our institution by determining (1) the frequency of FP counseling in pediatric female oncological patients at our institution, (2) the frequency of FP treatment in this study population, and (3) the factors associated with FP pre-treatment counseling. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed, including all pediatric and adolescent female patients (age <18) seen in consultation by the oncology team. Demographic data, as well as documentation of FP counseling and referral to a reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) specialist and subsequent FP treatment were collected. Results: A total of 89 female pediatric patients were included in our study. Forty-two patients received fertility counseling (47.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 37.2-57.5). Only 29/42 (69.0%; 95% CI: 54-80.9) received counseling before onset of treatment. A 12/42 (41.4%; 95% CI: 25-59.3) of the patients who received FP counseling were referred to an REI specialist and 11/12 proceeded with FP treatment (37.9%, 95% CI: 22.7-56). Conclusion: This study presents contemporary data on the rates of FP counseling in Canadian pediatric female oncological patients and demonstrates low rates of FP counseling in our patient population.

Disparities in Female Pediatric, Adolescent and Young Adult Oncofertility: A Needs Assessment

Advancements in cancer screening and implementation of targeted treatments have significantly improved survival rates to 85% for pediatric and AYA survivors. Greater than 75% of survivors will live to experience the long-term adverse outcomes of cancer therapies, termed late effects (LE), that disrupt quality of life (QoL). Infertility and poor reproductive outcomes are significant disruptors of QoL in survivorship, affecting 12-88% of survivors who receive at-risk therapies. To mitigate risk, fertility preservation (FP) counseling is recommended as standard of care prior to gonadotoxic therapy. However, disparities in FP counseling, implementation of FP interventions, and screening for gynecologic late effects in survivorship persist. Barriers to care include a lack of provider and patient knowledge of the safety and breadth of current FP options, misconceptions about the duration of time required to implement FP therapies, cost, and health care team bias. Developing strategies to address barriers and implement established guidelines are necessary to ensure equity and improve quality of care across populations.

Oncofertility Knowledge and Communication: Comparison Between Medical and Surgical Oncologists and Breast Cancer Patients in Academic Chinese Centers

Background: As cancer has become a major public health issue in China, fertility preservation remains limited despite the wide application of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) throughout the country.

Objective: This study aimed to identify gaps in knowledge and communication as well as referrals in the previous year regarding oncofertility among medical and surgical oncologists and breast cancer patients (BCPs) in Chinese academic settings to target areas of needed improvement.

Materials and Methods: A WeChat online questionnaire was designed, distributed, and compared between medical and surgical oncology specialists and reproductive age BCPs in academic teaching settings in Shanghai.

Results: Sixty-one medical and surgical oncologists and 125 BCPs responded to the survey. 63.3% of oncologists were familiar with the term “oncofertility” compared to 25.6% of BCPs (p < 0.001). Oncologists were more likely to correctly know the costs associated with treatment (59.0 vs. 32.0%, p < 0.001); patient did not have to be married to undergo oncofertility treatment (50.8 vs. 24.8%, p < 0.001). Both oncologists and BCPs were similarly unlikely to know when patients could utilize cryopreserved tissue in the future (37.7 vs. 22.2%, p = 0.056). While oncologists reported they discussed all oncofertility options (41.0%) and offered psychological counseling (98.4%), significantly fewer BCPs reported receiving information on all options and offered counseling (3.2%, p < 0.001 and 85.6%, p < 0.01). Knowledge of oncofertility was the most important predictor for providing and receiving counseling from oncologists [OR = 6.44 (95% CI = 1.59–26.1, p = 0.009] and BCPs (OR = 3.73 95% CI: = 1.36–10.2, p = 0.011). Overall, 57.4% of oncologists referred <10 patients and none referred more than 25 patients in the past year.

Conclusion: Data suggests a significant knowledge gap and ineffective communication/comprehension exists between academic Chinese oncologists and BCPs. Continued education and raised awareness are needed to optimize utilization of oncofertility services in China.

