Oncofertility: insights from IVF specialists—a worldwide web-based survey analysis (original) (raw)
Related papers
Developing a referral system for fertility preservation among patients with newly diagnosed cancer
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN, 2011
The goal of this project was to develop a referral system to increase the likelihood that patients of childbearing age with newly diagnosed cancer receive timely information about fertility, and reduce the burden oncologists may feel when discussing and exploring fertility preservation options with their patients. The group developed and examined the effectiveness of a fertility preservation referral system through pilot-testing a developed patient education brochure. During the 12-month pilot-testing period, 776 patients of childbearing age (< 40 years) were seen at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and 349 brochures were taken. The reproductive endocrinologist/infertility clinic experienced a 9-fold increase in the number of calls received during the 12-month study period, with 122 calls received compared with 13 the prior year. The large increase in calls illuminates the gap in patient interest and referral, and shows an effective method to transmit this information. Improving the ...
Oncologists’ Knowledge, Practice and Attitude toward Fertility Preservation: A National Survey
Life
Background: Improved chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment protocols, fortunately, increased the rates of cancer survivors over the years. However, these treatments may result in infertility or subfertility. Oncologists are considered the gateway for knowledge about cancer and its treatments’ effects. Several studies showed that many oncologists do not discuss fertility preservation with their patients. This study aimed to explore the perspective of oncologists in Oman on fertility preservation. Methods: A cross-sectional study of physicians and surgeons dealing with patients with cancer was conducted from June 2021 to December 2021. A standardized and validated questionnaire was used to collect data. Results: Participants reported that they are knowledgeable about sperm cryopreservation and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists use but not other methods of fertility preservation. About 94% of the participants reported that they need more knowledge about fertility preservation. ...
American Society of Clinical Oncology Recommendations on Fertility Preservation in Cancer Patients
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2006
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether it is appropriate to transfer the follow-up care of breast cancer (BrCa) survivors from cancer specialists to primary care physicians (PCPs). This contemporary study compared physician specialty and documented the long-term surveillance of survivors who underwent surgery at an American academic center. METHODS: Women in this institutional review board-approved study underwent breast surgery between 1996 and 2006. Data were collected for 270 patients with stage I to III BrCa (mean follow-up, 6 years). Charts were reviewed based on American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines for recommended surveillance frequency and care. RESULTS: The majority of patients (90%; n ¼ 242) were followed by specialists with 10% (n ¼ 28) followed by PCPs. Patients with advanced disease and a greater risk of disease recurrence more often received specialist care. Patients followed by specialists were more often seen at ASCO-recommended intervals (eg, 89% vs 69% of patients followed by a PCP at follow-up Year 6; P < .01); however, many patients were followed inconsistently. Breast disease was often not the focus of PCP visits or mentioned in clinic notes (18% patients). Women seen by specialists were more likely to have documented clinical examinations of the breast (93% vs 44% at Year 6), axilla (94% vs 52%), or annual mammograms (74% vs 48%; P ¼ .001-.02). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent compliance with surveillance guidelines and chart documentation needs improvement among all providers; however, specialists more consistently met ASCO guidelines. If transfer of care to a PCP occurs, it should be formalized and include follow-up recommendations and defined physician responsibilities. Providers and patients should be educated regarding surveillance care and current guidelines incorporated into standard clinical practice.
Long-term outcomes in cancer patients who did or did not pursue fertility preservation
Fertility and Sterility, 2018
Objective: 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. Design: Retrospective cohort. Setting: Single urban academic institution. Patient(s): Oncology patients who contacted the FP patient navigator, 2005-2015. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): 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 c 2 and logistic regression. Result(s): 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. Conclusion(s): 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.
Survey of Fertility Preservation Options Available to Patients With Cancer Around the Globe
abstract 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. J Glob Oncol 00.
Middle East Fertility Society Journal, 2021
Background Impaired fertility is one of the side effects of effective cancer therapy. Saving the potential or storing the material to enable people to have biological children after cancer treatment can be of high importance to many cancer survivors. Therefore, we designed a study to determine knowledge and attitudes to fertility preservation (FP) in adult cancer patients and the parents of patients with cancer. Participants who completed this survey were a convenience sample of 384 parents of cancer patients < 18 years and cancer patients ≥ 18 years from two large referral hospitals. A 25-item self-administered questionnaire measured knowledge and attitudes to FP. Responses were yes/no, or on a 4-point Likert scale (greatly, usually, rarely, never) scored from 1 for never to 4 for greatly. Results Most parents and most cancer patients were unaware of the FP methods of embryo cryopreservation (96.3% and 88.4%, respectively) and sperm cryopreservation (97.5% and 89.0%, respectivel...
Technology & Innovation, 2012
The field of oncofertility addresses issues of infertility in oncology patients. Even though this field has integrated professionals from multiple disciplines, a significant amount of research still needs to be carried out to understand the factors involved in patients' access to fertility preservation technologies , the worries and concerns of cancer patients and survivors, and the strategies used to deal with fertility transformations. The purpose of this article is to present a review of the existing social research on oncofertility, discuss notable gaps in knowledge, and identify future areas of study. We examine the relationship between common medical treatments used to treat cancer and their effects on fertility; available fertility preservation technologies; the social, political, cultural, and economic factors involved in medical care, patient decision making, and access to technological procedures; and existing guidelines and organizations in the US that focus on patient information and advocacy. This review seeks to encourage researchers to bring patient experience to the forefront of oncofertility research and consider the factors that continue to hinder their access to the technologies required to safeguard their fertility.
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2016
Background: Professional guidelines have been developed to promote discussion between providers and newly diagnosed young adults with cancer about the possibility of cancer treatment-related infertility, but previous research suggests many young adults fail to receive this information. The aim of this study was to examine rates of and factors predictive of oncologists' compliance with national guidelines for discussing potential treatment-related infertility with newly diagnosed young adults with cancer seen at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center. Methods: We reviewed data from the electronic medical record for new clinic encounters between medical oncologists and young adults with cancer (ages 18-39 years) from 2010 to 2012. Data from oncologist discussions of fertility preservation were abstracted, as were patient (age, sex, race, ethnicity, cancer type) and oncologist (gender, graduation year from fellowship) characteristics. Results: A total of 1,018 cases were reviewed, with 454 patients (mean, 31.5 years; 67.8% women) meeting inclusion criteria. Overall, 83% of patients were informed about potential treatment-related infertility, with patients with breast cancer (85% informed), Hodgkin lymphoma (95% informed), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (94% informed), leukemia (88% informed), or testicular cancer (100% informed) more likely to be informed than those with other cancer types (60%-74% informed). There was a significant effect for patient sex (odds ratio, 3.57; CI, 1.33, 9.60; P=.012), with women being more likely to be informed than men. Conclusions: Reported compliance with fertility preservation guidelines was greater than published rates. Higher compliance rates in female patients and in patients with cancers more common among young adults may reflect greater awareness of fertility-related concerns among these patients and their providers.