Assisted reproductive technology use and outcomes among women with a history of cancer

Patient Location and Disparities in Access to Fertility Preservation for Women With Gynecologic or Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of geographic factors on fertility-sparing treatment or assisted reproductive technology (ART) utilization among women with gynecologic or breast cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of reproductive-aged patients (18-45 years) with early-stage cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer or stage I-III breast cancer diagnosed between January 2000 and December 2015 using linked data from the California Cancer Registry, the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Generalized linear mixed models were used to evaluate associations between distance from fertility and gynecologic oncology clinics, as well as California Healthy Places Index score (a Census-level composite community health score), and ART or fertility-sparing treatment receipt.

RESULTS

We identified 7,612 women with gynecologic cancer and 35,992 women with breast cancer. Among all patients, 257 (0.6%) underwent ART. Among patients with gynecologic cancer, 1,676 (22.0%) underwent fertility-sparing treatment. Stratified by quartiles, residents who lived at increasing distances from gynecologic oncology or fertility clinics had decreased odds of undergoing fertility-sparing treatment (gynecologic oncology clinics: Q2, odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% CI, 0.63-0.93, P =.007; Q4, OR 0.72, 95% CI, 0.56-0.94, P =.016) (fertility clinics: Q3, OR 0.79, 95% CI, 0.65-0.97, P =.025; Q4, OR 0.67, 95% CI, 0.52-0.88, P =.004), whereas this relationship was not observed among women who resided within other quartiles (gynecologic oncology clinics: Q3, OR 0.81 95% CI, 0.65-1.01, P =.07; fertility clinics: Q2, OR 0.87 95% CI, 0.73-1.05, P =.15). Individuals who lived in communities with the highest (51 st -100 th percentile) California Healthy Places Index scores had greater odds of undergoing fertility-sparing treatment (OR 1.29, 95% CI, 1.06-1.57, P =.01; OR 1.66, 95% CI, 1.35-2.04, P =.001, respectively). The relationship between California Healthy Places Index scores and ART was even more pronounced (Q2 OR 1.9, 95% CI, 0.99-3.64, P =.05; Q3 OR 2.86, 95% CI, 1.54-5.33, P <.001; Q4 OR 3.41, 95% CI, 1.83-6.35, P <.001).

CONCLUSION

Geographic disparities affect fertility-sparing treatment and ART rates among women with gynecologic or breast cancer. By acknowledging geographic factors, health care systems can ensure equitable access to fertility-preservation services.

Changing the Perspective on Fertility Preservation for Women with Metastatic or Advanced Stage Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this Perspective we share the personal story of a 33-year-old patient diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer and her journey through fertility preservation, surrogacy, and eventually motherhood, highlighting misconceptions about fertility preservation in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are nearly 1 million women under the age of 50 diagnosed and living with cancer in the USA. These patients are met with life-altering decisions, including those that may limit their reproductive ability. While there have been tremendous advances and advocacy in the field of oncofertility, there has been limited focus on patients with advanced stage or metastatic cancer. We describe five key misconceptions surrounding fertility preservation in patients with advanced stage cancer, offering a review of the literature and our approach to challenging topics like desiring fertility preservation in the face of Stage 4 disease, the safety and timing of ovarian stimulation during cancer treatment, and passing away following fertility preservation. We review the importance of assessing perceptions of fertility preservation in patients with metastatic cancer and highlight the lack of research in this area as a call to action.

The potent paracrine effect of umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells mediates mitochondrial quality control to restore chemotherapy-induced damage in ovarian granulosa cells

The basic principle of chemotherapy is to attack cells with fast growth, and cancer cells are targeted by anticancer drugs because they have a faster growth rate than normal cells. High doses of anticancer drugs may cause an irreversible decline in reproductive capacity, and novel approaches for fertility preservation and/or restoration after anticancer treatment are urgently needed. Here, we provide important insights into the recovery of human reproductive cells damaged by chemotherapy. We performed a detailed screening of the cytokines of various human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) to select superior MSCs. Also, we analyzed the Ovarian granulosa cell (OGC)-)-specific functions for restoring function, apoptosis, and mitochondrial functions to confirm the recovery mechanism in damaged OGCs. As a result, we demonstrated that conditioned media (CM) of Umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UC-MSCs) could restore the functions of damaged OGCs primarily through antiapoptotic and antioxidant effects. Furthermore, CM changed the phenotype of damaged OGCs to an energetic status by restoring mitochondrial function and enhanced the mitochondrial metabolic activity decreased by chemotherapy. Finally, we demonstrated that the restoration of mitochondrial function in damaged OGCs was mediated through mitochondrial autophagy (mitophagy). Our findings offer new insights into the potential of stem cell-based therapy for fertility preservation and/or restoration in female cancer patients.

