Regret around fertility choices is decreased with pre-treatment counseling in gynecologic cancer patients

Fertility-Sparing Surgery for Stage I Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe population-level utilization of fertility-sparing surgery and outcome of reproductive-aged patients with early epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent fertility-sparing surgery in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective study queried the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result Program. The study included 3,027 patients younger than age 50 years with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer receiving primary surgical therapy from 2007 to 2020. Fertility-sparing surgery was defined as preservation of one ovary and the uterus for unilateral lesion and preservation of the uterus for bilateral lesions. Temporal trend of fertility-sparing surgery was assessed with linear segmented regression with log-transformation. Overall survival associated with fertility-sparing surgery was assessed with Cox proportional hazard regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 534 patients (17.6%) underwent fertility-sparing surgery. At the cohort level, the utilization of fertility-sparing surgery was 13.4% in 2007 and 21.8% in 2020 ( P for trend=.009). Non-Hispanic White individuals (2.8-fold), those with high-grade serous histology (2.2-fold), and individuals with stage IC disease (2.3-fold) had a more than twofold increase in fertility-sparing surgery utilization during the study period (all P for trend<.05). After controlling for the measured clinicopathologic characteristics, patients who received fertility-sparing surgery had overall survival comparable with that of patients who had nonsparing surgery (5-year rates 93.6% vs 92.1%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.87, 95% CI, 0.57-1.35). This survival association was consistent in high-grade serous (5-year rates 92.9% vs 92.4%), low-grade serous (100% vs 92.2%), clear cell (97.5% vs 86.1%), mucinous (92.1% vs 86.6%), low-grade endometrioid (95.7% vs 97.7%), and mixed (93.3% vs 83.7%) histology (all P >.05). In high-grade endometrioid tumor, fertility-sparing surgery was associated with decreased overall survival (5-year rates 71.9% vs 93.8%, adjusted hazard ratio 2.90, 95% CI, 1.09-7.67). Among bilateral ovarian lesions, fertility-sparing surgery was not associated with overall survival (5-year rates 95.8% vs 92.5%, P =.364). Among 41,914 patients who had epithelial ovarian cancer with any age and stage, those younger than age 50 years with stage I disease increased from 8.6% to 10.9% during the study period ( P for trend=.002).

CONCLUSION

Nearly one in five reproductive-aged patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer underwent fertility-sparing surgery in recent years in the United States. More than 90% of reproductive-aged patients with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent fertility-sparing surgery were alive at the 5-year timepoint, except for those with high-grade endometrioid tumors.

Fertility preservation choices and decisional regret after gender-affirming surgery in transgender men or gender nonbinary persons

Objective

To investigate the prevalence of decisional regret regarding preoperative fertility preservation choices after gender-affirming surgery or removal of reproductive organs.

Design

Cross-sectional.

Setting

University-based pratice.

Patients

A total of 57 survey respondents identifying as transgender men or gender nonbinary with a history of gender-affirming surgery or removal of reproductive organs between 2014 and 2023 with the University of North Carolina Minimally Invasive Gynecology division.

Intervention

Survey or questionnaire.

Main Outcome Measures

The prevalence and severity of decisional regret regarding preoperative fertility preservation choices were measured with the use of the validated decisional regret scale (DRS) (scored 0-100). Secondary outcomes included patient-reported barriers to pursuing reproductive endocrinology and infertility consultation and fertility preservation treatment.

Results

The survey response rate was 50.9% (57/112). "Mild" to "severe" decisional regret was reported by 38.6% (n = 22) of survey respondents, with DRS scores among all respondents ranging from 0-85. Higher median DRS scores were associated with patient-reported inadequacy of preoperative fertility counseling regarding implications of surgery on future fertility or family-building (0 vs. 50) and fertility preservation options (0 vs. 12.5). No desire for future fertility at the time of fertility counseling was the most frequent reason (68.4%) for declining a referral to reproductive endocrinology and infertility for additional fertility preservation discussion.

Conclusions

Decisional regret regarding preoperative fertility preservation choices is experienced among transgender men or gender nonbinary persons after gender-affirming surgery or the removal of reproductive organs. Preoperative, patient-centered fertility counseling and fertility preservation treatments should be provided to reduce the risk of future regret.

Pre-treatment fertility preservation and post-treatment reproduction in long-term survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer

PURPOSE

To describe recall of fertility-related consultations and cryopreservation and to examine reproductive goals and reproduction post-treatment in long-term survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) (age, 18-39 years) cancer.

METHODS

This study included n = 1457 male and n = 2112 female long-term survivors (Mage = 43-45 years; 5-22 years from diagnosis) who provided self-report. Clinical data were supplied by the Netherlands Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

Most male survivors (72.7%) recalled fertility-related consultations and 22.6% completed sperm cryopreservation. Younger age (OR = 2.8; 95%CI [2.2-3.6]), not having children (OR = 5.0; 95%CI [3.2-7.7]), testicular cancer or lymphoma/leukemia (OR = 2.8/2.5 relative to "others"), and more intense treatments (OR = 1.5; 95%CI [1.1-2.0]) were associated with higher cryopreservation rates. Time since diagnosis had no effect. Of men who cryopreserved, 12.1% utilized assisted reproductive technologies (ART). Most men (88.5%) felt their diagnosis did not affect their reproductive goals, but 7.6% wanted no (additional) children due to cancer. Half of female survivors (55.4%; n = 1171) recalled fertility-related consultations. Rates of cryopreservation were very low (3.6%), but increased after 2013 when oocyte cryopreservation became non-experimental. Of women who cryopreserved, 13.2% successfully utilized ART. Most women (74.8%) experienced no effects of cancer on reproductive goals, but 17.8% wanted no (additional) children due to cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Cryopreservation in men varied by patient/clinical factors and was very low in women, but data of more recently treated females are needed. Utilizing cryopreserved material through ART was rare, which questions its cost-effectiveness, but it may enhance survivors' well-being.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The extent to which cryopreservation positively affects survivors' well-being remains to be tested. Moreover, effects of cancer on reproductive goals require further attention, especially in women who refrain from having children due to cancer.

