1
|
Barral Y, Borrás A, Carrillo P, Agustí I, Peralta S, Casals G, Fàbregues F, Guimerà M, Corral JM, Calafell JM, Redondo M, Glickman A, Rovira M, Adamo B, Ricart E, Trullàs DM. Current status of fertility preservation in a Spanish tertiary public hospital: multidisciplinary approach and experience in over 1500 patients. Clin Transl Oncol 2024; 26:1129-1138. [PMID: 37872422 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-023-03330-2] [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: 07/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/03/2023] [Indexed: 10/25/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Currently, 15% of gynaecological and 9% of haematological malignancies are diagnosed before the age of 40. The increased survival rates of cancer patients who are candidates for gonadotoxic treatments, the delay in childbearing to older ages, and the optimization of in vitro fertilisation techniques have all contributed to an increased interest in fertility preservation (FP) treatments. This study reviews the experience of the Fertility Preservation Programme (FPP) of a tertiary public hospital with a multidisciplinary approach. METHODS This retrospective study included all the available (FP) treatments, performed in patients of childbearing age between 2006 and 2022. RESULTS 1556 patients were referred to the FPP: 332 oocyte vitrification cycles, 115 ovarian cortex cryopreservation with 11 orthotopic autotransplantations, 175 gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist treatments, 109 fertility-sparing treatments for gynaecological cancer, and 576 sperm cryopreservation were performed. Malignancy was the main indication for FP (the main indications being breast cancer in women and haematological malignancies in men), although non-oncological pathologies, such as endometriosis and autoimmune diseases, have increased in recent years. Currently, the most widely used FP technique is oocyte vitrification, the increase of which has been associated with a decrease in the use of cortex CP and GnRH agonists. CONCLUSIONS The increase in FP treatment reflects the implementation of reproductive counselling in oncology programmes. A multidisciplinary approach in a tertiary public hospital allows individualised FP treatment for each patient. In recent years, there has been a change in trend with the introduction of new indications for FP and a change in techniques due to their optimisation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasmina Barral
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Aina Borrás
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Pilar Carrillo
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Inés Agustí
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sara Peralta
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Gemma Casals
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Francesc Fàbregues
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marta Guimerà
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Juan Manuel Corral
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Josep Maria Calafell
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Miriam Redondo
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ariel Glickman
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Montserrat Rovira
- Department of Hematology, Clinical Institute of Hematological and Oncological Diseases, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Bárbara Adamo
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clínic, Clinical Institute of Hematological and Oncological Diseases, Barcelona, Spain
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Elena Ricart
- Gastroenterology Department, Clinical Institute of Digestive and Metabolic Diseases, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Dolors Manau Trullàs
- Assisted Reproduction Unit, Clinical Institute of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain.
- August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sauerbrun-Cutler MT, Rollo A, Gadson A, Eaton JL. The Status of Fertility Preservation (FP) Insurance Mandates and Their Impact on Utilization and Access to Care. J Clin Med 2024; 13:1072. [PMID: 38398385 PMCID: PMC10889224 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13041072] [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: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 02/08/2024] [Accepted: 02/09/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Fertility preservation (FP) is the use of a specific medical intervention to protect the fertility of individuals whose disease or disease treatment may lead to infertility. These medical interventions include the cryopreservation of oocytes, embryos, ovarian tissue, sperm, and testicular tissue; oocyte and embryo cryopreservation are the most widely used interventions in the United States. Although guidelines recommend FP prior to undergoing gonadotoxic treatments, cost barriers are high. For example, the average cost of an oocyte cryopreservation cycle in the United States exceeds $10,000. High cost and lack of insurance coverage are two of the most cited reasons explaining the low Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (REI) referral rates and limited FP utilization. Broadening insurance mandates for FP prior to gonadotoxic treatments could improve utilization and provide cancer survivors with improved quality of life post treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- May-Tal Sauerbrun-Cutler
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants Hospital and Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI 02903, USA;
| | - Allegra Rollo
- The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI 02903, USA;
| | - Alexis Gadson
- Shady Grove Fertility Center, Rockville, MD 20850, USA;
| | - Jennifer L. Eaton