Assisted reproductive technology use and outcomes in childhood cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Treatment exposures for childhood cancer reduce ovarian reserve. However, the success of assisted reproductive technology (ART) among female survivors is not well established.

METHODS

Five-year survivors of childhood cancer in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study were linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System, which captures national ART outcomes. The authors assessed the live birth rate, the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), and associations with treatment exposure using generalized estimating equations to account for multiple ovarian stimulations per individual. Siblings from a random sample of survivors were recruited to serve as a comparison group.

RESULTS

Among 9885 female survivors, 137 (1.4%; median age at diagnosis, 10 years [range, 0-20 years]; median years of follow-up after age 18 years, 11 years [range, 2-11 years]) underwent 224 ovarian stimulations using autologous or donor eggs and/or gestational carriers (157 autologous ovarian stimulation cycles, 67 donor ovarian stimulation cycles). In siblings, 33 (1.4%) underwent 51 autologous or donor ovarian stimulations. Of those who used embryos from autologous eggs without using gestational carriers, 97 survivors underwent 155 stimulations, resulting in 49 live births, for a 31.6% chance of live birth per ovarian stimulation (vs. 38.3% for siblings; p = .39) and a 43.9% chance of live birth per transfer (vs. 50.0%; p = .33). Prior treatment with cranial radiation therapy (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-0.97) and pelvic radiation therapy (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.73) resulted in a reduced chance of live birth compared with siblings. The likelihood of live birth after ART treatment in survivors was not affected by alkylator exposure (cyclophosphamide-equivalent dose, ≥8000 mg/m2 vs. none; RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.52-2.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Childhood cancer survivors are as likely to undergo treatment using ART as sibling controls. The success of ART treatment was not reduced after alkylator exposure. The results from the current study provide needed guidance on the use of ART in this population.

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.

Fertility restoration in mice with chemotherapy induced ovarian failure using differentiated iPSCs

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) are limited to hormone replacement and donor oocytes. A novel induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) transplant paradigm in a mouse model has potential translational applications for management of POI.

METHODS

Mouse ovarian granulosa cell derived-iPSCS were labelled with green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter and differentiated in vitro into oocytes. Differentiated cells were assayed for estradiol and progesterone secretion by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. After Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting (FACS) for the cell surface marker anti-Mullerian hormone receptor (AMHR2), enriched populations of differentiated cells were surgically transplanted into ovaries of mice that had POI secondary to gonadotoxic pre-treatment with alkylating agents. A total of 100 mice were used in these studies in five separate experiments with 56 animals receiving orthotopic ovarian injections of either FACS sorted or unsorted differentiated iPSCSs and the remaining animals receiving sham injections of PBS diluent. Following transplantation surgery, mice were stimulated with gonadotropins inducing oocyte development and underwent oocyte retrieval. Nine transplanted mice were cross bred with wild-type mice to assess fertility. Lineage tracing of resultant oocytes, F1 (30 pups), and F2 (42 pups) litters was interrogated by GFP expression and validation by short tandem repeat (STR) lineage tracing.

FINDINGS

[1] iPSCs differentiate into functional oocytes and steroidogenic ovarian cells which [2] express an ovarian (GJA1) and germ cell (ZP1) markers. [3] Endocrine function and fertility were restored in mice pretreated with gonadotoxic alkylating agents via orthotopic transplantation of differentiated iPSCS, thus generating viable, fertile mouse pups.

INTERPRETATION

iPSC-derived ovarian tissue can reverse endocrine and reproductive sequelae of POI.

FUNDING

Center for Infertility and Reproductive Surgery Research Award, Siezen Foundation award (RMA). Reproductive Scientist Development Program, Marriott Foundation, Saltonstall Foundation, Brigham Ovarian Cancer Research Fund (K.E).

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.