The use of fertility treatments among reproductive-aged women after cancer

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether female cancer survivors are more likely to pursue care for infertility after cancer than women without cancer.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study involving detailed interviews regarding reproductive history.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENTS

Female cancer survivors aged 22-45 years, who were at least 2 years after a cancer diagnosis between the ages of 20 and 35 years (n = 1,036), and age-matched comparison women with no cancer history (n = 1,026).

EXPOSURE

History of cancer vs. no history of cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Each cancer survivor was randomly matched to a comparison woman, who was assigned an artificial age at cancer diagnosis equal to that of her match. Matching was repeated 1,000 times. Outcomes of visiting a doctor for help becoming pregnant or undergoing fertility treatment were modeled using Cox proportional hazards regression, comparing survivors after a cancer diagnosis to age-matched comparison women, adjusted for race, income, residence, education, and parity.

RESULTS

Only 25.5% of cancer survivors reported meeting their desired family size before a cancer diagnosis. The median time from diagnosis to interview among survivors was 7 (interquartile range 5-11) years. Cancer survivors were more likely to report having no children (32.6%) at the interview compared with women with no cancer history (19.5%). Survivors were not more likely to visit a doctor for help becoming pregnant compared with women without a cancer history, matched on birth year and followed by the age at which cancer survivors received their diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.16, 95% simulation interval [SI] 0.78-1.74). Compared with cancer-free women, cancer survivors had similar probabilities of pursuing any treatment (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.88, 95% SI 0.46-1.56), using hormones or medications (aHR 0.86, 95% SI 0.46-1.63), or undergoing intrauterine insemination (aHR 1.26, 95% SI 0.40-5.88) to conceive. Cancer survivors were slightly more likely to pursue surgical interventions to become pregnant (HR 1.55, 95% SI 0.67-3.71). Of those who visited a doctor but declined to pursue fertility treatment, one-quarter of women reported declining treatment due to cost.

CONCLUSION

Cancer survivors did not use fertility treatments at higher rates than the general population. Further counseling and education surrounding fertility options are recommended for young adult female cancer patients after treatment is completed.

Identifying barriers individuals face in accessing fertility care after a gynecologic cancer diagnosis

Objective

To (1) identify the major barriers premenopausal individuals face in accessing fertility care at the time of gynecologic cancer diagnosis and (2) to assess patient experiences pertaining to fertility.

Methods

We distributed an online survey about cancer diagnosis and fertility goals to patients ages 18-40 who had been treated for ovarian, endometrial, or cervical cancer at a single, large academic hospital. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey results. Patients who completed the survey were given the option to participate in a follow-up virtual interview. We conducted semi-structured interviews to discuss their fertility goals and barriers to these. Grounded theory was used to qualitatively analyze the interviews.

Results

Fifty-five patients completed the survey, and 20 patients participated in the interview. The median age at diagnosis was 32 years old. Seventy-three percent of patients recalled that at the time of their diagnosis they were considering future childbearing, and 32% underwent fertility preservation. Patients reported the emotional response to their diagnosis as a barrier to receiving fertility care, with patients reporting lack of control (80%), shock (55%), and confusion (45%). Patients also identified inadequate counseling (60.0%), lack of time (60.0%), economic constraints (55.0%) and prioritization of cancer treatment (55.0%) as barriers. Nearly all patients had a positive interview experience and expressed desire to help patients in similar situations.

Conclusion

Many premenopausal patients diagnosed with gynecologic malignancies are considering future childbearing at the time of diagnosis. Both logistical and emotional barriers prevent them from undergoing fertility preservation before initiating oncologic treatment.

Reproductive Results in Cancer Survivors after Fertility Sparing Management: The Need for the Standardization of Definitions

In fertility-sparing management (FSM), two different issues can be distinguished: the risk of recurrence/death and the chance of childbearing. Survival is the principal outcome in oncology, and definitions of overall survival and progression-free survival are therefore well defined and widely accepted. The introduction of FSM to clinical practice was determined by the desire of young cancer patients to still have children. Initially, in small groups of patients, any pregnancy and/or childbirth were considered successes. Nowadays, FSM occupies an important place in cancer treatment, with thousands of young women treated successfully. However, in contrast to survival, no definition has been established for evaluating the reproductive outcomes of FSM. This review article evaluates the current pregnancy and birth rates of cancer patients. Differences between fertility-sparing and conservative treatment are analyzed, and improper and confusing interchangeable applications of these terms are pointed out. Additionally, various reasons for choosing FSM as a treatment method-which are not directly related to fertility preservation (treatment mismatch)-are presented. Uniform definitions of reproduction after FSM should be established to enable the comparison of results and facilitate the counseling of patients regarding the chances of reproduction.

Fertility-sparing options for cancer patients

Fertility preservation is becoming an integral part of cancer care among women of reproductive age. Despite advances in the treatment of pelvic malignancies, all the currently available treatment approaches, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery, place women at high risk for future fertility impairment. With improved long-term survival rates associated with cancer, expanding the reproductive options available is of high priority. Several fertility preservation options are available today for women with gynecologic and non-gynecologic malignancies. Depending on the underlying oncological entity, these can include the following procedures whether alone or in combination: oocyte cryopreservation, embryo cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, ovarian transposition, and trachelectomy. The purpose of this review is to provide the most up-to-date information on the aforementioned fertility-preserving approaches and highlight the current challenges, drawbacks, and areas of research where more data are still very necessary to optimize outcomes in young female oncological patients desiring pregnancy in the future.