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants Hospital and Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI 02903, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Landay SL, Burns JA, Bickle ML, Baltich Nelson B, Nipp RD. Fertility preservation in reproductive-aged female patients with colorectal cancer: a scoping review. Support Care Cancer 2023; 31:612. [PMID: 37796328 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08081-y] [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: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 09/26/2023] [Indexed: 10/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in adults younger than 50 years is steadily increasing in the USA, and treatment for CRC can impact future fertility. However, fertility decision-making in female patients with CRC can be complex, with fertility preservation (FP) counseling occurring inconsistently. PURPOSE The goal of this scoping review was to assess the literature regarding the frequency and quality of fertility preservation (FP) discussions taking place among oncology clinicians and their reproductive-age female patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) in order to identify existing gaps in care and inform future research, interventions, or potential changes in practice. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the Ovid Medline, PsycInfo, and Scopus databases in order to identify studies pertaining to FP counseling in reproductive-age female patients with CRC. We used Covidence to screen studies for relevance and to extract data. Findings of interest included rate of fertility and/or FP discussions, patient characteristics associated with fertility discussions, initiators of discussions, rate of referrals to fertility specialists, patient utilization of FP services, and unmet fertility needs. We performed both quantitative and qualitative data synthesis. RESULTS We identified five studies that met our inclusion criteria, all published between 2007 and 2022. Frequency of fertility counseling discussions was low across studies, with a range of 15 to 52.5% of female patients with CRC receiving counseling. Patient characteristics which may be associated with likelihood of fertility discussion included age, parity, number of children, cancer location and stage, treatment type, and quality of life. The literature suggested that fertility discussions were initiated by clinicians about two-thirds of the time, and medical oncologists were the clinicians most likely to initiate. Studies did capture unmet fertility-related patient needs; participants who did not receive counseling often expressed desire for these discussions and regret that they did not occur. CONCLUSION Despite increasing incidence of CRC in patients at younger ages, this scoping review found a dearth of research conducted on young female CRC patients' experiences with fertility counseling and referrals. Notably, the existing research reveals that relatively few of these patients are receiving appropriate counseling. Additional research is needed to clarify current FP counseling practices, patient and clinician perceptions about FP, and ways to improve the quantity and quality of FP counseling in this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia L Landay
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Jamie A Burns
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lenox Hill Hospital-Northwell Health, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New York, NY, USA
| | - Madison L Bickle
- OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | | | - Ryan D Nipp
- OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Meernik C, Engel SM, Wardell A, Baggett CD, Gupta P, Rodriguez-Ormaza N, Luke B, Baker VL, Wantman E, Rauh-Hain JA, Mersereau JE, Olshan AF, Smitherman AB, Cai J, Nichols HB. Disparities in fertility preservation use among adolescent and young adult women with cancer. J Cancer Surviv 2023; 17:1435-1444. [PMID: 35169982 PMCID: PMC9378772 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-022-01187-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2021] [Accepted: 02/08/2022] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Women face multiple barriers to fertility preservation after cancer diagnosis, but few studies have examined disparities in use of these services. METHODS Women aged 15-39 years diagnosed with cancer during 2004-2015 were identified from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System. Women who cryopreserved oocytes or embryos for fertility preservation (n = 96) were compared to women who received gonadotoxic treatment but did not use fertility preservation (n = 7964). Conditional logistic and log-binomial regression were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) or prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS Few adolescent and young adult women with cancer in our study (1.2%) used fertility preservation. In multivariable regression, women less likely to use fertility preservation were older at diagnosis (ages 25-29 vs. 35-39: OR = 6.27, 95% CI: 3.35, 11.73); non-Hispanic Black (vs. non-Hispanic White: PR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.79); and parous at diagnosis (vs. nulliparous: PR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45); or lived in census tracts that were non-urban (vs. urban: PR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.37) or of lower socioeconomic status (quintiles 1-3 vs. quintiles 4 and 5: PR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.61). CONCLUSIONS Women with cancer who were older, non-Hispanic Black, parous, or living in areas that were non-urban or of lower socioeconomic position were less likely to use fertility preservation. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS Clinical and policy interventions are needed to ensure equitable access to fertility services among women facing cancer treatment-related infertility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clare Meernik
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
| | - Stephanie M Engel
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Ally Wardell
- Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Christopher D Baggett
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Parul Gupta
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Nidia Rodriguez-Ormaza
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Barbara Luke
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Valerie L Baker
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jennifer E Mersereau
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Andrew F Olshan
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Andrew B Smitherman
- Department of Pediatrics and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Jianwen Cai
- Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Hazel B Nichols
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sauerbrun-Cutler MT, Pandya S, Recabo O, Raker C, Clark MA, Robison K. Survey of young women with breast cancer to identify rates of fertility preservation (FP) discussion and barriers to FP care. J Assist Reprod Genet 2023:10.1007/s10815-023-02850-8. [PMID: 37329421 PMCID: PMC10371949 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02850-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 06/01/2023] [Indexed: 06/19/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify the proportion of reproductive age women with breast cancer that engaged in a fertility preservation discussion and reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) consultation. METHODS This cross-sectional survey recruited women 18-42 years who were diagnosed with breast cancer from 2006 to 2016 by phone or email and asked them to complete an online survey. Demographic characteristics, barriers to FP, utilization of FP consultation, and FP procedures (oocyte and embryo cryopreservation) were analyzed. RESULTS A majority of women (64%) did not have FP discussed by any provider. Older women and those who were parents at the time of diagnosis were less likely to engage in a FP discussion. However, there were no significant differences in partner status or cancer stage between women with or without FP discussions. Of the women who desired future children prior to the cancer diagnosis, 93% received chemotherapy; however, only 34% of these women had a consultation with an REI. The most common reasons for declining FP consultation were already having their desired number of children (41%), financial barriers (14%), and concern about delaying cancer treatment and cancer recurrence (12%). Forty percent of women who desired future children and met with an REI pursued FP procedures. CONCLUSION Younger women were more likely to receive FP counseling. FP consultations and procedures were low even in women who desired future fertility, with the predominant barriers being cost, fears concerning a delay in cancer treatment, and future cancer recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- May-Tal Sauerbrun-Cutler
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, 90 Plain Street, Providence, RI, 02905, USA.
| | | | - Olivia Recabo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA
| | - Christina Raker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Melissa A Clark
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
- Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Katina Robison
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Banwait DK, Arora PR, Mahajan A, Dinand V, Jain S, Kalra M, Chandra J, Arora RS. Barriers to Accessing Fertility Preservation in Adolescents with Hodgkin Lymphoma in India. Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2023; 41:163-168. [PMID: 37264813 DOI: 10.1080/08880018.2023.2218444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2022] [Accepted: 05/21/2023] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Amita Mahajan
- Department of Pediatric Oncology, Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Veronique Dinand
- Palliative and Supportive Care Unit, Bai Jerbai Wadia Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - Sandeep Jain
- Department of Pediatric Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute, New Delhi, India
| | - Manas Kalra
- Pediatric Hematology, Oncology BMT Unit, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Jagdish Chandra
- Department of Pediatrics, PGIMSR and ESIC Model Hospital, Basaidarapur, New Delhi, India
| | - Ramandeep Singh Arora
- Max Institute of Cancer Care, Max Super Speciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi, India
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Han E, Seifer DB. Oocyte Cryopreservation for Medical and Planned Indications: A Practical Guide and Overview. J Clin Med 2023; 12:jcm12103542. [PMID: 37240648 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12103542] [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: 03/28/2023] [Revised: 05/13/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Oocyte cryopreservation (OC) is the process in which ovarian follicles are stimulated, the follicular fluid is retrieved, and mature oocytes are isolated and vitrified. Since the first successful pregnancy utilizing previously cryopreserved oocytes in 1986, OC has become increasingly utilized as an option for future biologic children in patients facing gonadotoxic therapies, such as for the treatment of cancer. Planned OC, also termed elective OC, is growing in popularity as a means to circumvent age-related fertility decline. In this narrative review, we describe both medically indicated and planned OC, focusing on the physiology of ovarian follicular loss, OC technique and risks, timing of when OC should be performed, associated financial considerations, and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric Han
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, USA
| | - David B Seifer
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Lambertini M, Arecco L, Woodard TL, Messelt A, Rojas KE. Advances in the Management of Menopausal Symptoms, Fertility Preservation, and Bone Health for Women With Breast Cancer on Endocrine Therapy. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2023; 43:e390442. [PMID: 37229618 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_390442] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