Patients' and Providers' Needs and Preferences When Considering Fertility Preservation Before Cancer Treatment: Decision-Making Needs Assessment

BACKGROUND

As cancer treatments continue to improve, it is increasingly important that women of reproductive age have an opportunity to decide whether they want to undergo fertility preservation treatments to try to protect their ability to have a child after cancer. Clinical practice guidelines recommend that providers offer fertility counseling to all young women with cancer; however, as few as 12% of women recall discussing fertility preservation. The long-term goal of this program is to develop an interactive web-based patient decision aid to improve awareness, access, knowledge, and decision making for all young women with cancer. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards collaboration recommends a formal decision-making needs assessment to inform and guide the design of understandable, meaningful, and usable patient decision aid interventions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess providers' and survivors' fertility preservation decision-making experiences, unmet needs, and initial design preferences to inform the development of a web-based patient decision aid.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews and an ad hoc focus group assessed current decision-making experiences, unmet needs, and recommendations for a patient decision aid. Two researchers coded and analyzed the transcripts using NVivo (QSR International). A stakeholder advisory panel guided the study and interpretation of results.

RESULTS

A total of 51 participants participated in 46 interviews (18 providers and 28 survivors) and 1 ad hoc focus group (7 survivors). The primary themes included the importance of fertility decisions for survivorship, the existence of significant but potentially modifiable barriers to optimal decision making, and a strong support for developing a carefully designed patient decision aid website. Providers reported needing an intervention that could quickly raise awareness and facilitate timely referrals. Survivors reported needing understandable information and help with managing uncertainty, costs, and pressures. Design recommendations included providing tailored information (eg, by age and cancer type), optional interactive features, and multimedia delivery at multiple time points, preferably outside the consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision making about fertility preservation is an important step in providing high-quality comprehensive cancer care and a priority for many survivors' optimal quality of life. Decision support interventions are needed to address gaps in care and help women quickly navigate toward an informed, values-congruent decision. Survivors and providers support developing a patient decision aid website to make information directly available to women outside of the consultation and to provide self-tailored content according to women's clinical characteristics and their information-seeking and deliberative styles.

Development and testing of a tailored online fertility preservation decision aid for female cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Decision making regarding future fertility can be very difficult for female cancer patients. To support patients in decision making, fertility preservation decision aids (DAs) are being developed. However, to make a well-informed decision, patients need personalized information tailored to their cancer type and treatment. Tailored cancer-specific DAs are not available yet.

METHODS

Our DA was systematically developed by a multidisciplinary steering group (n = 21) in an iterative process of draft development, three rounds of alpha testing, and revisions. The drafts were based on current guidelines, literature, and patients' and professionals' needs.

RESULTS

In total, 24 cancer-specific DAs were developed. In alpha testing, cancer survivors and professionals considered the DA very helpful in decision making, and scored an 8.5 (scale 1-10). In particular, the cancer-specific information and the tool for recognizing personal values were of great value. Revisions were made to increase readability, personalization, usability, and be more careful in giving any false hope.

CONCLUSIONS

A fertility preservation DA containing cancer-specific information is important in the daily care of female cancer patients and should be broadly available. Our final Dutch version is highly appraised, valid, and usable in decision making. After evaluating its effectiveness with newly diagnosed patients, the DA can be translated and adjusted according to (inter)national guidelines.

Fertility preservation in Hong Kong Chinese society: awareness, knowledge and acceptance

Background

Fertility preservation for both medical and non-medical reasons are gaining increasing attention world-wide. This study aimed to evaluate the awareness, knowledge and acceptance on fertility preservation in Hong Kong Chinese.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study carried out between June 2016 to March 2017. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed by convenience sampling.

Results

Forty two percent of subjects returned the questionnaire (n = 296/697). Among them, only 54.3% were aware of any means of fertility preservation. Tertiary educated individuals are more aware than less educated individuals (73.6% versus 46.6%, p < 0.001). The most commonly known method is oocyte cryopreservation (94.3%). Most of the respondents (80%) were interested to know about fertility preservation, 84.1% considered fertility preservation counselling necessary and 83.3% would consider undergoing fertility preservation if a treatment has a high chance of causing infertility despite the possibility of delay in cancer treatment. Up to 93.9% agreed to set up a dedicated referral centre with government funding and 73.4% agreed that fertility preservation for medical indication should be provided as a government funded service. In terms of fertility preservation for non-medical reason, 65.5 and 70.4% agreed that fertility preservation should be offered to single men and women without partner respectively, while only 53.3 and 50% agreed that fertility preservation is acceptable for delay in childbearing for career development in female and male respectively.

Conclusion

There was a low awareness but positive attitude towards fertility preservation among Hong Kong Chinese. Acceptance towards medically indicated fertility preservation is high while a considerable number also accepts it for non-medical reasons. Educational campaigns are required to arouse awareness of fertility preservation to prevent individuals being deprived of the option due to lack of knowledge. Dedicated referral centre with established efficient patient referral pathways and financial support should be provided to improve the provision and uptake of fertility preservation service to enhance the reproductive potential and life options of women.