Disparities in Fertility-Sparing Treatment and Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology After a Diagnosis of Cervical, Ovarian, or Endometrial Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the presence of sociodemographic and clinical disparities in fertility-sparing treatment and assisted reproductive technology (ART) use among patients with a history of cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study of patients aged 18-45 years who were diagnosed with cervical cancer (stage IA, IB), endometrial cancer (grade 1, stage IA, IB), or ovarian cancer (stage IA, IC) between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2015, using linked data from the CCR (California Cancer Registry), the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. The primary outcome was receipt of fertility-sparing treatment , defined as surgical or medical treatment to preserve the uterus and at least one ovary. The secondary outcome was fertility preservation , defined as ART use after cancer diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs for the association between fertility-sparing treatment and exposures of interest: age at diagnosis, race and ethnicity, health insurance, socioeconomic status, rurality, and parity.

RESULTS

We identified 7,736 patients who were diagnosed with cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer with eligible histology. There were 850 (18.8%) fertility-sparing procedures among 4,521 cases of cervical cancer, 108 (7.2%) among 1,504 cases of endometrial cancer, and 741 (43.3%) among 1,711 cases of ovarian cancer. Analyses demonstrated nonuniform patterns of sociodemographic disparities by cancer type for fertility-sparing treatment, and ART. Fertility-sparing treatment was more likely among young patients, overall, and of those in racial and ethnic minority groups among survivors of cervical and ovarian cancer. Use of ART was low (n=52) and was associated with a non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity designation, being of younger age (18-35 years), and having private insurance.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that clinical and sociodemographic disparities exist in the receipt of fertility-sparing treatment and ART use among patients with a history of cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer.

[The Experience of Gynecologic Cancer in Young Women: A Qualitative Study]

PURPOSE

This study aimed to understand the experiences of women under 40 years of age with gynecologic cancer.

METHODS

Semi-structured individual in-depth interviews were conducted with 14 Korean female patients aged 21~39 years with gynecologic cancer. The data were analyzed using Corbin and Strauss' grounded theory approach, including open coding, context analysis, and integrating categories.

RESULTS

Grounded theory analysis revealed nine categories and a core category of 'the journey to find my life after losing the life as a typical woman.' The categories that emerged as the conditions are 'Unwelcomed guest, cancer,' 'Completely devastated life as an ordinary woman,' 'Uncertain future,' 'Losing my physical characteristics as a woman,' and 'Life tied with treatments.' The actions/interactions were'Decrease of interpersonal relationships,' 'A lonely battle to overcome alone,' and 'The power to overcome hardships.' The consequence was 'Live my own life.'

CONCLUSION

This study contributes to the development of a substantive theory of the experience of gynecologic cancer in young women, which has been on the rise in recent years. The study's results are expected to be used as a basis for providing nursing care to help young women with gynecologic cancer adapt to their disease.

Obstetric and Neonatal Outcomes 1 or More Years After a Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate obstetric and neonatal outcomes of the first live birth conceived 1 or more years after breast cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

We performed a population-based study to compare live births between women with a history of breast cancer (case group) and matched women with no cancer history (control group). Individuals in the case and control groups were identified using linked data from the California Cancer Registry and California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development data sets. Individuals in the case group were diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer at age 18-45 years between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2012, and conceived 12 or more months after breast cancer diagnosis. Individuals in the control group were covariate-matched women without a history of breast cancer who delivered during 2000-2012. The primary outcome was preterm birth at less than 37 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes were preterm birth at less than 32 weeks of gestation, small for gestational age (SGA), cesarean delivery, severe maternal morbidity, and neonatal morbidity. Subgroup analyses were used to assess the effect of time from initial treatment to fertilization and receipt of additional adjuvant therapy before pregnancy on outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Of 30,021 women aged 18-45 years diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer during 2000-2012, 553 met the study inclusion criteria. Those with a history of breast cancer and matched women in the control group had similar odds of preterm birth at less than 37 weeks of gestation (odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI 0.95-1.74), preterm birth at less than 32 weeks of gestation (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.34-1.79), delivering an SGA neonate (less than the 5th percentile: OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.35-1.03; less than the 10th percentile: OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.68-1.30), and experiencing severe maternal morbidity (OR 1.61; 95% CI 0.74-3.50). Patients with a history of breast cancer had higher odds of undergoing cesarean delivery (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.03-1.53); however, their offspring did not have increased odds of neonatal morbidity compared with women in the control group (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.81-1.62).

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer 1 or more years before fertilization was not strongly associated with obstetric and neonatal complications.

Survival outcomes following pregnancy or assisted reproductive technologies after breast cancer: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

This study sought to determine the impact of pregnancy or assisted reproductive technologies (ART) on breast-cancer-specific survival among breast cancer survivors.

METHODS

The authors performed a cohort study using a novel data linkage from the California Cancer Registry, the California birth cohort, and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System data sets. They performed risk-set matching in women with stages I-III breast cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2012. For each pregnant woman, comparable women who were not pregnant at that point but were otherwise similar based on observed characteristics were matched at the time of pregnancy. After matching, Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of pregnancy with breast-cancer-specific survival. We repeated these analyses for women who received ART.

RESULTS

Among 30,021 women with breast cancer, 553 had a pregnancy and 189 attempted at least one cycle of ART. In Cox proportional hazards modeling, the pregnancy group had a higher 5-year disease-specific survival rate; 95.6% in the pregnancy group and 90.6% in the nonpregnant group (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.77). In women with hormone receptor-positive cancer, we found similar results (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.2-0.91). In the ART analysis, there was no difference in survival between groups; the 5-year disease-specific survival rate was 96.9% in the ART group and 94.1% in the non-ART group (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.17-1.13).

CONCLUSION

Pregnancy and ART are not associated with worse survival in women with breast cancer.

LAY SUMMARY

We sought to determine the impact of pregnancy or assisted reproductive technologies (ART) among breast cancer survivors. We performed a study of 30,021 women by linking available data from California and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System. For each pregnant woman, we matched at the time of pregnancy comparable women who were not pregnant at that point but were otherwise similar based on observed characteristics. We repeated these analyses for women who received ART. We found that pregnancy and ART were not associated with worse survival.