In patients with hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer, adjuvant endocrine treatment administered for up to 5-10 years after diagnosis significantly reduces the risk of recurrence and death. However, this benefit comes with the cost of short- and long-term side effects that may negatively affect patients' quality of life (QoL) and treatment adherence. Among them, the prolonged estrogen suppression associated with the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women can induce life-altering menopausal symptoms, including sexual dysfunction. Moreover, a decrease in bone mineral density and an increased risk of fractures should be carefully considered and prevented whenever indicated. For young women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer with unfulfilled childbearing plans, several challenges should be addressed to manage their fertility and pregnancy-related concerns. Proper counseling and proactive management of these issues are critical components of survivorship and should be pursued from diagnosis through the breast cancer care continuum. This study aims to provide an updated overview of the available approaches for improving the QoL of patients with breast cancer receiving estrogen deprivation therapy, focusing on advances in the management of menopausal symptoms, including sexual dysfunction, fertility preservation, and bone health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matteo Lambertini
- Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (DiMI), School of Medicine, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
- Department of Medical Oncology, U.O.C. Clinica di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Luca Arecco
- Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (DiMI), School of Medicine, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
- Department of Medical Oncology, U.O.C. Clinica di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Terri Lynn Woodard
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - Audrey Messelt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - Kristin E Rojas
- Dewitt Daughtry Family Department of Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL
- Menopause, Urogenital, Sexual Health, and Intimacy (MUSIC) Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Cavestro GM, Mannucci A, Balaguer F, Hampel H, Kupfer SS, Repici A, Sartore-Bianchi A, Seppälä TT, Valentini V, Boland CR, Brand RE, Buffart TE, Burke CA, Caccialanza R, Cannizzaro R, Cascinu S, Cercek A, Crosbie EJ, Danese S, Dekker E, Daca-Alvarez M, Deni F, Dominguez-Valentin M, Eng C, Goel A, Guillem JG, Houwen BBSL, Kahi C, Kalady MF, Kastrinos F, Kühn F, Laghi L, Latchford A, Liska D, Lynch P, Malesci A, Mauri G, Meldolesi E, Møller P, Monahan KJ, Möslein G, Murphy CC, Nass K, Ng K, Oliani C, Papaleo E, Patel SG, Puzzono M, Remo A, Ricciardiello L, Ripamonti CI, Siena S, Singh SK, Stadler ZK, Stanich PP, Syngal S, Turi S, Urso ED, Valle L, Vanni VS, Vilar E, Vitellaro M, You YQN, Yurgelun MB, Zuppardo RA, Stoffel EM. Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21:581-603.e33. [PMID: 36549470 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Revised: 12/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC. METHODS After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%. RESULTS The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients. CONCLUSIONS The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Martina Cavestro
- Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
| | - Alessandro Mannucci
- Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesc Balaguer
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Heather Hampel
- Department of Medical Oncology & Therapeutics Research, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Sonia S Kupfer
- Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Alessandro Repici
- Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Humanitas University, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Andrea Sartore-Bianchi
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, and Department of Hematology Oncology, and Molecular Medicine, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Toni T Seppälä
- Faculty of Medicine and Medical Technology, University of Tampere and TAYS Cancer Centre, Arvo Ylpön katu, Tampere, Finland; Unit of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Elämänaukio, Tampere, Finland; Applied Tumor Genomics Research Program and Department of Surgery, Helsinki University and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Hematology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Clement Richard Boland
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California
| | - Randall E Brand
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Tineke E Buffart
- Department of Medical Oncology. Amsterdam UMC, Location de Boelelaan, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carol A Burke
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Riccardo Caccialanza
- Clinical Nutrition and Dietetics Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy
| | - Renato Cannizzaro
- SOC Gastroenterologia Oncologica e Sperimentale Centro di Riferimento Oncologico di Aviano (CRO) IRCCS 33081, Aviano, Italy
| | - Stefano Cascinu
- Oncology Department, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Cercek
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Emma J Crosbie
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom; Division of Gynaecology, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Silvio Danese
- Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maria Daca-Alvarez
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Francesco Deni
- Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Mev Dominguez-Valentin