Key recommendations for high-quality female oncofertility care based on international clinical practice guidelines

RESEARCH QUESTION

Which guideline-based key recommendations can be selected for high-quality female oncofertility care?

DESIGN

The Delphi method was used to select a set of key recommendations for female oncofertility care. First, recommendations from (inter)national clinical practice guidelines were selected in four domains: risk communication, referral, counselling and decision-making. Thereafter, they were scored, per domain, on their importance for high-quality oncofertility care by a multidisciplinary, oncofertility expert panel, consisting of patients, referrers and counsellors, in two Delphi rounds. Finally, the selected key recommendations were presented for approval in a third round. Differences in perspectives between subgroups of the expert panel were analysed.

RESULTS

A panel of 86 experts was asked to select key recommendations for high-quality oncofertility care. Eleven key recommendations were selected. Key recommendations in the domains risk communication and referral focused on information provision and offering referral to a reproductive specialist to female cancer patients. With the counselling domain, key recommendations focused on all aspects of counselling, including different methods, safety, pros and cons. In the decision-making domain, key recommendations focused on shared decision-making and supporting the decision with written information. The final set of key recommendations was approved by 91% of the experts. Differences in perspectives were found between subgroups. Patients found recommendations on decision-making and information provision more important.

CONCLUSION

A set of 11 key recommendations for high-quality female oncofertility care was selected by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The involvement of the perspectives of patients, referrers and counsellors led to this valid, acceptable and credible set of key recommendations.

Outcomes of delivering a fertility preservation service for women with cancer over a 12-year period at a UK assisted conception unit

This service evaluation aimed to appraise the delivery of a fertility preservation service for women with cancer which was established in 2005 as part of an Assisted Conception Unit. First, the ACU-database was interrogated between 08/2005 and 01/2017; revealing 174 women received referrals over the 12-year period with a steady referral increase each year. Demographic analyses revealed factors, such as being partnered, to be strong indicators of whether women would seek FP or not. To improve service provision, women who had consented to be contacted for audit, administrative and research purposes, received questionnaires to ascertain their perspectives on the FP decision-making process, their outcomes and ACU after-care. The majority perceived their experience as excellent due to the care they received from ACU staff, speed and efficiency in service delivery. The increasing number of referrals since 2005 is reassuring. However, this audit also highlighted shortcomings of the service, such as limited awareness of the fertility counselling service and lack of after-care.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? There has been an increase in women diagnosed with cancer undergoing fertility preservation (FP) before starting potential gonadotoxic treatment. Offering FP to these women is essential as the ability to have future children is often perceived as equally as important as survivorship, and a source of hope for the future.What do the results of this study add? This study presents a service evaluation, across a 12-year period, of delivering FP services to women with cancer in one UK Assisted Conception Unit (ACU). Women's experiences of the service were evaluated to enhance service delivery and make recommendations for clinical practice.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or future research? The current service evaluation demonstrated increased rates of FP referral over a 12-year period for women with cancer. While this increasing number is reassuring and reflecting increased awareness among professionals and patients; shortcomings in the care pathway were also found: women reported limited opportunity to see fertility counsellors and desired better after care. This information may also be of benefit to other ACUs seeking to enhance and improve service provision in the care of women with cancer, contemplating fertility preservation.

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.

The time is now: An exploratory study regarding the predictors of female cancer patients' decision to undergo fertility preservation

INTRODUCTION

This cross-sectional exploratory study aimed to examine the female cancer patients' personal and health care-related variables mostly associated with their decision whether to preserve or not their fertility, in order to know more about the influence of attitudinal and health care-related variables on this decision where fertility preservation (FP) is fully covered by the National Health System.

METHODS

Childbearing attitudes, health care-related information, FP motivations and childbearing motivations were assessed, in a clinical setting, to female cancer patients in childbearing age, who were undergoing the FP decision-making process.

RESULTS

This study included 89 participants (82% response rate). Those who decided to undergo FP attributed more value to the reasons for FP and less value to the reasons against FP than those who decided not to undergo FP. Not having children, strongly valuing pregnancy after cancer and attributing low value to the implications of the postponement of cancer treatments were significant and independently associated with deciding to preserve fertility.

CONCLUSION

The decision to pursue FP is mainly influenced by three factors: the absence of children, attributing high value to trying to ensure future pregnancy and attributing low value to the possible postponement of cancer therapy in order to have time to preserve fertility.