Perspectives of Young Women With Gynecologic Cancers on Fertility and Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Gynecologic cancers standard treatment often requires the removal of some reproductive organs, making fertility preservation a complex challenge. Despite heightened oncofertility awareness, knowledge about fertility attitudes and decisions of young patients with gynecologic cancer is scarce. The aim of this systematic review was to highlight what is currently known about knowledge, attitudes, and decisions about fertility, fertility preservation, and parenthood among these patients.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed journals published in English were searched in PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE from January 1, 2000 to July 1, 2020. Childbearing, fertility, fertility preservation, pregnancy, and parenthood attitudes/decisions after gynecologic cancer from women's perspective were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies comprised the review. Most of the women valued fertility preservation procedures that could be regarded as a means to restore fertility. A unique feature identified was that fertility preservation was seen also as a way to restore gender identity perceived to be lost or threatened during diagnosis and treatment. Fertility counseling was suboptimal, with wide variability among studies reviewed. Comparisons between gynecologic cancers and other cancer types about fertility counseling rates were inconclusive. The potential negative impact of impaired fertility on patients' mental health and quality of life was also documented.

CONCLUSIONS

Fertility and parenthood were important matters in patients' lives, with the majority of patients expressing positive attitudes toward future childbearing. Results confirm that the inclusion of patients with gynecologic cancer in research studies focusing on this topic still remains low. Additionally, the provision of fertility counseling and referral by health professionals is still suboptimal.

Updates in Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Gynecologic Surgery

Gynecologic surgery encompasses over a quarter of inpatient surgical procedures for US women, and current projections estimate an increase of the US female population by nearly 50% in 2050. Over the last decade, US hospitals have embraced enhanced recovery pathways in many specialties. They have increasingly been used in multiple institutions worldwide, becoming the standard of care for patient optimization. According to the last updated enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guideline published in 2019, there are several new considerations behind each practice in ERAS protocols. This article discusses the most updated evidence regarding ERAS programs for gynecologic surgery.

Decisional Regret in Female Oncofertility Decision Making-An Integrative Narrative Review

It is well established that fertility is an important issue for young women with cancer at reproductive age, as many have not initiated or completed their parenthood goals when diagnosed. Because cancer treatments may impair fertility, women face fertility decisions that are often complex and surrounded by uncertainty. This may put patients at risk for psychological distress and the experience of regret regarding decisions made at diagnosis, which may be associated with a negative impact on women's QoL. This narrative review addresses current knowledge about decisional regret regarding fertility preservation decisions in adult female cancer patients at reproductive age. Electronic searches were conducted on Pubmed database for articles published in English from 1 January 2000 to 1 July 2021 that assessed decisional regret following fertility decisions in young women diagnosed at childbearing age. Of the 96 articles identified, nine provided information on decisional regret regarding fertility decisions. Studies reported that, overall, decisional regret regarding oncofertility decisions was low. Factors associated with the experience of decisional regret were patients' perceived quality and satisfaction with fertility counseling received, the decision to undergo fertility preservation, desire for children and decisional conflict. Health providers should be aware of the factors that are potentially modifiable and prone to improvement in order to reduce decisional regret. All efforts should be made to improve availability of and access to tailored high quality fertility counseling and fertility preservation. Given the growing evidence that decision aids (DAs) are effective in increasing knowledge and reducing decisional conflict and regret, their use in a routine and timely manner to complement fertility counseling is recommended.

Outcomes of the First Pregnancy After Fertility-Sparing Surgery for Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes of the first pregnancy after fertility-sparing surgery in patients treated for early-stage ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of women aged 18-45 years with a history of stage IA or IC ovarian cancer reported to the California Cancer Registry for the years 2000-2012. These data were linked to the 2000-2012 California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development birth and discharge data sets to ascertain oncologic characteristics and obstetric outcomes. We included in the case group ovarian cancer patients who conceived at least 3 months after fertility-sparing surgery. The primary outcome was preterm birth, and only the first pregnancy after cancer diagnosis was considered. Secondary outcomes included small-for-gestational-age (SGA) neonates, neonatal morbidity (respiratory support within 72 hours after birth, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, seizures, infection, meconium aspiration syndrome, birth trauma, and intracranial or subgaleal hemorrhage), and severe maternal morbidity as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Propensity scores were used to match women in a 1:2 ratio for the case group and the control group. Wald statistics and logistic regressions were used to evaluate outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients who conceived after fertility-sparing surgery were matched to 306 women in a control group. Histologic types included epithelial (55%), germ-cell (37%), and sex-cord stromal (7%). Treatment for ovarian cancer was not associated with preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation (13.7% vs 11.4%; odds ratio [OR] 1.23, 95% CI 0.69-2.20), SGA neonates (birth weight less than the 10th percentile: 11.8% vs 12.7%; OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.50-1.66), severe maternal morbidity (2.6% vs 1.3%; OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.50-8.25), or neonatal morbidity (both 5.9% OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44-2.28).

CONCLUSION

Patients who conceived at least 3 months after surgery for early-stage ovarian cancer did not have an increased risk of adverse obstetric outcomes.

A randomized controlled evaluation of an educational resource to address fertility concerns after cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the acceptability and impact of a written oncofertility educational resource (ER), as a self-help intervention (SH), and as an adjunct to a one-hour health-care professional discussion (HP).

METHODS

Within a randomized control trial (RCT), 194 adults with cancer (175 womens; 19 mens) were allocated to the SH or HP intervention. 127 completed 6-weeks post-intervention measures, a retention rate of 65.85%.