Outcomes after assisted reproductive technology in women with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY QUESTION

What are the associations between a history of cancer and outcomes after ART?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer and a lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy and live birth after ART.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Small, single-institution studies have suggested that cancer and its treatment may negatively affect ART outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing ART outcomes between women with and without cancer. PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched for original, English-language studies published up to June 2021.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Inclusion criteria required reporting of ART outcomes after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) among women with a history of cancer compared to women without cancer who used ART for any indication. Outcomes of interest ranged from duration of COS to likelihood of live birth after embryo transfer. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs and 95% prediction intervals (PIs). We assessed heterogeneity by age-adjustment, referent group indication for ART, study location and among women with breast cancer and women who initiated ART before cancer treatment. We used visual inspection, Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method to assess funnel plot asymmetry.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Of 6094 unique records identified, 42 studies met inclusion criteria, representing a median per study of 58 women with cancer (interquartile range (IQR) = 159) and 114 women without cancer (IQR = 348). Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.74; 95% PI: 0.00, 64.98); lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.73; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.35); and lower likelihood of live birth (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.83; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.69). Substantial among-study heterogeneity was observed for COS duration, gonadotropin dose, cycle cancellation, total oocytes and mature oocytes. Fertilization percentage showed less heterogeneity, but study-specific estimates were imprecise. Similarly, number of embryos showed less heterogeneity, and most studies estimated minimal differences by cancer history. Funnel plot asymmetry was observed for estradiol peak and oocyte maturation percentage.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Appreciable confounding is possible in 11 studies that lacked adequate control for group differences in age, and among-study heterogeneity was observed for most outcomes. Lack of data limited our ability to assess how cancer clinical factors (e.g. cancers other than breast, cancer stage and treatment) and ART cycle characteristics (e.g. fresh versus frozen embryo transfers and use of gestational carriers) may affect outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Women with cancer may be less likely to achieve pregnancy and live birth after embryo transfer. Further examination of reproductive outcomes and sources of heterogeneity among studies is warranted to improve evidence of the expected success of ART after a cancer diagnosis.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported in part by R01 CA211093 and P30 ES010126. C.M. was supported by the University of North Carolina Lineberger Cancer Control Education Program (T32 CA057726) and the National Cancer Institute (F31 CA260787). J.A.R.-H. was supported by the National Cancer Institute (K08 CA234333, P30 CA016672). J.A.R.-H. reports receiving consulting fees from Schlesinger Group and Guidepoint. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

The Impact of Malignancy on Assisted Reproductive Outcomes for Cancer Survivors: A Retrospective Case–Control Study

Background

Related studies have shown that it is safe for cancer patients to undergo assisted reproduction. However, studies on whether a history of cancer affects long-term reproductive outcomes in women who undergo assisted reproductive technology (ART) are scarce. In this study, we evaluated the long-term reproductive outcomes of patients with malignant tumors undergoing ART treatment and explored the impact of malignancy history on ART outcomes.

Methods

This retrospective study analyzed the clinical outcomes of patients with malignant tumors undergoing their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles compared with those of age-matched healthy infertile women at Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital between January 2003 and October 2020. We evaluated ovarian stimulation outcome, the pregnancy rate, the live birth rate, the risk of adverse obstetric outcomes and birth outcomes.

Results

This study included 59 patients in the cancer group for data analysis who had a history of malignancy. By matching, a total of 118 healthy infertile women were included in the control group. No statistically significant association was found in terms of age, duration of infertility, BMI, or insemination type between the two groups of patients. Thyroid cancer(45.8%) and gynecologic malignancies (44.07%) were the major cancer types in this study. There were statistically significant differences in the antral follicle count (AFC) (12.00 ± 7.86 vs. 14.90 ± 8.71, P=0.033), length of ovarian stimulation (9.98 ± 2.68 vs. 11.42 ± 2.43, P=0.033) and endometrial thickness on the trigger day (10.16 ± 3.11 vs. 10.84 ± 2.17, P&lt;0.001) between the two groups. The total gonadotropin dose, number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, high-quality embryo rate, blastocyst rate and first-time embryo-transfer (ET) implantation rate were nonsignificantly lower in the cancer group than in the control group (P&gt;0.05). There were no significant differences in the clinical pregnancy rate per ET cycle (32% vs. 40.39%, P=0.156), live birth rate per ET cycle (27% vs. 35.96%, P=0.119), miscarriage rate per ET cycle (5% vs. 4.43%, P=0.779), or preterm delivery rate per ET cycle (11.11% vs. 17.80%, P=0.547) between the two groups. Additionally, regression analysis showed that a history of malignancy was not a risk factor for reproductive outcomes.

