Search

Background: Many women diagnosed with cancer as adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years) want biological children after cancer but lack information on the potential impact of their cancer history on future reproductive outcomes. We investigated the risk of adverse birth outcomes among AYA cancer survivors., Methods: We identified insured women diagnosed with AYA breast cancer, thyroid cancer, gynecologic cancers, lymphoma, or melanoma from 2003 to 2016 in the state of North Carolina or the Kaiser Permanente health care systems in northern and southern California. Post-diagnosis births to cancer survivors were each matched with up to 5 births to women without cancer. Risk ratios for preterm birth (<37 completed weeks), very preterm birth (<34 completed weeks), low birth weight (<2500 g), and small for gestational age (SGA, <10th percentile of weight for gestational age) were estimated using modified Poisson regression., Results: Analyses included 1648 births to 1268 AYA cancer survivors and 7879 births to 6066 women without cancer. Overall, risk of preterm birth, very preterm birth, low birth weight, and SGA did not significantly differ between births to women with and without cancer. However, births to women with gynecologic cancers had a significantly increased risk of low birth weight (risk ratio = 1.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 3.21) and suggested increased risk of preterm birth (risk ratio = 1.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.99 to 2.54). Chemotherapy exposure was not associated with increased risk of adverse birth outcomes., Conclusions: Women with gynecologic cancers, but not other cancers, had an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes compared to women without cancer., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Purpose: Women face multiple barriers to fertility preservation after cancer diagnosis, but few studies have examined disparities in use of these services., Methods: Women aged 15-39 years diagnosed with cancer during 2004-2015 were identified from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System. Women who cryopreserved oocytes or embryos for fertility preservation (n = 96) were compared to women who received gonadotoxic treatment but did not use fertility preservation (n = 7964). Conditional logistic and log-binomial regression were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) or prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Few adolescent and young adult women with cancer in our study (1.2%) used fertility preservation. In multivariable regression, women less likely to use fertility preservation were older at diagnosis (ages 25-29 vs. 35-39: OR = 6.27, 95% CI: 3.35, 11.73); non-Hispanic Black (vs. non-Hispanic White: PR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.79); and parous at diagnosis (vs. nulliparous: PR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45); or lived in census tracts that were non-urban (vs. urban: PR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.37) or of lower socioeconomic status (quintiles 1-3 vs. quintiles 4 and 5: PR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.61)., Conclusions: Women with cancer who were older, non-Hispanic Black, parous, or living in areas that were non-urban or of lower socioeconomic position were less likely to use fertility preservation., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Clinical and policy interventions are needed to ensure equitable access to fertility services among women facing cancer treatment-related infertility., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: No population-based studies have examined chronic opioid use among cancer survivors who are diverse with respect to diagnosis, age group, and insurance status., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using North Carolina cancer registry data linked with claims from public and private insurance (2006-2016). We included adults with nonmetastatic cancer who had no prior chronic opioid use (n = 38 366). We used modified Poisson regression to assess the adjusted relative risk of chronic opioid use in survivorship (>90-day continuous supply of opioids in the 13-24 months following diagnosis) associated with patient characteristics., Results: Only 3.0% of cancer survivors in our cohort used opioids chronically in survivorship. Predictors included younger age (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 50-59 vs 60-69 = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.43), baseline depression (aRR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.41) or substance use (aRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.78) and Medicaid (aRR vs private = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.56 to 2.40). Survivors who used opioids intermittently (vs not at all) before diagnosis were twice as likely to use opioids chronically in survivorship (aRR = 2.62, 95% CI = 2.28 to 3.02). Those who used opioids chronically (vs intermittently or not at all) during active treatment had a nearly 17-fold increased likelihood of chronic use in survivorship (aRR = 16.65, 95% CI = 14.30 to 19.40)., Conclusions: Younger and low-income survivors, those with baseline depression or substance use, and those who require chronic opioid therapy during treatment are at increased risk for chronic opioid use in survivorship. Our findings point to opportunities to improve assessment of psychosocial histories and to engage patients in shared decision-making around long-term pain management, when chronic opioid therapy is required during treatment., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Fertility preservation (FP) may be underused after cancer diagnosis because of uncertainty around delays to cancer treatment and subsequent reproductive success. Methods: Women aged 15 to 39 years diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2015 were identified from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry. Use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) after cancer diagnosis between 2004 and 2018 (including FP) was assessed through linkage to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Linear regression was used to examine time to cancer treatment among women who did (n = 95) or did not (n = 469) use FP. Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for pregnancy and birth based on timing of ART initiation relative to cancer treatment (n = 18 initiated before treatment for FP vs n = 26 initiated after treatment without FP). Results: The median time to cancer treatment was 9 to 33 days longer among women who used FP compared with women who did not, matched on clinical factors. Women who initiated ART before cancer treatment may be more likely to have a live birth given pregnancy compared with women who initiated ART after cancer treatment (age‐adjusted RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.98‐2.23), though this may be affected by the more frequent use of gestational carriers in the former group (47% vs 20% of transfer cycles, respectively). Conclusions: FP delayed gonadotoxic cancer treatment by up to 4.5 weeks, a delay that would not be expected to alter prognosis for many women. Further study of the use of gestational carriers in cancer populations is warranted to better understand its effect on reproductive outcomes. In this statewide retrospective cohort, adolescent and young adult women with cancer who used fertility preservation experienced up to a 4.5‐week delay in receipt of first gonadotoxic cancer treatment, but may have an increased likelihood of live birth after achieving pregnancy compared to women with cancer who used assisted reproduction without prior fertility preservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: No population-based studies have examined chronic opioid use among cancer survivors who are diverse with respect to diagnosis, age group, and insurance status.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using North Carolina cancer registry data linked with claims from public and private insurance (2006-2016). We included adults with nonmetastatic cancer who had no prior chronic opioid use (n = 38 366). We used modified Poisson regression to assess the adjusted relative risk of chronic opioid use in survivorship (>90-day continuous supply of opioids in the 13-24 months following diagnosis) associated with patient characteristics.Results: Only 3.0% of cancer survivors in our cohort used opioids chronically in survivorship. Predictors included younger age (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 50-59 vs 60-69 = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.43), baseline depression (aRR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.41) or substance use (aRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.78) and Medicaid (aRR vs private = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.56 to 2.40). Survivors who used opioids intermittently (vs not at all) before diagnosis were twice as likely to use opioids chronically in survivorship (aRR = 2.62, 95% CI = 2.28 to 3.02). Those who used opioids chronically (vs intermittently or not at all) during active treatment had a nearly 17-fold increased likelihood of chronic use in survivorship (aRR = 16.65, 95% CI = 14.30 to 19.40).Conclusions: Younger and low-income survivors, those with baseline depression or substance use, and those who require chronic opioid therapy during treatment are at increased risk for chronic opioid use in survivorship. Our findings point to opportunities to improve assessment of psychosocial histories and to engage patients in shared decision-making around long-term pain management, when chronic opioid therapy is required during treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of addressing adverse financial effects of cancer among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) is paramount as survival improves. In the current study, the authors examined whether cancer‐related employment disruption was associated with financial hardship among female AYA cancer survivors in North Carolina and California. Methods: AYA cancer survivors identified through the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and the Kaiser Permanente Northern/Southern California tumor registries responded to an online survey. Disrupted employment was defined as reducing hours, taking temporary leave, or stopping work completely because of cancer. Financial hardship was defined as material conditions or psychological distress related to cancer. Descriptive statistics and chi‐square tests were used to characterize the invited sample and survey respondents. Marginal structural binomial regression models were used to estimate prevalence differences (PDs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Results: Among 1328 women employed at the time of their diagnosis, women were a median age of 34 years at the time of diagnosis and 7 years from diagnosis at the time of the survey and approximately 32% experienced employment disruption. A substantial percentage reported financial hardship related to material conditions (27%) or psychological distress (50%). In adjusted analyses, women with disrupted employment had a 17% higher burden of material conditions (95% CI, 10%‐23%) and an 8% higher burden of psychological distress (95% CI, 1%‐16%) compared with those without disruption. Conclusions: Financial hardship related to employment disruption among female AYA cancer survivors can be substantial. Interventions to promote job maintenance and transition back to the workforce after treatment, as well as improved workplace accommodations and benefits, present an opportunity to improve cancer survivorship. Female adolescent and young adult cancer survivors can be particularly vulnerable to adverse employment and financial outcomes. Those with cancer‐related employment disruption report increased financial hardship related to material conditions and psychological distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]