RESULTS

Across interventions, the ER was rated as highly acceptable and useful, in terms of ease of understanding, and information. Heath literacy significantly increased post-intervention, including functional literacy, communicative literacy, and critical health literacy. There were no significant changes in ratings of fertility distress or general distress pre-post intervention. Quality of life was significantly reduced post intervention. Those in the HP condition reported higher quality of life and greater likelihood of communication with others about fertility, most notably with intimate partners, post-intervention. Qualitative identification of increased knowledge, confidence with communication and normalization of fertility concerns, reflects increased health literacy, and provides explanation for significant reductions in feeling nervous and fearful about fertility treatments post-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm the importance of information provision about the impact of cancer on fertility. Written ERs are a useful adjunct to a patient-clinician discussion, increasing health literacy, which facilitates knowledge, self-efficacy and management of fertility concerns and changes.

Safety of Surgical Fertility Preservation Procedures in Children Prior to Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant

Long-term survival following hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) in childhood continues to improve, and patients are thus increasingly faced with the late effects of treatment. Infertility is very common for both males and females following HSCT and is one of the most distressing sequelae. Adoption and surrogate egg or sperm donation are possibilities for some patients, but post-HSCT reversal of gonadal failure is not possible. We have recently initiated an oncofertility program with a dedicated practitioner with specific expertise in this area. Our practice is for her to meet with all families and age-appropriate patients during the pre-HSCT evaluation period. This allows patients and families to be accurately informed about the expected treatment-related infertility risk and the available options for fertility preservation. Sperm banking and egg or embryo cryopreservation are established approaches but are not achievable for many children and adolescents. Recently, the harvesting and cryopreservation of ovarian and testicular tissue represents a novel surgical option that allows for the possibility of fertility preservation to be extended to children of all ages. The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the safety of these procedures proximal to conditioning therapy and HSCT. This is a retrospective report on a consecutive cohort of all patients aged 0 to 25 years who, after discussion with our oncofertility specialist, chose to undergo surgical fertility preservation (laparoscopic unilateral oophorectomy or testicular biopsy) at our institution between March 2018 and April 2020. These procedures occurred under general anesthesia at the time of central line placement prior to the initiation of HSCT conditioning. We assess the safety of the procedures in terms of postoperative complications and impact on HSCT course. Twenty-two patients underwent fertility preservation surgical procedures. Thirteen patients (59%) were female, median age 13 years (1 to 22 years), and 9 (41%) were male, median age 8 years (5 to 12 years). Fourteen (63%) were prepubertal and 8 (36%) pubertal. HSCT indications were hematologic malignancies/solid tumor (40%) and nonmalignant diseases (60%). Most received an allogenic graft (68%) and 81% had myeloablative conditioning. All patients became neutropenic at a median of 10 days (0 to 51 days) from the surgical procedure; 1 was neutropenic at the time of testicular tissue cryopreservation (TTC). The mean duration for the procedures performed, including ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) or TTC, was 98 minutes (49 to 260 minutes) and 97 minutes (56 to 178 minutes), respectively. Estimated blood loss was minimal and no postoperative site infections occurred. One postprocedure, blood culture-negative fever was reported without an identifiable source; the patient completed 48 hours of antibiotics with resolution of fever. Sixty-two percent of females and 56% of males started conditioning within 24 hours of OTC/TTC (15 hours to 113 days; median, 1 day). The median time to engraftment was 22 days (9 to 33 days) in females and 17 days (11 to 67 days) in males, consistent with our institutional benchmarks. One patient with aplastic anemia had primary graft failure, attributed to low cell dose. This patient engrafted after a second transplant from an alternative donor but ultimately died of multiorgan failure. He was neutropenic for over 60 days and never experienced surgical site infection. There were no procedure-related delays to start of conditioning or to discharge. Children of all ages can now be offered the possibility of fertility preservation following HSCT for benign and malignant conditions. Our review suggests that these procedure for both females and males can be performed close to the start of conditioning, which allows for coupling with central access placement. These procedures appear to be safe and do not add to transplant-related morbidity.

Long-term effectiveness of an online decision aid for female cancer patients regarding fertility preservation: Knowledge, attitude, and decisional regret

INTRODUCTION

The decision, whether to undergo fertility preservation or not is highly demanding for cancer patients. Decision aids may act as an additional source of support. So far, only a limited number of decision aids regarding fertility preservation for female cancer patients exist and have been evaluated systematically. This paper presents the results of secondary analyses of the first randomized controlled trial evaluating an online decision aid for female cancer patients affected by different types of cancer. It focuses on fertility-related knowledge, attitude toward fertility preservation, and long-term effectiveness regarding decisional regret.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Young female cancer patients between 18 and 40 years of age were recruited after fertility counseling with a reproductive specialist. They were assigned to either the control group (counseling only) or the intervention group (counseling followed by the additional use of the decision aid). Both groups had to complete a questionnaire after counseling as well as 1 and 12 months later, covering topics such as fertility-related knowledge, attitude towards fertility preservation, decisional conflict and regret. Recruitment was ongoing during 18 months in eight fertility centers located in Switzerland and Germany.

RESULTS

Mean age of participating women was 29.31 years (SD 4.57). Of the entire sample (n = 51) 53% were affected with breast cancer, 27.4% with lymphoma, and 19.6% with various other types of cancer. Knowledge regarding the most common fertility preservation methods was high and comparable in both groups. Positive attitude significantly exceeded negative attitude among all participants (p = 0.001). Although the altogether low scores for decisional regret were on a higher level in the control group (T2: mean = 19.00, SD = 13.24; T3: mean = 22.0, SD = 20.67) than in the intervention group (T2: mean = 14.12, SD = 11.07; T3: mean = 12.94, SD = 13.24), there were no statistically significant differences between and within both groups. There was a positive association between decisional conflict and decisional regret at T3 (p = 0.001, r = 0.510).

CONCLUSIONS

This decision aid was suitable as an additional source of knowledge and may positively impact decisional regret in the long term. Results suggest that the provision of an online decision aid as a complement to fertility counseling may facilitate decision-making.