- Department of Tumor Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Cathy Eng
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Ajay Goel
- Department of Molecular Diagnostics & Experimental Therapeutics, Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California
| | - Josè G Guillem
- Department of Surgery and Lineberger Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Britt B S L Houwen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Charles Kahi
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Matthew F Kalady
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Fay Kastrinos
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York
| | - Florian Kühn
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Luigi Laghi
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, and Laboratory of Molecular Gastroenterology, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano-Milan, Italy
| | - Andrew Latchford
- Lynch Syndrome Clinic, Centre for Familial Intestinal Cancer, St Mark's Hospital, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Harrow, United Kingdom
| | - David Liska
- Department of Colorectal Surgery and Edward J. DeBartolo Jr Family Center for Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Patrick Lynch
- Department of Gastroenterology, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Alberto Malesci
- Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Gianluca Mauri
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, and Department of Hematology Oncology, and Molecular Medicine, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy; IFOM ETS - The AIRC Institute of Molecular Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Elisa Meldolesi
- Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Hematology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Pål Møller
- Department of Tumor Biology, Institute of Cancer Research, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Kevin J Monahan
- Lynch Syndrome Clinic, Centre for Familial Intestinal Cancer, St Mark's Hospital, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Harrow, United Kingdom; Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gabriela Möslein
- Surgical Center for Hereditary Tumors, Ev. BETHESDA Khs. Duisburg, Academic Hospital University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Caitlin C Murphy
- School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas
| | - Karlijn Nass
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kimmie Ng
- Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Cristina Oliani
- Medical Oncology, AULSS 5 Polesana, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Rovigo, Italy
| | - Enrico Papaleo
- Centro Scienze della Natalità, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Swati G Patel
- University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center and Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Marta Puzzono
- Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Remo
- Pathology Unit, Mater Salutis Hospital, ULSS9, Legnago, Verona, Italy
| | - Luigi Ricciardiello
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Universita degli Studi di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Carla Ida Ripamonti
- Department of Onco-Haematology, Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Salvatore Siena
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, and Department of Hematology Oncology, and Molecular Medicine, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Satish K Singh
- Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, VA Boston Healthcare System and Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Zsofia K Stadler
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Peter P Stanich
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Sapna Syngal
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Stefano Turi
- Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Emanuele Damiano Urso
- Chirurgia Generale 3, Department of Surgical, Oncological and Gastroenterological Sciences (DiSCOG), University Hospital of Padova, Padova, Italy
| | - Laura Valle
- Hereditary Cancer Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Oncobell Program, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Center (IDIBELL), Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Cáncer (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain
| | - Valeria Stella Vanni
- Centro Scienze della Natalità, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Eduardo Vilar
- Department of Clinical Cancer Prevention, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Marco Vitellaro
- Unit of Hereditary Digestive Tract Tumours, Department of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Yi-Qian Nancy You
- Department of Colon & Rectal Surgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Matthew B Yurgelun
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Raffaella Alessia Zuppardo
- Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Elena M Stoffel
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine and Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Meernik C, Jorgensen K, Wu CF, Murphy CC, Baker VL, Brady PC, Nitecki R, Nichols HB, Rauh-Hain JA. Disparities in the use of assisted reproductive technologies after breast cancer: a population-based study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2023; 198:149-158. [PMID: 36607486 PMCID: PMC10184512 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-022-06857-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Accepted: 12/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Equitable access to oncofertility services is a key component of cancer survivorship care, but factors affecting access and use remain understudied. METHODS To describe disparities in assisted reproductive technology (ART) use among women with breast cancer in California, we conducted a population-based cohort study using linked oncology, ART, and demographic data. We identified