1
|
Holtzman S, McCarthy L, Estevez SL, Lee JA, Baird MF, Gounko D, Copperman AB, Blank SV. Walking the tightrope: Fertility preservation among hereditary breast and ovarian Cancer syndrome Previvors. Gynecol Oncol 2024; 186:176-181. [PMID: 38696905 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.03.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2024] [Revised: 03/21/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/04/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Fertility-related concerns cause significant anxiety among patients with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (HBOC). The Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommend patients diagnosed with HBOC receive early referral to a reproductive endocrinologist. However, evidence about fertility trends in this patient population are limited and guidelines are scarce. The aim of this study is to compare fertility preservation among patients with HBOC to control patients undergoing fertility treatment without a diagnosis of infertility. METHODS This retrospective study included patients who presented to a single academic institution for fertility preservation in the setting of diagnosis of HBOC. In this study, HBOC patients are referred to as those who had tested positive for pathogenic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 or were at high-risk for HBOC based on a strong family history (defined as >3 family members diagnosed with HBOC) without a genetic mutation. HBOC patients were matched in a 1:1 fashion to a control group undergoing fertility preservation without a diagnosis of infertility or HBOC. All analysis was done using SPSS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). RESULTS Between August 1st, 2016 and August 1st, 2022, 81 patients presented to the study center for consultation in the setting of HBOC. Of those who presented, 48 (59.2%) ultimately underwent oocyte cryopreservation and 33 (40.7%) underwent embryo cryopreservation. Patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation due to BRCA1 status were more likely to present for fertility consultation at a younger age compared to control patients (32.6 vs. 34.7 years, p = 0.03) and were more likely to undergo oocyte cryopreservation at a younger age (32.1 vs. 34.6 years, p = 0.007). There was no difference in age at initial consultation or age at procedure for patients with BRCA2 or patients with a strong family history compared to control patients (p > 0.05). There was no difference in the mean age of patients with HBOC at presentation for consultation for embryo cryopreservation or the mean age the patient with HBOC underwent embryo cryopreservation compared to control patients (p > 0.05). Patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 did not have expedited time from consultation to first cycle start (p > 0.05). After adjusting for factors including anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level and age, patients considered in the HBOC group due to family history had less time between consultation and oocyte cryopreservation cycle compared to control patients. (179 vs. 317 days, p = 0.045). There was no difference in time from consultation to starting cycle for embryo cryopreservation for patients with HBOC compared to controls (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION Patients with HBOC did not undergo expedited fertility treatment compared to control patients undergoing oocyte and embryo cryopreservation for non-infertility reasons. Patients diagnosed with BRCA1 had more oocytes retrieved compared to the control population which is possibly due to earlier age of presentation in the setting of recommended age of risk reducing surgery being age 35-40. When age matched, cycle outcomes did not differ between HBOC and control patients. Given the known cancer prevention benefit and recommendations for risk-reducing surgery, future studies should focus on guidelines for fertility preservation for patients with HBOC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sharonne Holtzman
- Icahn School of Medicine at the Mount Sinai Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Lily McCarthy
- Icahn School of Medicine at the Mount Sinai Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samantha L Estevez
- Icahn School of Medicine at the Mount Sinai Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, New York, NY, USA; Reproductive Medicine Associates of New York, New York, NY, USA
| | - Joseph A Lee
- Reproductive Medicine Associates of New York, New York, NY, USA
| | - Morgan F Baird
- Reproductive Medicine Associates of New York, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dmitry Gounko
- Reproductive Medicine Associates of New York, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alan B Copperman
- Icahn School of Medicine at the Mount Sinai Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, New York, NY, USA; Reproductive Medicine Associates of New York, New York, NY, USA
| | - Stephanie V Blank
- Icahn School of Medicine at the Mount Sinai Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dason ES, Drost L, Greenblatt EM, Scheer AS, Han J, Sobel M, Allen L, Jacobson M, Doshi T, Wolff E, McMahon E, Jones CA. Providers' perspectives on the reproductive decision-making of BRCA-positive women. BMC Womens Health 2022; 22:506. [PMID: 36482357 PMCID: PMC9730610 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-022-02093-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2022] [Accepted: 11/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Reproductive decision-making is difficult for BRCA-positive women. Our objective was to assess the complexities of decision-making and identify decisional supports for patients and providers when discussing reproductive options prior to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). METHODS This study was of qualitive design, using data collection via semi-structured interviews conducted from November 2018 to October 2020. Individuals were included if they