Search

The incidence of haematological malignancies is increasing in women of childbearing age. Survival rates accompany this increase, making it essential to assess the impact of treatments on their future quality of life, evaluate the impact of each treatment on ovarian reserve and define the fertility preservation techniques used by women with haematologic malignancies. A retrospective study was conducted after data collection from 61 women diagnosed with haematological malignancies and followed-up in a fertility preservation centre between January 2008 and June 2019. Cancer treatments caused a decrease in ovarian reserve, demonstrated by an increase in FSH levels and a decrease in AMH levels. When assessing which treatments have the greatest impact on AMH levels, we found that the BEACOPP regimen, and the agents vincristine, etoposide, procarbazine, prednisone and the haematopoietic stem cell transplantation were mainly responsible. Regarding pregnancy after oncological treatments, of the eleven women who became pregnant, ten did so spontaneously. This study reinforces the importance of referring patients to a fertility preservation consultation before starting oncological treatment, as most of them opt to preserve fertility. This work also helps to clarify the impact of each chemotherapeutic agent on the ovarian reserve.

Background: Cryopreservation of ovarian tissue is a powerful technique for preserving female fertility, as it can restore fertility and endocrine function. To increase the longevity of the transplant and decrease the risk of reimplantation of neoplastic cells, several studies have been carried out with culture of ovarian tissue. The aim of this study was to compare a conventional (2D) culture with an alginate matrix three-dimensional (3D) model for ovarian tissue culture., Results: The ovarian tissue culture within the alginate matrix (3D) was similar to 2D culture, regarding follicular density and cell apoptosis in follicles and stroma. The proliferation rate remained stable in both models for follicles, but for stromal cell proliferation it decreased only in 3D culture (p = 0.001). At 24 h of culture, cytotoxicity was lower in the 3D model (p = 0.006). As culture time increased, cytotoxicity seemed similar. Degradation of the tissue was suggested by the histological score analysis of tissue morphology after 72 h of culture. Tissue injury was greater (p = 0.01) in 3D culture due to higher interstitial oedema (p = 0.017) and tissue necrosis (p = 0.035)., Conclusion: According to our results, 3D culture of ovarian tissue has no advantage over 2Dculture; it is more time consuming and difficult to perform and has worse reproducibility., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Ovarian cancer is more frequent in post-menopausal women, however it can also occur in young premenopausal women. After diagnosis and cancer staging, health care providers should address the possibility of infertility and might offer fertility preservation options. Chemotherapy, frequently used when treating ovarian cancer, has proven to cause extensive ovarian damage. Standard surgery may be aggressive and the recurrence risk may not be relevant enough to opt for these approaches. Fertility sparing surgery has been progressively accepted and many alternative surgical approaches have proven to be successful in both cancer treatment, fertility preservation and low recurrence rates. Though there are several techniques available for fertility preservation in cancer patients, when dealing with ovarian cancer patients, oocyte and embryo cryopreservation are the only suitable. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation has been largely studied, but no data on ovarian cancer patients exist, due to the risk of reimplanting cancer cells.

Purpose: Today, male and female adult and pediatric cancer patients, individuals transitioning between gender identities, and other individuals facing health extending but fertility limiting treatments can look forward to a fertile future. This is, in part, due to the work of members associated with the Oncofertility Consortium., Methods: The Oncofertility Consortium is an international, interdisciplinary initiative originally designed to explore the urgent unmet need associated with the reproductive future of cancer survivors. As the strategies for fertility management were invented, developed or applied, the individuals for who the program offered hope, similarly expanded. As a community of practice, Consortium participants share information in an open and rapid manner to addresses the complex health care and quality-of-life issues of cancer, transgender and other patients. To ensure that the organization remains contemporary to the needs of the community, the field designed a fully inclusive mechanism for strategic planning and here present the findings of this process., Results: This interprofessional network of medical specialists, scientists, and scholars in the law, medical ethics, religious studies and other disciplines associated with human interventions, explore the relationships between health, disease, survivorship, treatment, gender and reproductive longevity., Conclusion: The goals are to continually integrate the best science in the service of the needs of patients and build a community of care that is ready for the challenges of the field in the future.