Conclusions

Overall, it is feasible for women with a history of cancer to conceive using ART is feasible and their long-term reproductive outcomes are similar to these of healthy infertile women. A history of cancer does not decrease the number of retrieved oocytes, increase the risk of adverse obstetric outcomes or affect birth outcomes.

Outcomes of Pregnancies and Deliveries of Patients Who Underwent Fertility-Preserving Surgery for Early-Stage Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Some studies have shown increased risks of preterm birth, low birth weight, and cesarean delivery after oncologic treatment; others have shown the opposite. We evaluated the outcomes of pregnancies and deliveries of patients who underwent fertility-preserving surgery (FSS) for early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and examined their perinatal prognosis. This retrospective study included women with a history of stage IA or IC ovarian cancer reported in our previous study. The primary outcome was preterm birth after cancer diagnosis was considered. Secondary outcomes were neonatal morbidity and severe maternal morbidity. Thirty-one children were born to 25 women who had undergone FSS. The mean number of weeks at delivery was 38.7 ± 0.7, and the mean birth weight of infants was 3021 ± 160 g. With respect to pregnancy outcomes, 5 patients had preterm labor and 26 had full-term labor. The delivery mode was vaginal delivery in 18 patients and cesarean delivery in 13. Complications during pregnancy included placenta previa (one case) and pelvic abscess (one case). Except for three preterm infants with low birth weight, there were no other perinatal abnormalities. Pregnancy after fertility preservation in EOC has an excellent perinatal prognosis, although the cesarean delivery rate is high.

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.

History of cancer and fertility treatment outcomes: a registry linkage study in Massachusetts

PURPOSE

To investigate assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes among adolescent and young-adult female cancer survivors.

METHODS

The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) data were linked to the Massachusetts Cancer Registry for 90,928 ART cycles in Massachusetts to women ≥ 18 years old from 2004 to 2013. To estimate relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), we used generalized estimating equations with a log link that accounted for multiple cycles per woman and a priori adjusted for maternal age and cycle year. The main outcomes of interest were ART treatment patterns; number of autologous oocytes retrieved, fertilized, and transferred; and rates of implantation, clinical intrauterine gestation (CIG), live birth, and pregnancy loss.

RESULTS

We saw no difference in number of oocytes retrieved (aRR: 0.95 (0.89-1.02)) or proportion of autologous oocytes fertilized (aRR: 0.99 (0.95-1.03)) between autologous cycles with and without a history of cancer; however, cancer survivors required a higher total FSH administered (aRR: 1.12 (1.06-1.19)). Among autologous cycle starts, cycles in women with a history of cancer were less likely to result in CIG compared to no history of cancer (aRR: 0.73 (0.65-0.83)); this relationship was absent from donor cycles (aRR: 1.01 (0.85-1.20)). Once achieving CIG, donor cycles for women with a history of cancer were two times more likely to result in pregnancy loss (aRR: 1.99 (1.26-3.16)).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that cancer may influence ovarian stimulation response, requiring more FSH and resulting in lower CIG among cycle starts.

Outcomes of Fertility Preservation Consults for Women at Risk for Primary Ovarian Insufficiency Due to History of Cancer Treatment or Mosaic Turner Syndrome

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) at risk of primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) often request fertility preservation consultation. We report consult/treatment outcomes for 21 cancer survivors and 3 mosaic Turner syndrome (TS) patients (mean age 21.6 at consult, 3 with POI). Ten AYAs (9 survivors, 1 mosaic TS) attempted ovarian stimulation; 4 cancelled for poor response. Of completed cycles, mean 3.8 mature oocytes were retrieved, with mean anti-Müllerian hormone 0.653 ng/mL. Ovarian stimulation for mosaic TS AYA and survivors is possible, even with diminished ovarian reserve. Further study is needed to establish guidelines for patient selection, treatment timing, and stimulation protocols.

Probability of live birth after IVF/ICSI treatments in female early onset cancer survivors: a Finnish population-based registry study

STUDY QUESTION

Does the probability of a live birth after fresh IVF/ICSI cycles with autologous oocytes differ in early onset female cancer survivors compared to their siblings?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The probability of a live birth was similar in female cancer survivors and siblings after four fresh IVF/ICSI cycles.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Fertility preservation strategies are rapidly being developed to help female cancer patients who wish to have children later. However, there are only a few studies available on fertility treatments and following live births in female cancer survivors before fertility preservation strategies became available. In one of them, the probability of a live birth was reduced after assisted reproductive technology with autologous oocytes in cancer survivors compared to siblings.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