were identified to provide care to BRCA-positive women. In total, 19 providers were approached and 15 consented to participate. Providers were recruited from three clinics in Toronto, Ontario located at academic centers: [1] A familial ovarian cancer clinic, [2] A familial breast cancer clinic and [3] A fertility clinic, all of which treat carriers of the BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic mutation. The interview guide was developed according to the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and included questions regarding reproductive options available to patients, factors that impact the decision-making process and the role of decisional support. Interviews were transcribed and transcripts were analyzed thematically using NVIVO 12. RESULTS Providers identified three major decisions that reproductive-aged women face when a BRCA mutation is discovered: [1] "Do I want children?"; [2] "Do I want to take the chance of passing on this the mutation?"; and [3] "Do I want to carry a child?" Inherent decision challenges that are faced by both providers and patients included difficult decision type, competing options, scientifically uncertain outcomes, and challenging decision timing. Modifiable decisional needs included: inadequate knowledge, unrealistic expectations, unclear values and inadequate support or resources. Identified clinical gaps included counselling time constraints, lack of reliable sources of background information for patients or providers and need for time-sensitive, geographically accessible, and centralized care. CONCLUSION Our study identified a need for a patient information resource that can be immediately provided to patients who carry a BRCA genetic mutation. Other suggestions for clinical practice include more time during consultation appointments, adequate follow-up, value-centric counseling, access to psychosocial support, and a specialized decisional coach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E. S. Dason
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1E2 Canada ,Mount Sinai Fertility, 7th Floor, 250 Dundas St. W, Toronto, ON M5T 2Z5 Canada
| | - L. Drost
- grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada
| | - E. M. Greenblatt
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1E2 Canada ,grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada
| | - A. S. Scheer
- grid.415502.7Department of General Surgery, St. Michaels Hospital, Unity Health Network, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8 Canada
| | - J. Han
- grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada
| | - M. Sobel
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1E2 Canada ,grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada ,grid.417199.30000 0004 0474 0188Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON M5S 1B2 Canada
| | - L. Allen
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1E2 Canada ,grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada ,grid.417199.30000 0004 0474 0188Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON M5S 1B2 Canada
| | - M. Jacobson
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1E2 Canada ,grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada ,grid.417199.30000 0004 0474 0188Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON M5S 1B2 Canada
| | - T. Doshi
- grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada
| | - E. Wolff
- grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada
| | - E. McMahon
- grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada ,grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 1P8 Canada
| | - C. A. Jones
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5G 1E2 Canada ,grid.492573.e0000 0004 6477 6457Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5 Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Krassuski LM, Kautz-Freimuth S, Vennedey V, Rhiem K, Schmutzler RK, Stock S. Decision Aids for Preventive Treatment Alternatives for BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: a Systematic Review. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2021; 81:679-698. [PMID: 34168381 PMCID: PMC8216782 DOI: 10.1055/a-1326-1792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2020] [Accepted: 11/29/2020] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction
Women with a pathogenic
BRCA1/2
mutation have a markedly increased lifetime risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. The current preventive treatment alternatives that are offered are an intensified breast cancer screening programme and risk-reducing operations. Before deciding on one option, medical and personal factors such as life situation and individual preferences must be weighed carefully. Decision aids are used internationally to support
BRCA1/2
mutation carriers during their decision-making process. In this study these are analysed structurally for the first time and their applicability to the German context is examined.
Material and Methods
A systematic literature search in five electronic databases and a manual search were performed. The identified decision aids were evaluated with regard to formal criteria, medical content and quality. The qualitative assessment used the criteria of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration (IPDASi v4.0), which examined various dimensions (e.g., information, probabilities, values).
Results
Twenty decision aids, which were published between 2003 and 2019 in Australia (n = 4), the United Kingdom (n = 3), Canada (n = 2), the Netherlands (n = 2) and the USA (n = 9), were included. Nine focus on
BRCA1/2
mutation carriers and eleven include other risk groups. Eighteen include risk-reducing operations as decision options, 14 list screening methods for breast and/or ovarian cancer, and 13 describe the possibility of pharmacological prevention by means of selective oestrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors. Nine of the 20 decision aids meet fundamental quality criteria (IPDASi v4.0 qualification criteria).