women age 18-45 years diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2000 and 2015. The primary outcome was ART use-including oocyte/embryo cryopreservation or embryo transfer-after cancer diagnosis. We used log-binomial regression to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to identify factors associated with ART use. RESULTS Among 36,468 women with invasive breast cancer, 206 (0.56%) used ART. Women significantly less likely to use ART were age 36-45 years at diagnosis (vs. 18-35 years: PR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.13-0.22); non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic (vs. non-Hispanic White: PR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.21-0.46); had at least one child (vs. no children: adjusted PR [aPR] = 0.39, 95% CI 0.25-0.60); or lived in non-urban areas (vs. urban: aPR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.75), whereas women more likely to use ART lived in high-SES areas (vs. low-/middle-SES areas: aPR = 2.93, 95% CI 2.04-4.20) or had private insurance (vs. public/other insurance: aPR = 2.95, 95% CI 1.59-5.49). CONCLUSION Women with breast cancer who are socially or economically disadvantaged, or who already had a child, are substantially less likely to use ART after diagnosis. The implementation of policies or programs targeting more equitable access to fertility services for women with cancer is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clare Meernik
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Kirsten Jorgensen
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Chi-Fang Wu
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Caitlin C Murphy
- Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Valerie L Baker
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Paula C Brady
- Columbia University Fertility Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Roni Nitecki
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Hazel B Nichols
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - J Alejandro Rauh-Hain
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Voigt P, Persily J, Blakemore JK, Licciardi F, Thakker S, Najari B. Sociodemographic differences in utilization of fertility services among reproductive age women diagnosed with cancer in the USA. J Assist Reprod Genet 2022; 39:963-972. [PMID: 35316438 PMCID: PMC9051007 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-022-02455-7] [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: 12/28/2021] [Accepted: 03/04/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine whether sociodemographic differences exist among female patients accessing fertility services post-cancer diagnosis in a representative sample of the United States population. METHODS All women ages 15-45 with a history of cancer who responded to the National Survey for Family Growth (NSFG) from 2011 to 2017 were included. The population was then stratified into 2 groups, defined as those who did and did not seek infertility services. The demographic characteristics of age, legal marital status, education, race, religion, insurance status, access to healthcare, and self-perceived health were compared between the two groups. The primary outcome measure was the utilization of fertility services. The complex sample analysis using the provided sample weights required by the NSFG survey design was used. RESULTS Five hundred forty-five women reported a history of cancer and were included in this study. Forty-three (7.89%) pursued fertility services after their cancer diagnosis. Using the NSFG sample weights, this equates to a population of 161,500.7 female cancer survivors in the USA who did utilize fertility services and 1,811,955.3 women who did not. Using multivariable analysis, household income, marital status, and race were significantly associated with women utilizing fertility services following a cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS In this nationally representative cohort of reproductive age women diagnosed with cancer, there are marital, socioeconomic, and racial differences between those who utilized fertility services and those who did not. This difference did not appear to be due to insurance coverage, access to healthcare, or perceived health status.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paxton Voigt
- NYU Grossman School of Medicine, NY, New York, USA.
| | - Jesse Persily
- NYU Langone Department of Urology, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | - Bobby Najari
- NYU Langone Department of Urology, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Eng C, Jácome AA, Agarwal R, Hayat MH, Byndloss MX, Holowatyj AN, Bailey C, Lieu CH. A comprehensive framework for early-onset colorectal cancer research. Lancet Oncol 2022; 23:e116-e128. [PMID: 35090673 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00588-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2021] [Revised: 10/04/2021] [Accepted: 10/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Sporadic colorectal cancer has traditionally been viewed as a malignancy of older individuals. However, as the global prevalence of the disease diagnosed in younger individuals (<50 years) is expected to increase within the next decade, greater recognition is now being given to early-onset colorectal cancer. The cause of the predicted rise in prevalence is largely unknown and probably multifactorial. In this Series paper, we discuss the potential underlying causes of early-onset colorectal cancer, the role of energy balance, biological and genomic mechanisms (including microbiome aspects), and the treatment of early-onset colorectal cancer. We have specifically considered the psychosocial challenges of being diagnosed with colorectal cancer at younger age and the potential financial toxicity that might ensue. This Series paper brings a comprehensive review based on the existing data in the hopes of optimising the overall outcomes for patients with early-onset colorectal cancer.