Patterns of Referral for Fertility Preservation Among Female Adolescents and Young Adults with Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study

Purpose: To assess the fertility preservation (FP) referral rates and patterns of newly diagnosed breast cancer in female adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients.

Methods: Women aged 15–39 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer in Ontario from 2000 to 2017 were identified using the Ontario Cancer Registry. Exclusion criteria included prior sterilizing procedure, health insurance ineligibility, and prior infertility or cancer diagnosis. Women with a gynecology consult between cancer diagnosis and chemotherapy commencement with the billed infertility diagnostic code (ICD-9 628) were used as a surrogate for FP referral. The effect of age, parity, year of cancer diagnosis, staging, income, region, neighborhood marginalization, and rurality on referral status was investigated.

Results: A total of 4452 patients aged 15–39 with newly diagnosed breast cancer met the inclusion criteria. Of these women, 178 (4.0%) were referred to a gynecologist with a billing code of infertility between cancer diagnosis and initiation of chemotherapy. Older patients, prior parity, and advanced disease were inversely correlated with referrals. Referral rates also varied regionally: patients treated in the south-east and south-west Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs) had the highest probability of referral, and patients covered by north LHINs had the lowest (central LHIN as reference). General surgeons accounted for 36.5% of all referrals, the highest percentage of all specialists. Referral rates significantly increased over time from 0.4% in 2000 to 10.7% in 2016.

Conclusion: FP referral rates remain low and continue to be influenced by patient demographics and prognosis. These findings highlight the need for further interdisciplinary coordination in addressing the fertility concerns of AYA with newly diagnosed breast cancers.

Awareness of Female Cancer Patients About the Risk of Impaired Fertility

Purpose: To evaluate awareness of female cancer patients about fertility impairment following cancer treatment. Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Imam Hossein Hospital between March 2014 and July 2015. Women of childbearing age with cancer who were treated in an oncology clinic and referred for follow-up were asked to fill out the questionnaire designed for this purpose. The process of filling out the questionnaire was managed by a resident of clinical oncology during patient interviews. Results: Two hundred forty-seven patients with mean age of 35.5 years were included. The most common cancers were breast cancer (61.9%) and gynecologic cancer (10.9%). Among all patients, 22.7% had received information about infertility risk. The likelihood that women would have received information about fertility varied by cancer type. Among women with gynecologic cancers, only 59.3% had received information about the effects of treatment on fertility despite having cancers of the reproductive system. Moreover, 19.6% of women with breast cancer and 18.5% of those with other cancers had received fertility information (p < 0.001). Significance of Results: Knowledge and awareness of female cancer patients of childbearing age about the impact of cancer treatment on fertility and fertility preservation are limited. A structured program is required to provide complete information regarding the risk of fertility impairment following cancer treatment and increase the knowledge of these patients to enable them to make a proper decision about fertility preservation.

Surrogacy and ethics in women with cancer

Women diagnosed with gynaecological cancer may face unwanted loss of fertility as well as all the other life-changing issues with which cancer and its treatments are associated. The decision to harvest and store gametes has to be made before commencement of treatment, and advances in these techniques have made this successful. Fertility sparing therefore must be discussed and offered at an early stage post diagnosis. Surrogacy is currently an evidence-based method of assisted reproduction, with mainly desirable outcomes for the commissioning mother, surrogate and child, without impacting on the cancer treatment and long-term survival. Surrogacy is therefore ethical as long as the autonomous rights of both the commissioning mother and gestational carrier are equally observed, they both have equal legal protection and due attention is paid to the short- and long-term welfare of any resulting offspring.

Motherhood after breast cancer: can we balance fertility preservation and cancer treatment? A narrative review of the literature

Breast cancer may affect young women who have not yet completed childbearing. Assisted reproductive technology (ART) provides alternatives for fertility preservation such as oocyte, embryo or ovarian tissue cryopreservation. We reviewed the published literature on fertility-preserving management in breast cancer, aiming at finding evidence to answer the following questions: (1) What are the fertility sparing options available?; (2) How do these women respond to IVF? and (3) Can pregnancy influence breast cancer recurrence? There is a paucity of publications describing clinical experience and outcome data which limits accessibility to fertility preservation in this setting. Presently, oocyte or embryo cryopreservation are the main options for fertility preservation. IVF success rates are comparable to the ones of non-oncological populations according to the woman's age but current published studies lack data on definitive success rates following embryo banking for cancer patients. The perception that IVF and pregnancy may worsen cancer prognosis remains, despite the lack of scientific evidence to support this notion. Published studies show reassuring results for pregnancies occurring >2 years after breast cancer diagnosis. The best published evidence suggests pregnancy after breast cancer does not increase the risk of disease recurrence, thus pregnancy should not be forbidden once treatment is completed. Decision making for women diagnosed with cancer requires up-to-date knowledge of the efficacy and safety of available options. Providing consultation with a reproductive specialist and appropriate information on fertility preservation for these women should be an essential aspect of their supportive care.