Conclusion
International decision aids can serve formally as a basis for a German decision aid for
BRCA1/2
mutation carriers. Some of them differ markedly in content from the recommendations of German guidelines. Only a few achieve a high quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Marlene Krassuski
- Institut für Gesundheitsökonomie und Klinische Epidemiologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
| | - Sibylle Kautz-Freimuth
- Institut für Gesundheitsökonomie und Klinische Epidemiologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
| | - Vera Vennedey
- Institut für Gesundheitsökonomie und Klinische Epidemiologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
| | - Rita K Schmutzler
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
| | - Stephanie Stock
- Institut für Gesundheitsökonomie und Klinische Epidemiologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Skrovanek E, Dunbar-Jacob J, Dunwoody C, Wesmiller S. Integrative Review of Reproductive Decision Making of Women Who Are BRCA Positive. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2020; 49:525-536. [PMID: 32926832 DOI: 10.1016/j.jogn.2020.07.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/01/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To synthesize research findings about reproductive decision making among women who are BRCA positive. DATA SOURCES PubMed and CINAHL. STUDY SELECTION Articles published in English between 2000 and June 28, 2020, about the reproductive decision making of women with a confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. DATA EXTRACTION We extracted data about participants, study design, analysis, follow-up, and results. We used the modified Downs and Black checklist and Kennelly's qualitative data analysis to rate studies for quality and applicability by using. DATA SYNTHESIS We included five of 257 screened articles in our synthesis. The total sample size of the five studies was 1,468 women. The most prevalent factors related to reproductive decision making were the impending decisions regarding childbearing and family choices, including decisions about biological children, preventive surgery, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, and prenatal diagnosis to prevent further transmission of a BRCA mutation, and family planning. CONCLUSION A lack of knowledge exists about the reproductive decision-making processes of women who are BRCA positive. A better understanding of this process would provide nurses and other clinicians with the knowledge needed to support these women through their reproductive life choices.
Collapse
|
6
|
Chen LM, Blank SV, Burton E, Glass K, Penick E, Woodard T. Reproductive and hormonal considerations in women at increased risk for hereditary gynecologic cancers: Society of Gynecologic Oncology and American Society for Reproductive Medicine Evidence-Based Review. Fertil Steril 2019; 112:1034-1042. [PMID: 31606136 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.07.1349] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2019] [Revised: 06/14/2019] [Accepted: 06/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Providers who care for women at risk for hereditary gynecologic cancers must consider the impact of these conditions on reproductive and hormonal health. This document reviews potential options for cancer prevention, family building, genetic testing and management of surgical menopause in this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lee-May Chen
- University of California San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California.
| | - Stephanie V Blank
- Icahn and Blavatnik Family Women's Health Research Institute, New York, New York
| | | | - Karen Glass
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Emily Penick
- Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Terri Woodard
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Reproductive Decision-Making in Women with BRCA1/2 Mutations. J Genet Couns 2016; 26:594-603. [PMID: 27796678 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-0035-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2016] [Accepted: 10/07/2016] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Expanded genetic testing of BRCA mutations has led to identification of more reproductive-aged women who test positive for the mutation which might impact attitudes and decisions about relationships, childbearing and the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND). A cross-sectional survey was administered to 1081 self-reported BRCA carriers to investigate how knowledge of BRCA status influences these issues. The mean age at BRCA test disclosure was 44 years and 36 % reported a personal history of cancer. Of 163 women who were unpartnered, 21.5 % felt more pressure to get married. Of 284 women whose families were not complete, 41 % reported that carrier status impacted their decision to have biological children. Women with a history of cancer were more likely to report that knowledge of BRCA+ status impacted their decision to have a child (OR 1.8, 95 % CI 1-3.2). Fifty-nine percent thought PGD should be offered to mutation carriers and 55.5 % thought PND should be offered. In conclusion, knowledge of BRCA status impacts attitudes regarding relationships and childbearing, and most carriers believe that PGD and PND should be offered to other carriers. This study suggests that BRCA carriers desire and would benefit from reproductive counseling after test disclosure.
Collapse
|