Fertility considerations prior to conservative management of gynecologic cancers

Fertility-sparing management of early-stage gynecologic cancers is becoming more prevalent as increasing evidence demonstrates acceptable oncologic and reproductive outcomes in appropriately selected patients. However, in the absence of randomized controlled trials, most of the commonly used treatment algorithms are based only on observational studies. As women are increasingly postponing childbearing, the need for evidence-based guidance on the optimal selection of appropriate candidates for fertility-sparing therapies is paramount. It is imperative to seriously consider the fertility potential of a given individual prior to making major oncologic treatment decisions that may deviate from the accepted standard of care. It is a disservice to patients to undergo a fertility-sparing procedure in hopes of ultimately achieving a live birth, only to determine later they have poor baseline fertility potential or other substantial barriers to conception including excess financial toxicity. Many women with oncologic diagnoses are of advanced maternal age and their obstetric and neonatal risks must be considered. In the era of advanced assisted reproductive technologies, patients should be provided realistic expectations regarding success rates while understanding the potential oncologic perils. A multidisciplinary approach to the conservative treatment of early-stage gynecologic cancers with early referral to reproductive specialists as well as maternal-fetal medicine specialists is warranted. In this review, we discuss the recommended fertility evaluation for patients with newly diagnosed, early-stage gynecologic cancers who are considering fertility-sparing management.

Barriers and Facilitators to Fertility-Related Discussions with Teenagers and Young Adults with Cancer: Nurses' Experiences

Introduction: Improvements in cancer survival rates for teenagers and young adults (TYAs) have resulted in quality-of-life issues into survivorship becoming increasingly important. However, infertility is a potential late side effect of cancer treatment, which can negatively impact on quality of life. Advances in assisted reproductive technologies have resulted in increasingly effective fertility preservation (FP) options. Purpose: This study aimed to explore nurses' experiences of undertaking fertility-related discussions with TYAs with cancer aged 13-24 years. Methods: An interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach was used. Eleven purposively selected nurses working on a specialist TYA cancer unit participated in semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed using IPA. Results: Parents/family were experienced as self-appointed informal gatekeepers who were perceived to hold the power to control nurses' access to communicate with young people about fertility issues. Nurses adopted a supportive role, which was enhanced by the positive nature of their relationship with the TYA. Uncertainty was expressed over whether the TYA had been fully informed of their infertility risk and potential FP options. Conclusions: Nurses should manage parental involvement sensitively if TYAs are to make informed decisions regarding their future reproductive health. There is a need for clear role delineation in fertility discussions to ensure that TYAs are provided with the opportunity to discuss infertility risk and be referred to a specialist before initiating cancer treatment. Nurses should cultivate the primacy of the nurse-TYA relationship to improve fertility care. Further research into the factors that TYAs may consider beneficial within the nurse-patient relationship is required.

Satisfaction, disappointment and regret surrounding fertility preservation decisions in the paediatric and adolescent cancer population

PURPOSE

With over 80% of paediatric and adolescent cancer patients surviving into adulthood, quality-of-life issues such as future fertility are increasingly important. However, little is known about regret around decisions to pursue or forgo fertility preservation (FP). We investigated the risk of decision regret in families involved in making a FP decision and explored contributive factors.

METHODS

Parents and patients ≥ 15 years were invited to participate. Participants completed a 10-item survey, including a validated Decision Regret Scale. Scores ≥ 30 indicated high regret. Free-text response items allowed participants to provide reasons for satisfaction or regret.

RESULTS

A total of 108 parents and 30 patients participated. Most (81.4%) reported low regret (mean score 13.7). On multivariate analysis, predictors of low regret included having a FP procedure and a fertility discussion pre-treatment. Most participants believed that FP offers hope for future fertility. Some reported dissatisfaction with the process of decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Overall levels of regret in the study population were low, with factors associated with quality, timely discussion and belief in the success of FP technology being predictors of low regret. However, dissatisfaction with the decision-making process itself revealed that refinements to the programme are required to meet families' needs.

Fertility preservation in patients with hematologic malignancies and recipients of hematopoietic cell transplants

Patients with hematologic malignancies and those undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) face a complex set of challenges when considering options for fertility preservation (FP). There are no standard options for prepubertal children, and women with hematologic malignancies may not be eligible for standard FP options. Fortunately, initial therapies for most blood cancers are not highly gonadotoxic, affording an important opportunity for postremission counseling and referrals to fertility specialists. These patients face a high risk of relapse, and many will be referred for autologous or allogeneic HCT, which carries an extremely high risk of infertility. The expanding indications for HCT to include benign hematologic disorders as well as autoimmune diseases mandate that all hematologists are familiar with these risks. Oncofertility researchers are continually pushing the boundaries of what may be possible for our patients; in the meantime, communication and shared decision-making between hematologists and patients, as well as program-building, education, and outreach are essential to ensure that these patients, many of whom will be cured, maintain all of their options for a fulfilling life after intensive therapy.

Fertility-related experiences after breast cancer diagnosis in the Sister and Two Sister Studies

BACKGROUND

Commonly used chemotherapies can be toxic to the ovaries. To the authors' knowledge, the majority of studies evaluating receipt of fertility counseling for women in their reproductive years have been performed in specific settings, thereby limiting generalizability.

METHODS

A nationwide sample of US women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 45 years completed a survey assessing the prevalence of fertility counseling. Age-adjusted log-binomial regression was used to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% CIs for fertility counseling.