In this retrospective, register-based study, data from Finnish registers on cancer, birth and prescribed medications were merged to identify 8944 female cancer survivors (diagnosed with cancer between 1953 and 2012 at the age of 0-40 years) and 9848 female siblings of survivors eligible for IVF/ICSI treatments between January 1993 and December 2012.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Fresh IVF/ICSI cycles and following live birth rates (LBRs) within 22-48 weeks in cancer survivors and siblings at the age of 20-41 years were identified. A binomial regression model with log-link function was used to calculate risk ratio (RR) for live births after fresh IVF/ICSI cycles in survivors compared to siblings, adjusting for attained age and calendar time. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for an IVF/ICSI treatment, as well as overall live births, including both pregnancies after fertility treatments and spontaneous pregnancies, in survivors compared to siblings.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

We observed an overall decreased LBR, irrespective of IVF/ICSI treatments, in cancer survivors compared to siblings (IRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.64-0.71). All in all, 179 (2.0%) survivors and 230 (2.3%) siblings were prescribed fertility drugs for IVF/ICSI treatments (IRR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.84). For the first fresh IVF/ICSI cycle, the LBR was 17.2% among survivors and 15.7% among siblings (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.72-1.87). The mean LBR after four fresh IVF/ICSI cycles was not statistically different in survivors compared to siblings.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

In this study, only IVF/ICSI treatments with autologous oocytes were included. The probability of a live birth after a frozen embryo transfer or oocyte donation could not be evaluated in this study. Information on miscarriages, extrauterine pregnancies or termination of pregnancies was not available.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

For those early onset cancer survivors, who received IVF/ICSI treatments, the probability of live birth was not different from siblings who received IVF/ICSI treatments. However, an overall decreased LBR, irrespective of IVF/ICSI treatments, was observed in cancer survivors compared to siblings, indicating that cancer survivors receiving IVF/ICSI treatments in our study consisted of a selected group with at least a moderate ovarian reserve.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was supported by a grant from the Cancer Foundation (Finland) (grant number 130079) and by a grant from LähiTapiola. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

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.

Analysis of related factors affecting cumulative live birth rates of the first ovarian hyperstimulation in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle: a population-based study from 17,978 women in China

Background:

More and more scholars have called for the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) of a complete ovarian stimulation cycle as a key indicator for assisted reproductive technology. This research aims to study the CLBR of the first ovarian hyperstimulation cycles and analyze the related prognosis factors that might affect the CLBR.

Methods:

Our retrospective study included first in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles performed between January 2013 to December 2014. A total of 17,978 couples of first ovarian hyperstimulation IVF/ICSI cycles were included. The study was followed up for 4 years to observe the CLBR. The multivariable logistic regression model was used to analyze the prognosis factor, P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

The cumulative pregnancy rate was 58.14% (10,452/17,978), and the CLBR was 49.66% (8928/17,978). The female age was younger in the live birth group when compared with the non-live birth group (30.81 ± 4.05 vs. 33.09 ± 5.13, P < 0.001). The average duration of infertility was shorter than the non-live birth cohort (4.22 ± 3.11 vs. 5.06 ± 4.08, P < 0.001). The preliminary gonadotropin used and the total number of gonadotropin used were lower in the live birth group when compared with the non-live birth group (both P < 0.001). Meanwhile, the number of oocytes retrieved and transferrable embryos were both significantly higher in the live birth group (15.35 ± 7.98 vs. 11.35 ± 7.60, P < 0.001; 6.66 ± 5.19 vs. 3.62 ± 3.51, P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusions:

The women's age, body mass index, duration of infertility years, infertility factors, controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocol, the number of acquired oocytes, and number of transferrable embryos are the prognosis factors that significantly affected the CLBR.

Success and risks of pregnancy after breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. The number of childbearing-age women diagnosed with early breast cancer (eBC) is increasing, raising questions over their subsequent fertility.

PURPOSE

The main objective of this study was therefore to assess, in a cohort of eBC patients with pregnancy desire, the rate of live births achieved spontaneously or by assisted reproductive technology.

METHODS

We conducted an observational, descriptive, retrospective study including patients aged 18-40, treated for eBC at the Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest (ICO) Pays de Loire between July 2010 and July 2016, with pregnancy desire. The primary outcome was the rate of live births. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, disease-free survival, time to conception, and spontaneous or assisted pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

61 patients were included, with a live birth rate of 19.7% (12/61). We observed no recurrence or death in women with a pregnancy. Pregnancy started with a median time of 36.4 months after the end of treatment (4.1-51.3 months). All pregnancies in this cohort were achieved spontaneously.