Contemporarily Treated Patients With Hodgkin Lymphoma Have Childbearing Potential in Line With Matched Comparators

Purpose With excellent cure rates for young patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), there is an increasing number of female survivors of HL interested in becoming pregnant. Here, we report childbearing among contemporarily treated HL survivors in comparison with the general population. Material and Methods Using Swedish registers, 449 women (ages 18 to 40 years) diagnosed with HL between 1992 and 2009 and in remission 9 months after diagnosis were identified. Patients were age- and calendar-year-matched to 2,210 population comparators. Rates of first postdiagnosis childbirth were calculated. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were estimated for different follow-up periods using Cox regression. Cumulative probabilities of first childbirth were calculated in the presence of the competing risk of death or relapse. Results Twenty-two percent of relapse-free patients with HL had a child during follow-up, and first childbirth rates increased over time, from 40.2 per 1,000 person-years (1992 to 1997) to 69.7 per 1,000 person-years (2004 to 2009). For comparators, childbirth rates remained stable (70.1 per 1,000 person-years). Patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 had a cumulative probability of childbirth similar to comparators. Three years or more after diagnosis, no differences in childbirth rates were observed between patients and comparators, regardless of stage or treatment. Patients who received six to eight courses of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone had a lower childbirth rate than comparators during the first 3 years (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.94), as did patients who received six to eight courses of chemotherapy and radiotherapy (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.65). Conclusion Childbearing potential among female survivors of HL has improved over time, and childbirth rates 3 years after diagnosis in contemporarily treated patients are, in the absence of relapse, similar to those in the general population, regardless of stage and treatment.

Psychosocial benefits of fertility preservation for young cancer patients

PURPOSE

The risk of ovarian failure after radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy is a concern among oncologic women. There is no doubt regarding the psycho-emotional benefits of fertility preservation (FP) after a cancer diagnosis because concerns about biological conception are a source of anxiety and can even affect the patient's cancer recovery. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncology patients' feelings, concerns, and life quality impacts related to FP.

METHODS

This qualitative cross-sectional study was based on a questionnaire administered to a selected group of women diagnosed with cancer who underwent FP. Thirty-four eligible women (23-39 years old) completed this questionnaire.

RESULTS

Two of the participants already had a child, and most of them (61.8%) stated a desire to have children at the time of FP. Their feelings primarily involved safety (44.1%) and hope (23.5%). Time and/or financial issues (82.4%) were the main challenge for FP. All of the women noted the importance of FP, with many stating that it is warranted to allow the possibility of a biological pregnancy due to the risk of infertility. Finally, questions about the impact on their lives if they had not undergone FP indicated emotional impairment, low quality of life, relationship problems, and uncertainty about maternity.

CONCLUSIONS

FP for oncology patients is a positive strategy. The women in this study felt that FP was a worthwhile process and that the security of having undergone FP brought them peace during oncological treatment and contributed to their quality of life.

Oncologists and hematologists' perceptions of fertility-related communication - a nationwide survey

BACKGROUND

Despite the negative impacts of several cancer treatments on fertility, many patients do not recall having fertility-related discussions with their physicians. This study was conducted to identify those factors related to physicians' discussing the treatment impacts on fertility with cancer patients of reproductive age.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this nationwide survey of cancer care physicians (n = 329, response rate 55%), oncologists and hematologists (mainly) completed a questionnaire on practice behavior, barriers, attitudes and confidence in knowledge regarding treatment-related fertility risks. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with not routinely discussing fertility issues with patients.

RESULTS

Most of the physicians agreed that they were responsible for discussing fertility issues with patients of reproductive age (91%), but approximately 30% did not do so regularly. Those factors decreasing the likelihood of discussion were: patient already had children (female/male OR 3.0/6.9), high workload (OR 3.3/4.8), seeing <5 female/male patients of reproductive age weekly (OR 3.2/3.4) and access to a reproduction clinic (OR 5.2/4.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Most Swedish oncologists and hematologists regularly discuss impact of treatment on fertility with their patients. Those factors having a negative impact on fertility discussions may guide targeted organizational and educational efforts to further improve fertility-related communication in cancer care.

