Long-term outcomes in cancer patients who did or did not pursue fertility preservation.

<bold>Objective: </bold>To compare long-term outcomes of cancer patients who pursued fertility preservation (FP) with those who did not and compare random-start (RS) and menstrual cycle-specific (CS) protocols for FP.<bold>Design: </bold>Retrospective cohort.<bold>Setting: </bold>Single urban academic institution.<bold>Patient(s): </bold>Oncology patients who contacted the FP patient navigator, 2005-2015.<bold>Intervention(s): </bold>None.<bold>Main Outcome Measure(s): </bold>Time to cancer treatment, disease-free survival, and reproductive outcomes in FP versus no-FP patients and cycle outcomes for RS versus CS protocols. Data were analyzed by χ2 and logistic regression.<bold>Result(s): </bold>Of 497 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 41% elected FP. The median number of days to cancer treatment was 33 and 19 days in the FP and no-FP groups, respectively. There was no difference in cancer recurrence or mortality. There were no differences in stimulation parameters, outcomes, or days to next cancer treatment in RS versus CS protocols. Twenty-one patients returned to use cryopreserved specimens, resulting in 16 live births. Eight of 21 returning patients used a gestational carrier. Thirteen FP (6.4%) and 16 no-FP (5.5%) patients experienced a spontaneous pregnancy.<bold>Conclusion(s): </bold>FP is both safe and efficacious for eligible cancer patients. Only 10% of patients returned to use cryopreserved specimens, and almost half used a gestational carrier, suggesting the need for further research into reproductive decision-making in cancer survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]