Purpose: Oncofertility focuses on providing fertility and endocrine-sparing options to patients who undergo life-preserving but gonadotoxic cancer treatment. The resources needed to meet patient demand often are fragmented along disciplinary lines. We quantify assets and gaps in oncofertility care on a global scale., Methods: Survey-based questionnaires were provided to 191 members of the Oncofertility Consortium Global Partners Network, a National Institutes of Health-funded organization. Responses were analyzed to measure trends and regional subtleties about patient oncofertility experiences and to analyze barriers to care at sites that provide oncofertility services., Results: Sixty-three responses were received (response rate, 25%), and 40 were analyzed from oncofertility centers in 28 countries. Thirty of 40 survey results (75%) showed that formal referral processes and psychological care are provided to patients at the majority of sites. Fourteen of 23 respondents (61%) stated that some fertility preservation services are not offered because of cultural and legal barriers. The growth of oncofertility and its capacity to improve the lives of cancer survivors around the globe relies on concentrated efforts to increase awareness, promote collaboration, share best practices, and advocate for research funding., Conclusion: This survey reveals global and regional successes and challenges and provides insight into what is needed to advance the field and make the discussion of fertility preservation and endocrine health a standard component of the cancer treatment plan. As the field of oncofertility continues to develop around the globe, regular assessment of both international and regional barriers to quality care must continue to guide process improvements., Competing Interests: The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/site/ifc. Alexandra S. RashediEmployment: Cigna (I) Stock or Other Ownership: Cigna (I)Antoinette AnazodoResearch Funding: Merck SeronoCassio SartorioEmployment: Vida Centro de Fertilidade Leadership: Vida Centro de Fertilidade Stock or Other Ownership: Vida Centro de FertilidadeCatharina C.M. BeerendonkTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: GoodlifeEllen M. GreenblattConsulting or Advisory Role: Ferring Pharmaceuticals, EMD Serono Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: EMD SeronoFernando M. ReisHonoraria: Politec Saúde (I) Consulting or Advisory Role: Politec Saúde (I) Speakers’ Bureau: UCB (I) Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Abbott Laboratories (I)Johan SmitzSpeakers’ Bureau: Ferring Pharmaceuticals Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ferring PharmaceuticalsMaria T. BourlonLeadership: Medivation, Astellas Pharma Honoraria: Medivation, Astellas Pharma Speakers’ Bureau: Asofarma Research Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen PharmaceuticalsMichel De VosHonoraria: Cook Medical Research Funding: Cook MedicalRichard A. AndersonConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, HRA Pharma, NeRe Pharmaceuticals Speakers’ Bureau: Roche, Beckman Coulter, IBSA Institut Biochimque Research Funding: Ferring Pharmaceuticals Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: IBSA Institut BiochimqueRoberto de A. AntunesConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Serono Speakers’ Bureau: Merck Serono Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck Serono, MSDTeresa Almeida-SantosConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, MSD Research Funding: MerckTeresa K. WoodruffResearch Funding: Ferring Pharmaceuticals (Inst) No other potential conflicts of interest were reported., (© 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: In the accompanying article, "Survey of Fertility Preservation Options Available to Patients With Cancer Around the Globe," we showed that specific fertility preservation services may not be offered at various sites around the world because of cultural and legal barriers. We assessed global and regional experiences as well as the legal status of third-party reproduction and adoption to serve as a comprehensive international data set and resource for groups that wish to begin oncofertility interventions., Methods: We provide data on the legalities of third-party assisted reproductive technologies and other family-building options in the 28 oncofertility-practicing countries surveyed., Results: We found regional and country differences that will be important in the development of tailored resources for physicians and for patient brochures that are sensitive to these local restrictions and cultural norms., Conclusion: Because many patients first consult Web-based materials, the formal assessment of the availability of these options provides members of the global oncofertility community with data to which they might otherwise not have ready access to better serve their patients., Competing Interests: The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or jco.ascopubs.org/site/ifc. Alexandra S. RashediEmployment: Cigna (I) Stock or Other Ownership: Cigna (I)Antoinette AnazodoResearch Funding: Merck SeronoCassio SartorioEmployment: Vida Centro de Fertilidade Leadership: Vida Centro de Fertilidade Stock or Other Ownership: Vida Centro de FertilidadeCatharina C.M. BeerendonkTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: GoodlifeEllen M. GreenblattConsulting or Advisory Role: Ferring Pharmaceuticals, EMD Serono Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: EMD SeronoFernando M. ReisHonoraria: Politec Saúde (I) Consulting or Advisory Role: Politec Saúde (I) Speakers’ Bureau: UCB (I) Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Abbott Laboratories (I)Flor SánchezPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: patent pendingJohan SmitzSpeakers’ Bureau: Ferring Pharmaceuticals Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ferring PharmaceuticalsMaria T. BourlonLeadership: Medivation, Astellas Pharma Honoraria: Medivation, Astellas PharmaRichard A. AndersonConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, HRA Pharma, NeRe Pharmaceuticals Speakers’ Bureau: Roche, Beckman Coulter, IBSA Institut Biochimque Research Funding: Ferring Pharmaceuticals Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: IBSA Institut BiochimqueRoberto de A. AntunesConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Serono Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck Serono, MSDSergio RomeroPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: patent pendingTeresa Almeida-SantosConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, MSD Research Funding: Merck SeronoTeresa K. WoodruffResearch Funding: Ferring Pharmaceuticals (Inst) No other potential conflicts of interest were reported., (© 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. Currently, oncofertility competencies do not exist. The aim of this study was to develop an oncofertility competency framework that defines the key components of oncofertility care, develops a model for prioritizing service development, and defines the roles that health care professionals (HCPs) play., Materials and Method: A quantitative modified Delphi methodology was used to conduct two rounds of an electronic survey, querying and synthesizing opinions about statements regarding oncofertility care with HCPs and patient and family advocacy groups (PFAs) from 16 countries (12 high and 4 middle income). Statements included the roles of HCPs and priorities for service development care across ten domains (communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, oncofertility training, reproductive survivorship care and fertility-related psychosocial support, supportive care, and ethical frameworks) that represent 33 different elements of care., Results: The first questionnaire was completed by 457 participants (332 HCPs and 125 PFAs). One hundred and thirty-eight participants completed the second questionnaire (122 HCPs and 16 PFAs). Consensus was agreed on 108 oncofertility competencies and the roles HCPs should play in oncofertility care. A three-tier service development model is proposed, with gradual implementation of different components of care. A total of 92.8% of the 108 agreed competencies also had agreement between high and middle income participants., Conclusion: FP guidelines establish best practice but do not consider the skills and requirements to implement these guidelines. The competency framework gives HCPs and services a structure for the training of HCPs and implementation of care, as well as defining a model for prioritizing oncofertility service development., Implications for Practice: Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. The competency framework gives 108 competencies that will allow health care professionals (HCPs) and services a structure for the development of oncofertility care, as well as define the role HCPs play to provide care and support. The framework also proposes a three-tier oncofertility service development model which prioritizes the development of components of oncofertility care into essential, enhanced, and expert services, giving clear recommendations for service development. The competency framework will enhance the implementation of FP guidelines, improving the equitable access to medical and psychological oncofertility care., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2019.)