RESULTS

Among 432 survivors diagnosed between 2004 and 2011, 288 (67%) had not discussed the effects of treatment on fertility with a health care provider before or during treatment. Fertility discussion was associated with younger age (PR, 3.49 [95% CI, 2.66-4.58] for aged <35 years vs ≥40 years) and lower parity (PR, 1.81 [95% CI, 1.29-2.53] for parity 1 vs 2). Approximately 20% of respondents reported that they were interested in future fertility (87 of 432 respondents) at the time of their diagnosis, but not all of these individuals (66 of 87 respondents) received counseling regarding the impact of treatment on their fertility, and few (8 of 87 respondents) used fertility preservation strategies. Among 68 women with a fertility interest who provided reasons for not taking steps to preserve fertility, reasons cited included concern for an adverse impact on cancer treatment (56%), lack of knowledge (26%), decision to not have a child (24%), and cost (18%).

CONCLUSIONS

Across multiple treatment settings, the majority of women of reproductive age who are diagnosed with breast cancer did not discuss fertility with a health care provider or use fertility preservation strategies. Discussing the potential impact of cancer treatment on future fertility is an important aspect of patient education.

Utilization and Outcomes of Fertility Preservation Techniques in Women Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant

Iatrogenic menopause with consequent infertility is a major complication in reproductive-age women undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Recent guidelines recommend a discussion of the possibility of infertility and the options for fertility preservation as part of informed consent before initiation of any cancer-directed therapy, including HCT. Women age 15 to 49 years at the time of allogeneic HCT, between the years 2001 and 2017, were identified from the Mayo Clinic Rochester institutional HCT database. One hundred seventy-seven women were eligible, of whom 49 (28%) were excluded due to documented postmenopausal state or prior hysterectomy. The median age of the cohort was 31 years (range, 15 to 49 years) with median gravidity and parity being G1P1 (range, G0 to G8, P0 to P6). Fifty-four (42%) women were nulligravid at the time of HCT. Eighty-two percent underwent myeloablative conditioning (MAC), whereas 18% underwent reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC). Only 34 women (27%) had documented fertility counseling within 72 hours of diagnosis, and a total of 61 (48%) received fertility counseling prior to HCT. Thirty-eight women (30%) were referred to a reproductive endocrinologist, of whom 13 (10%) underwent assisted reproductive technologies (ART; nine oocyte cryopreservation, four embryo cryopreservation). Of these, nine procedures yielded successful cryopreserved tissue (two completed at outside institutions). The median time to completion of the seven successful ART procedures at Mayo Clinic was 13 days (range, 9 to 15 days). The remainder of women referred to reproductive endocrinology did not undergo ART due to disease severity (68%), financial barriers (20%), and/or low antral follicle count (12%). Ninety-three women (73%) received leuprolide for ovarian suppression prior to conditioning. Three (4%) of 75 women who underwent MAC and were alive >365 days after HCT had spontaneous menstrual recovery after HCT (median time, 14 months; range, 6 to 21 months), in comparison to 10 (50%) of 20 women who underwent RIC and were alive >365 days after HCT (P < .01) (median, 21.5 months; range, 5 to 83 months). In the latter cohort, there were two spontaneous pregnancies, occurring at 71 and 72 months after HCT, respectively. Oncofertility is an emerging field due to an increasing number of young cancer survivors. Herein, we document that even at a large tertiary HCT center, the rate of documented fertility counseling and reproductive endocrinology referrals was low and the rate of ART was even lower. Spontaneous menstrual recovery was rare but more likely in the setting of nonmalignant disease and RIC HCT. A concerted multidisciplinary effort is needed to understand parenthood goals and to explore the impact of HCT on decision making about fertility preservation and parenthood. These efforts could improve oncofertility referral, ART utilization, and reproductive outcomes.

[Epithelial ovarian cancer and fertility preservation: Article drafted from the French Guidelines in oncology entitled "Initial management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer" developed by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY under the aegis of CNGOF and endorsed by INCa]

OBJECTIVES

To study the methods and strategies of fertility preservation in young women with stage I epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in order to provide recommendations for clinical practice.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for english and french language articles, between 2005 and 2001, according to predefined search equations.

RESULTS

Young patients with stage IA EOC willing to conceive should be informed that conservative treatment (contralateral ovary and salpinx, uterus) is possible (GradeC), associated with a 6 % to 13 % recurrence risk (GradeC) on the remaining ovary. This conservative surgical treatment includes adnexectomy, peritoneal and lymph node staging for all subtypes, and additional endometrial curettage for endometriosis and mucinous subtypes (GradeC). In case of positive staging conservative treatment is not possible. In case of mucinous EOC with an infiltrative pattern, lymph node staging is not necessary. Multidisciplinary analysis (including oncologists and reproductive medicine specialists) of the risk-benefit balance for a conservative surgery is recommended and must rely on a complete final pathology report (GradeC). No recommendation on bilateral adnexectomy and uterine conservation to allow pregnancy using egg donation can be provided in case of low-grade stage IA EOC, in the absence of data. Bilateral adnexectomy and uterine conservation to allow pregnancy using egg donation can be offered in case of serous, mucinous or endometrioid high-grade FIGO stage IA or low-grade FIGO stage IC1 or IC2 EOC (GradeC). Preservation of the uterus and contralateral ovary and Fallopian tube can be discussed with a specialized rare ovarian tumors multidiciplinary staff in case of clear cell stage I EOC.

Knowledge and Beliefs About Oncofertility and Associations with Quality of Life Among Adolescent and Young Adult Survivors of Pediatric Cancer

PURPOSE

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors experience fertility and childrearing challenges in adulthood, but there is limited evidence on awareness, beliefs, and concerns about oncofertility in this population, needs for supportive resources, and associations with quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

Participants were 69 AYAs aged 12-25 who were diagnosed with cancer at age 18 years or younger and ≥1 year cancer free, recruited from childhood cancer clinical records and support organizations. Participants completed self-report assessment of oncofertility knowledge and beliefs, information needs, and measures of QoL. Analyses examined associations between oncofertility-related variables and QoL.