Collapse
|
13
|
Nie Z, Zhang L, Chen W, Zhang Y, Wang W, Hua R, Zhang T, Zhao C, Gong M, Wu H. The protective effects of resveratrol pretreatment in cyclophosphamide-induced rat ovarian injury: an vivo study. Gynecol Endocrinol 2021; 37:914-919. [PMID: 33594937 DOI: 10.1080/09513590.2021.1885643] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To explore whether resveratrol (Res) pretreatment could exert a protective effect on cyclophosphamide (Cy) induced ovarian toxicity in a rat model. METHODS Twenty-four female 7-week old Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into four groups: Con, administered with vehicle solutions; Cy, treated with Cy; Res + Cy, treated with Cy + Res combined; Res, treated with Res. After 21 d of treatments, the rats were euthanized and blood samples were collected to evaluate the levels of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). The Ovaries were processed for immunohistochemical and western blotting. RESULTS Cy-treat caused the decrease of body weights and ovarian weight. AMH was lower in Cy group, whereas AMH levels were similar among other groups. Histomorphology showed a large number of primordial follicles were activated in Cy groups, whereas the primordial follicles were inhibited in the Res and Res + Cy groups. The expressions of Sirt1, Foxo3a were up-regulated and p53, Caspase-3, and Bax were down-regulated in Res + Cy and Res groups (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS Res can prevent the primordial follicle activation and decrease apoptosis induced by Cy. Res may be an effective protection for ovarian function during chemotherapy, which means a new nonsurgical application for protection of ovarian reserve.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhaoyan Nie
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Lei Zhang
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Wei Chen
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Yanan Zhang
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Wei Wang
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Rui Hua
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Tiantian Zhang
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Chunfang Zhao
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Miao Gong
- Department of Histology and Embryology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| | - Haifeng Wu
- Department of Medical Laboratory, Hebei Chest Hospital, Shijiazhuang, PR China
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Fertility-Sparing Treatment for Early-Stage Cervical, Ovarian, and Endometrial Malignancies. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 136:1157-1169. [PMID: 33156194 DOI: 10.1097/aog.0000000000004163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Approximately 20% of gynecologic malignancies are diagnosed in reproductive-aged women, and standard-of-care surgical treatment often precludes future fertility. In early-stage disease, shared decision making about fertility-sparing medical and surgical approaches may give well-selected patients the opportunity to pursue their family-building goals without compromising long-term survival. Although future fertility is an important consideration for young women with cancer, rates of fertility-sparing procedures remain low. Moreover, because data on pregnancy rates and outcomes after fertility-sparing treatments are limited, it is challenging to counsel patients on realistic expectations. This review examines the critical oncologic outcomes of fertility-sparing approaches in early-stage gynecologic malignancies and highlights pregnancy outcomes in this population.
Collapse
|
15
|
Equal opportunity for all? An analysis of race and ethnicity in fertility preservation in New York City. J Assist Reprod Genet 2020; 37:3095-3102. [PMID: 33085025 PMCID: PMC7576106 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01980-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To compare the racial and ethnic make-up of patients who accessed medically indicated fertility preservation services (MIFP) against the overall racial diversity (including Hispanic origin) across women of reproductive age diagnosed with cancer in New York City (NYC). Methods All patients who completed at least one MIFP between January 2017 and December 2018 were reviewed. Race was self-reported. A calculation of the expected racial distribution across women of reproductive age with cancer in NYC was determined using the most recent NYC census data. Statistical analysis included chi-square goodness of fit and test for independence and Kruskal-Wallis H test, with p < 0.05 considered significant. Results A total of 107 patients who accessed MIFP were included. A total of 55 (51.4%) identified as White, 3 (2.8%) as Black, 13 (12.2%) as Asian, 6 (5.6%) as Hispanic, 3 (2.8%) as other, and 27 (25.2%) did not report. A total of 78.5% of patients had insurance. There was no significant difference in racial distribution by cancer type (p = 0.255). A subgroup analysis excluding the BRCA+ patients and races not reported by the census (n = 69) was then performed, showing a statistically significant difference between observed (O) and expected (E) cases of fertility preservation (FP) by race at our center—White 47O/32E, Black 3O/15E, Asian 13O/7E, and Hispanic 6O/15E (p < 0.001). A statistically significant difference in racial distribution by FP type was observed. Conclusions There is a difference in the observed vs expected racial distribution of patients accessing MIFP. Further studies are needed to identify modifiable factors to better ensure equal opportunity to all patients.