Background: Fertility preservation must be discussed with reproductive age women before cancer treatment. Heart transplantation raises complex issues in pregnancy. Pregnancy in a heart transplant woman after pelvic irradiation involves close multidisciplinary follow-up to avoid complications in the mother and the foetus. We report the first live birth in a heart transplant woman after pelvic irradiation, chemotherapy and fertility preservation., Case Presentation: A 36-year-old heart transplant woman with pelvic non-Hodgkin lymphoma spared her fertility, with cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos, before chemotherapy and pelvic irradiation. After multidisciplinary discussion and pre-conception evaluation, pregnancy was achieved. A close follow-up by a multidisciplinary team allowed a normal pregnancy without maternal or foetal complications and the delivery of a healthy infant., Conclusions: Achieving pregnancy in heart transplant women with iatrogenic ovarian failure after oncologic treatment including pelvic irradiation is possible and can be successful. Careful and close surveillance by a multidisciplinary team is mandatory due to increased risk of maternal and foetal complications.

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., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

In recent years, following the improved prognosis of patients with cancer, interest and attention has grown around fertility issues in these patients. International guidelines on fertility preservation in patients with cancer recommend that physicians discuss with all patients of reproductive age (or their parents/guardians, if children) the risk of infertility arising from their cancer or its treatment. Oncofertility counselling is recommended at the earliest opportunity and prior to cancer treatment, to help patients make informed decisions on pursuing fertility preservation. Currently, however, such discussions are not being routinely held. In June 2017, an esteemed group of European oncofertility experts met to discuss current unfulfilled needs in oncofertility for female cancer patients. This expert group has produced here a number of key recommendations in order to guide oncologists, haematologists, and other involved professionals with oncofertility discussions and appropriate referrals for further fertility preservation counselling and follow-up., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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 Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)

Purpose: To assess female cancer patients' perceptions of the fertility preservation decision-making process and to examine the effect of clinicians' support on the decision quality., Methods: A total of 71 patients participated in this longitudinal study with two assessment time points (before cancer therapy, after cancer therapy). Self-report measures assessed the decision-making process, the decision quality and the clinicians' support., Results: A less positive experience in the decision-making process was associated with higher decisional regret and lower decisional satisfaction. In the group that decided not to pursue FP, participants who perceived higher oncologist's support reported higher decisional satisfaction., Conclusions: A higher quality decision is positively associated with a better experience in the decision-making process. The oncologist's support is crucial for the decisional satisfaction of patients who decide not to pursue FP. Implications for psychosocial providers: Psychologists may be important in helping patients to adequately cope with the FP decision so that they can make a high-quality decision.