Nurse Perspectives on Referrals for Oncology Patients to Reproductive Endocrinologists: Results of a Learning Activity

BACKGROUND

Although concern about future fertility for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer is high, referrals to reproductive endocrinologists (REI) are low. Oncology nurses are well positioned to facilitate these referrals but may lack the knowledge and training. This report describes a learning activity in the Educating Nurses about Reproductive Issues in Cancer Healthcare (ENRICH) program whereby oncology nurses interviewed REIs.

METHOD

Participants were instructed to conduct an interview with an REI using a semistructured guide and provided a written report of the discussion. We examined responses to each question using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven participants across 15 states provided a summary. Learner summaries highlighted four themes related to FP, including Cost, Time, Lack of Information or Referrals, and Learning About Available Options.

CONCLUSION

Oncology nurses have an opportunity for a partnership to ensure that concerns about fertility among AYA patients are addressed. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2016;47(8):376-384.

Knowledge regarding fertility preservation in cancer patients: a population-based survey among Brazilian people during the Pink October awareness event

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge about the risk of infertility in cancer patients after treatment, and the options for fertility preservation based on a survey carried out during the 2013 Pink October campaign.

Methods

This survey was carried out during the 2013 Pink October event in the most important public park of São Paulo, Brazil. Approximately 900 people expressed interest in learning about breast cancer prevention and fertility preservation by participating in workshops, and 242 people filled out a questionnaire.

Results

Most of the respondents (78.5%) were women, and one-fourth (25%) had at least one relative with gynecological cancer. Among women over 40 years of age, 86.3% had been screened for breast cancer at some point. However, few participants (34.0%) were aware that cancer treatment can lead to infertility or had heard about fertility preservation options (22.0%). Having a relative with cancer did not influence their knowledge about fertility preservation (22.4% versus 21.3%; p=0.864). However, a higher educational level was significantly associated with more knowledge about the effects of cancer on fertility and options for fertility preservation.

Conclusions

The majority of participants did not have knowledge about the impact of oncologic treatment on fertility and did not know that there are options to preserve fertility in cancer patients. Awareness of infertility risk factors is an essential first step to safeguard future fertility, and therefore, more educational initiatives are needed to spread knowledge about oncofertility.

Disparities in Counseling Female Cancer Patients for Fertility Preservation

BACKGROUND

Female cancer patients who are exposed to gonadotoxic chemotherapy are at risk of future infertility. Research suggests that disparities in fertility preservation counseling (FPC) may exist. Previous research is limited by recall bias; therefore, this study examined objective electronic medical chart data regarding FPC at an academic medical center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included reproductive-aged women (18-45 years old) with a diagnosis of breast, gynecological, or hematological cancer and who were exposed to a gonadotoxic chemotherapeutic agent from 2009 to 2013. Chi-square and logistic regression analyses were utilized to analyze disparities in FPC.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-nine women met the study criteria. One hundred eighty-one women were diagnosed with breast cancer, 52 with hematological cancer, and 26 with gynecological cancer. 160/259 (62%) women had documented counseling for fertility preservation (FP), 60 (23%) women were not counseled as counseling was determined to be "not applicable," 16 (6%) women were not counseled and no explanation was given for the lack of counseling, and counseling was not documented in 23 (9%) charts. Age, marital status, and racial/ethnic background were related to counseling status. Patients with gynecological or hematological cancer were more likely to be counseled than other patients. Logistic regression results demonstrated that FPC was largely driven by cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although cancer diagnosis was the greatest predictor of FPC, disparities were evident in the counseling of female cancer patients for FP treatment. Equality in counseling female patients for FP treatment is imperative to reduce the risk of emotional harm and future infertility.

Cryopreservation of reproductive material before cancer treatment: a qualitative study of health care professionals' views about ways to enhance clinical care

BACKGROUND

Cancer treatment can diminish fertility in women and men. The need for fertility preservation is growing as increasing numbers of people survive cancer. Cryostorage of reproductive material to preserve potential for conception for cancer survivors has moved from being experimental to being a part of clinical management of women and men who are diagnosed with cancer in their reproductive years. There is little existing evidence about how fertility preservation services can be enhanced to meet the complex needs of patients who are diagnosed with cancer in their reproductive years. The aim of this research was to inform clinical practice development by drawing on the collective experience and knowledge of staff at well-established clinics that offer fertility preservation before cancer treatment.