Collapse
|
16
|
Carpinello O, Aserlind A, Chang F, Sagoskin A, Widra E. Fertility preservation in an oncology patient who presented with positive human chorionic gonadotropin. F S Rep 2020; 1:51-53. [PMID: 34223213 PMCID: PMC8244282 DOI: 10.1016/j.xfre.2020.04.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Revised: 04/28/2020] [Accepted: 04/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To report the case of a woman who presented for fertility preservation before breast cancer treatment who was found to be pregnant with an undesired pregnancy. Design Case report. Setting Single infertility practice. Patient A 28-year-old woman with a new diagnosis of grade 3 invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast was planning to undergo oocyte cryopreservation and was found to be pregnant with an undesired pregnancy. She underwent a medical termination at a gestational age of 5 weeks 4 days. Neither the patient nor her oncology team wished to delay treatment more than was necessary. The physician and patient decided to initiate controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) before her human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) returned to normal. Intervention(s) COH in the setting of a positive quantitative hCG. Main Outcome Measure(s) Number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes cryopreserved; doses of Gonal-F and Menopur; serum E2, follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, hCG levels. Result(s) COH began 7 days after passing the products of conception. Baseline labs demonstrated hCG at 222 mIU/mL, follicle-stimulating hormone at <0.10 mIU/mL, luteinizing hormone at <1.10 mIU/mL, and E2 at 147 pg/mL. She was started on an antagonist protocol with the use of 150 IU Gonal F and 75 IU Menopur. She was triggered on stimulation day 14 with 5,000 U hCG, and her peak E2 was 5,924 pg/mL. She ultimately had 18 oocytes retrieved, 12 of which were MII, one MI, and five germinal vesicle. All were vitrified. Conclusion(s) COH can be achieved in the setting of low positive hCG levels with subsequent successful oocyte maturation. The threshold for hCG trigger to be ineffective in the setting of a positive hCG has yet to be determined.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olivia Carpinello
- Program in Reproductive Endocrinology and Gynecology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, Maryland
- Reprint requests: Olivia Carpinello, M.D., National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, 38 Maryland Ave., Unit 225, Rockville, M.D. 20850.
| | | | | | | | - Eric Widra
- Shady Grove Fertility, Rockville, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Taylan E, Oktay K. Fertility preservation in gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 155:522-529. [PMID: 31604663 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.09.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2019] [Revised: 09/03/2019] [Accepted: 09/09/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
An increasing number of women in modern societies are delaying childbearing beyond the age of 35, and gynecologic cancers affect a significant proportion of reproductive age women who wish to preserve fertility for a future chance of childbearing. As a result, providing treatment options for fertility preservation in women with gynecologic cancer has become a crucial component of cancer survivorship care. In this review article, we discussed the current knowledge on fertility-sparing surgical approaches, as well as assisted reproductive technologies that can be utilized to preserve reproductive potential in women with cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancer. A brief section on fertility preservation in pediatric gynecologic malignancies is also provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enes Taylan
- Women's Cancer Program at Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Laboratory of Molecular Reproduction and Fertility Preservation, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
| | - Kutluk Oktay
- Laboratory of Molecular Reproduction and Fertility Preservation, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; Innovation Institute for Fertility Preservation and IVF, New York, NY, USA; Ovarian Transplantation Program, NYU Winthrop Hospital, Mineola, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|