RESULTS

Knowledge and beliefs about oncofertility options were considerably low in the sample, and participants reported unmet oncofertility resource needs. In multivariable analyses, QoL was associated with beliefs valuing the importance of fertility in childhood cancer (β = 0.87, p = 0.01) and lower information needs (β = -1.19, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Infertility is a well-documented effect of childhood cancer treatment. Our findings indicate that clinical providers are a preferred source of information for AYA patients, and there is a need to address oncofertility concerns and challenges in this group. Research is needed to examine barriers to addressing fertility issues in childhood cancer treatment and ways to promote dialogue between providers and patients and their families.

Female cancer patients' perceptions of the fertility preservation decision-making process: An exploratory prospective study

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.

Threat of biographical disruption: the gendered construction and experience of infertility following cancer for women and men

BACKGROUND

Infertility is a major concern for people with cancer and their partners. There have been calls for further research on the gendered nature of psychosocial, emotional and identity concomitants of fertility post-cancer across women and men.

METHOD

The gendered construction and experience of infertility following cancer was examined through a survey of 693 women and 185 men, and in-depth one-to-one interviews with a subsample of survey respondents, 61 women and 17 men, purposively selected across cancer types and age groups. Thematic decomposition was used to examine the open ended survey responses and interviews. The chi square test for independence was used to test for group differences between women and men on closed survey items.

RESULTS

In the thematic decomposition, infertility was identified as providing a 'Threat of Biographical Disruption' which impacted on life course and identity, for both women and men. Subthemes identified were: 'Parenthood as central to adulthood'; 'Infertility as a threat to gender identity'; ' Unknown fertility status and delayed parenthood'; 'Feelings of loss and grief'; 'Absence of understanding and support'; 'Benefit finding and renegotiation of identity'. In the closed survey items, the majority of women and men agreed that they had always 'wanted to be a parent' and that 'parenthood was a more important life goal than a satisfying career'. 'It is hard to feel like a true adult until you have a child' and impact upon 'my feelings about myself as a man or a woman' was reported by both women and men, with significantly more women reporting 'I feel empty because of fertility issues'. Many participants agreed they 'could visualise a happy life without a child' and there is 'freedom without children'. Significantly more men than women reported that they had not discussed fertility with a health care professional.

CONCLUSION

The fear of infertility following cancer, or knowledge of compromised fertility, can have negative effects on identity and psychological wellbeing for both women and men, serving to create biographical disruption. Support from family, partners and health care professionals can facilitate renegotiation of identity and coping.

Need for information, honesty and respect: patient perspectives on health care professionals communication about cancer and fertility

BACKGROUND

Individuals affected by cancer report a need for information about fertility from health care professionals (HCPs), in order to inform decision making and alleviate anxiety. However, there is evidence that many health professionals do not engage in such discussions.

METHOD

A mixed method design was used to examine the construction and subjective experience of communication with health professionals about fertility in the context of cancer, from the perspective of patients. A survey was completed by 693 women and 185 men, across a range of cancer tumour types and age groups, and in-depth one-to-one interviews conducted with a purposively selected subsample of survey respondents, 61 women and 17 men. The chi square test for independence was used to test for group differences between women and men on closed survey items. Thematic analysis was used to examine the open ended survey responses and interviews.

RESULTS

Significantly more women (57%, n = 373) than men (46%, n = 80) (X2(2517) = 6.54, p = .011) reported that they had discussed fertility with a HCP since diagnosis of cancer. Satisfaction with the discussion was reported by 65% (n = 242) of women and 69% (n = 54) (ns) of men. This discussion was reported to have been initiated by the patient or their partner in 44% (n = 165) of women and 47% (n = 37) (ns) of men. In the interviews and open ended surveys three themes were identified: Feeling heard and informed about fertility after cancer: Positive experiences of HCP communication; "I was never given full disclosure": HCP silence or reticence about discussing fertility after cancer, including the sub-theme "Their primary concern is getting me cancer free": Constructions of absence of fertility communication by HCPs; and Confusion and lack of compassion: Unsatisfactory information provision about fertility and cancer.

CONCLUSION

Discussion with a HCP about fertility concerns, and satisfaction with the discussion, was associated with reports of lower patient distress, greater knowledge and understanding of the consequences of cancer on fertility, involvement in the decision making process about fertility preservation, and satisfaction with health care.

Comparison of fertility-sparing treatments in patients with early endometrial cancer and atypical complex hyperplasia: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

There are some fertility-sparing treatments in patients with early endometrial cancer (EEC) or atypical complex hyperplasia (ACH), and the objective is to compare them by evaluating the oncologic and reproductive outcomes.

METHODS

We searched the published literature using Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases up to January 3, 2017, with various combinations of keywords fertility-sparing treatments, progesterone, progestin, intrauterine devices, early endometrial cancer, and atypical complex hyperplasia. The primary endpoint is the complete response (CR) rate, and the secondary endpoints are the partial response (PR) rate, relapse rate (RR), pregnancy rate, and live birth rate.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies containing 1038 women with EEC or ACH were included for review and meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that women with EEC or ACH managed with progestin had a pooled CR rate of 71% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-77%). The pooled pregnancy outcomes showed that 34% of women taking progestin treatment for EEC or ACH became pregnant (95% CI: 30-38%); however, only 20% of them delivered live newborns. The pooled CR rate for women using intrauterine device (IUD) was 76% (95% CI: 67-83%), and pooled RR was 9% (95% CI: 5-17%). The pregnancy rate for women whom underwent IUD was 18% (95% CI: 7-37%), and 14% of them delivered live newborns. In patients using progestin plus IUD, the pooled CR rate was 87% (95% CI: 75-93%); among those patients, 40% became pregnant (95% CI: 20-63%), and 35% delivered live newborns. There is no publication bias for the CR rate.

CONCLUSION

For patients with EEC and ACH, treatments with progestin, with or without IUD, or IUD alone can reach good CR rate; however, the pregnancy outcomes might be worse in patients treated with IUD alone. Further randomized-controlled studies are warranted to find out a better solution.