This study aims to investigate the current practice patterns of Portuguese oncologists with different clinical specialties regarding female fertility preservation (FP) and to determine the relative endorsement of different barriers to these practices. A total of 111 doctors with different clinical specialties assisting female cancer patients of childbearing age at Portuguese clinical institutions completed a self-report questionnaire to assess their current practice patterns regarding female FP and their perceptions of the barriers to these practices. Although the majority of the oncologists reported discussing the reproductive future with their patients, 2.8% and 7.2% of these clinicians reported never informing about the risk of infertility and about FP, respectively, and 75.8% of the participants have referred fewer than ten patients to a reproductive medicine doctor. Time with patients was the strongest endorsed barrier to these practices. A stronger endorsement of the barriers "oncologists' communication skills" and "patient-related factors" was related to a lower frequency of informing about both the risk of cancer-related infertility and about FP. It is important to overcome the intrinsic barriers that emerged as being the most relevant to oncologists' FP practices and that can be modified, namely the lack of communication skills and the oncologists' perceptions of their patients' characteristics., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Ovarian tissue cryopreservation is a female fertility preservation technique that presents major challenges for the maintenance of follicular viability after transplantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the application of L-Mesitran Soft®, a product containing 40% medical grade honey (MGH), with other strategies to improve ovarian grafts' viability. For this purpose, bovine ovarian tissue was vitrified, warmed and randomly assigned to culture groups: (1) control, (2) MGH 0.2% in vitro, (3) MGH in vivo (direct application in the xenotransplantation), (4) vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF 50 ng/mL) and (5) vitamin D (100 Nm), during a 48 h period. A sixth group (6) of fragments was thawed on transplantation day and was not cultured. The tissue was xenotransplanted into immunodeficient (Rowett nude homozygous) ovariectomized rats. Grafts were analyzed 48 h after culture, and 7 and 28 days after transplantation. The tissue was subjected to histological and immunohistochemical analysis. Treatments using MGH showed the highest angiogenic and cell proliferation stimulation, with cellular apoptosis, within a healthy cellular turnover pathway. In conclusion, MGH should be considered as a potentially effective and less expensive strategy to improve ovarian tissue transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: Which factors related to patient, treatment or disease are associated with ovarian function recovery after chemotherapy in premenopausal women with breast cancer?Summary Answer: Younger age and GnRH agonist (GnRHa) administration during chemotherapy were significantly associated with menses recovery, but this recovery was less likely in patients exposed to taxanes.What Is Already Known: To date, published meta-analyses have only assessed GnRHa administration as a possible factor for ovarian function recovery, and their results were conflicting. Current guidelines present distinct recommendations regarding the use of GnRHa for fertility preservation (FP) in women with breast cancer.Study Design, Size, Duration: A systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies in the English, Portuguese, French or Spanish languages (1990-2015), ongoing trials or completed trials (1990-2015) and conference proceedings (2000-2015) were performed.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Scielo, Toxline and DART databases, online trial registries and conference proceedings. Studies were eligible if they included premenopausal women with early breast cancer treated with chemotherapy, reported ovarian function recovery data and identified factor(s) associated with recovery. Two authors independently screened the studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. An odds ratio (OR) was estimated from the number of recovery events. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: Fifteen articles were included. Five different factors were analysed: younger age and baseline levels of anti-Müllerian hormone (patient-related factors), co-administration of GnRHa, addition of taxanes to anthracycline-based chemotherapy and addition of endocrine therapy to chemotherapy (treatment-related factors). Menses recovery was the most used marker. Younger age (≤40 years) and exposure to GnRHa were positively associated with menses recovery (OR 6.07 and 2.03, respectively) but exposure to taxanes adversely affected recovery (OR 0.49). Significant heterogeneity among studies was found.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: A general limitation of the included studies is the use of menses as the main recovery marker. Regarding GnRHa, the substantial heterogeneity and conflicting results limit the interpretation of our results. Studies that use additional markers and have a longer follow-up are needed.Wider Implications Of the Findings: The decision for using chemotherapy regimens with taxanes must take into account their potential adverse effects on female fertility. Considering the conflicting results regarding GnRHa agonist use, other fertility preservation strategies should also be considered.Study Funding/competing Interests: No external funding was received. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.Prospero Registration Number: This review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42015013494). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]