METHODS

A qualitative research model was adopted using semi-structured interviews with professionals involved in the care of people who freeze reproductive material before cancer treatment. In the state of Victoria, Australia, two large assisted reproductive technology (ART) centres have been providing fertility preservation services for more than two decades. An invitation to participate in a semi-structured interview about clinical care in the context of fertility preservation was emailed to past and current staff members. To capture diverse perspectives, informants were sought from all relevant professions: fertility specialists, andrologists, nurses, embryologists/scientists, counsellors, and administrative staff. Transcripts were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Thirteen key informants were interviewed from August 2013 to February 2014. The identified themes relating to enhancing clinical care in a fertility preservation service were communication between oncology and ART specialists; managing urgency; managing patients' expectations; establishing and implementing protocols, systems, and data bases; and maintaining contact with patients.

CONCLUSION

The collective knowledge of this study's informants, who represent multidisciplinary teams with more than two decades' experience in fertility preservation, yields important insights into strategies that fertility preservation services can employ to promote the integration of oncology and fertility care, the psychosocial care of patients, data recording and monitoring, and reporting of outcomes.

Fertility Preservation Care for Children and Adolescents with Cancer: An Inquiry to Quantify Professionals' Barriers

PURPOSE

There is a growing interest in fertility preservation as emerging research is highlighting the prevalence of infertility among young cancer survivors and its negative impact on quality of life. Previous qualitative research has identified barriers of fertility preservation care among professionals. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of these barriers among pediatric and adolescent oncology healthcare professionals and evaluate factors that influence them.

METHODS

Based on previously identified barriers and experts' input, a questionnaire was developed and sent to 88 professionals drawn from the multidisciplinary pediatric and adolescent oncology team of a large Principal Treatment Centre. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate which factors influence professional adherence to fertility preservation care.

RESULTS

In total, 48 (55%) professionals responded and were included in the analysis. All pediatric and adolescent oncology healthcare professionals reported at least one barrier to fertility preservation care. Even though some interdisciplinary differences were observed, the most frequently endorsed barriers were focusing on patients' characteristics (age, health status, urgency of cancer treatment, and lack of interest in fertility issues). The least frequently endorsed barriers were related to organizational aspects (availability of fertility specialists, time constrains, and ability to raise fertility issues). Nurses and allied healthcare professionals endorsed knowledge or policy gaps as barriers to a greater degree than medical doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that educational support provision, especially for nurses and allied healthcare professionals, and strengthening interdisciplinary collaborations could help overcome observed barriers and facilitate fertility discussions with pediatric and young cancer patients.

Fertility preservation counselling in Dutch Oncology Practice: Are nurses ready to assist physicians?

Cancer and its treatments may result in impaired fertility, which could cause long-term distress to cancer survivors. For eligible patients, fertility preservation (FP) is available to secure future reproductive potential. Many physicians, however, feel inhibited about discussing FP. Oncology nurses may serve as an initiator for discussing the subject and provide additional support. Our aim was to investigate their knowledge about FP, the way they apply this, and possible barriers to discussing FP with patients of reproductive age. A questionnaire was administered via mail, Internet and the Dutch Oncology Nursing Congress. Four hundred and twenty-one oncology nurses participated, a third of whom (31.1%) had "sufficient" knowledge of FP. Twenty-eight per cent of participants reported that they "never/hardly ever" discussed FP; 32.2% "almost always/always." FP discussions were more frequently performed by graduate nurses, academic nurses, experienced nurses and nurses with sufficient knowledge. Reasons for not discussing FP were a "lack of knowledge" (25.2%), "poor prognosis" (16.4%) and "lack of time" (10.5%). In conclusion, several obstacles may result in FP not being routinely discussed, specifically a lack of knowledge. Yet nurses feel responsible for addressing the issue, indicating that assistance with FP discussions should be encouraged. Educational training about FP is recommended.

The Role of Oncofertility Clinics in Facilitating Access to Reproductive Specialists

PURPOSE

To determine the impact of the establishment of a dedicated oncofertility clinic on the frequency of patient referrals for fertility preservation (FP) consultation and the time from patient referral to consultation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all women aged 21 to 44 years with an active cancer diagnosis who were referred for FP consultation from 2011 to 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 6895 female patients eligible for FP were seen at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Cancer Center. Of those eligible, a total of 209 patients were referred for FP consultation with 150 included in the final analysis. Since the establishment of the oncofertility clinic, the mean time to nonemergent consultation with a reproductive endocrinologist decreased by 27%, from 10.4 to 7.6 days (P = .03). Furthermore, the proportion of reproductive-aged females seen at the MGH Cancer Center referred for FP consultation increased from 1.7% to 3.0% (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

A dedicated oncofertility clinic increases physician referrals for FP and decreases the mean time to consultation, improving access to FP consultation for reproductive-aged women with cancer.

Which female cancer patients fail to receive fertility counseling before treatment in the state of Georgia?

OBJECTIVE

To assess which characteristics are associated with failure to receive fertility counseling among a cohort of young women diagnosed with cancer.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,282 cancer survivors, of whom 1,116 met the inclusion criteria for the analysis.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The main outcome in this study was whether or not women reported receiving any information at the time of their cancer diagnosis on how cancer treatment might affect their ability to become pregnant.

RESULT(S)

Forty percent of cancer survivors reported that they did not receive fertility counseling at the time of cancer diagnosis. Women were more likely to fail to receive counseling if they had only a high school education or less or if they had given birth. Cancer-related variables that were associated with a lack of counseling included not receiving chemotherapy as part of treatment and diagnosis with certain cancer types.

CONCLUSION(S)

Counseling about the risk of infertility and available fertility preservation options is important to cancer patients. Additionally, counseling can make women aware of other adverse reproductive outcomes, such as early menopause and its associated symptoms. Less-educated women and parous women are at particular risk of not getting fertility-related information. Programs that focus on training not just the oncologist, but also other health care providers involved with cancer care, to provide fertility counseling may help to expand access.

A Review of the Oncology Patient's Challenges for Utilizing Fertility Preservation Services

PURPOSE

The American Society of Clinical Oncology issued practice guidelines in 2006 to provide critical information about fertility impact to adolescents and young adults (AYA) at the time of cancer diagnosis. Survivors continue to express concerns about their long-term reproductive health after cancer therapy even as treatment options for fertility preservation evolve. An underutilization of fertility preservation methods by cancer patients continues to persist. A review of the literature cites barriers and challenges that limit fertility information and preservation options for AYA cancer patients.

METHODS

A review of medical literature was conducted to examine current practice for patients receiving fertility information and the barriers to patients receiving fertility preservation services.

RESULTS

A total of 69 publications were included in this review. The review summarizes (1) patient experiences with receiving fertility information and (2) patient desires, barriers, and challenges to utilizing fertility preservation services.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite advances in fertility preservation, there are challenges for patients to utilizing fertility preservation services. Barriers include the following: urgency to initiate treatment, inadequate information, clinic time constraints, and perceptions around patients' gender, age, cost, parity, race, relationship, and sociodemographic status influence whether patients receive fertility preservation consultation. Patients report a lack of adequate information to make informed fertility decisions.

A survey on fertility management in young women of reproductive age treated with chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Treatment-related infertility is an important issue for cancer survivors of reproductive age. We aimed to determine the understanding and management of fertility issues in cancer survivors by health care providers.

METHODS

We studied 112 patients aged 15-40 years who underwent chemotherapy in Tokushima University Hospital. The gynecologists and oncologists who treated these patients were surveyed regarding their concerns about infertility issues in young cancer survivors.

RESULTS

Of the 112 women studied, 57 had iatrogenic amenorrhea. Five were referred to reproductive specialists before or during treatment. Three patients with breast cancer were referred after treatment; they could not undergo fertility treatment due to ovarian failure after chemotherapy. Forty-five medical doctors answered the survey: 21 gynecologists (including 9 fertility specialists), 13 oncologists, and 11 surgeons. Of the oncologists and surgeons, 37.5 % (9/24) referred their patients to fertility experts. They listed certain issues regarding the patients: (1) anxiety that the intervention will alter the prognosis by delaying cancer treatment, and (2) a lack of communication between the oncologist and the fertility specialist. Almost all physicians agreed that fertility counseling was needed before chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

This report showed the importance of oncofertility counseling and cooperation between oncologists and fertility specialists. Fertility in cancer survivors depends on type of cancer treatment applied, chemotherapy regimen, and age at treatment. Our institute is now equipped for oncofertility counseling and refers patients for fertility preservation prior to cancer treatment.