CONCLUSION

The results of our cohort are consistent with previous results showing that spontaneous pregnancy remains possible after treatment for eBC without increasing the risk of recurrence or death.

Efficacy and Safety of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation With or Without Letrozole Co-administration for Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The co-administration of letrozole during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins is used to limit the potentially harmful effects of a supra-physiological rise in estrogen levels on hormone-sensitive cancers. However, the efficacy and safety of adding letrozole to COS remain debated.

Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared the efficacy and safety of COS with co-administration of letrozole vs. COS without letrozole in all patient populations. A secondary analysis was done including only the studies in breast cancer patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the number of retrieved mature Metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Secondary efficacy and safety endpoints were total number of oocytes, maturation rate, fertilization rate, number of cryopreserved embryos, peak estradiol levels, progesterone levels, and total gonadotropin dose. Data for each endpoint were reported and analyzed thorough mean ratio (MR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results: A total of 11 records were selected including 2,121 patients (990 patients underwent COS with letrozole and 1,131 COS without letrozole). The addition of letrozole to COS did not have any negative effect on the number of mature oocytes collected (MR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.87–1.16; P = 0.967) and the other efficacy endpoints. COS with letrozole was associated with significantly decreased peak estradiol levels (MR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.24–0.32; P < 0.001). Similar results were observed in the secondary analysis including only breast cancer patients.

Conclusions: These findings are reassuring on the efficacy and safety of COS with gonadotropins and letrozole and are particularly important for fertility preservation in women with hormone-sensitive cancers.

"Looking at future cancer survivors, give them a roadmap": addressing fertility and family-building topics in post-treatment cancer survivorship care

PURPOSE

Fertility is an important issue among adolescent and young adult female (AYA-F) cancer survivors. This study examined AYA-F survivors' unmet needs and recommendations for care to address fertility/family-building in post-treatment survivorship.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews (45-60 min) explored themes related to fertility and family-building after cancer. Coding categories were derived based on grounded theory methods. Themes were identified through an iterative process of coding and review.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 25) averaged 29 years old (SD = 6.2; range, 15-39) were primarily White and well educated, and averaged 5.81 years post-treatment (SD = 5.43); 32% had undergone fertility preservation (pre- or post-cancer). Six recommendations for improving care were identified: addressing patient-provider communication, need to provide informational, emotional, and peer support, financial information, and decision-making support. AYA-Fs believed the best way to learn about resources was through online platforms or doctor-initiated discussions. Telehealth options and digital resources were generally considered acceptable. Face-to-face interactions were preferred for in-depth information, when AYA-Fs anticipated having immediate questions or distressing emotions, and with concerns about Internet security. Thus, a combined approach was preferred such that information (via web-based communication) should be provided first, with follow-up in-person visits and referrals when needed.

CONCLUSION

Informational and support services are needed to better educate patients about gonadotoxic effects and options to have children after cancer treatment is completed. Future work should evaluate how to best support oncology providers in meeting the needs of survivors concerned about fertility and family-building including referral to clinical specialties and supportive resources.

Immature Oocyte for Fertility Preservation

In vitro maturation (IVM) of human immature oocytes has been offered to women who are at risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) caused by gonadotropin stimulation, such as PCO(S) patients or who have poor ovarian reserve. Cryopreservation of oocytes matured in vivo obtained in IVF cycles has improved after implementing the vitrification method and many successful results have been reported. Now, this procedure can be successfully offered to fertility preservation programs for patients who are in danger of losing their ovarian function due to medical or social reasons, and to oocyte donation programs. This vitrification technique has also been applied to cryopreserve oocytes obtained from IVM program. Some advantages of oocytes vitrification related with IVM are: (1) eliminating costly drugs and frequent monitoring; (2) completing treatment within 2 to 10 days (3) avoiding the use of hormones in cancer patients with hormone-sensitive tumors; and (4) retrieving oocytes at any point in menstrual cycle, even in the luteal phase. In addition, immature oocytes can also be collected from extracorporeal ovarian biopsy specimens or ovaries during caesarian section. Theoretically, there are two possible approaches for preserving immature oocytes: oocyte cryopreservation at the mature stage (after IVM) and oocyte cryopreservation at the Germinal Vesicle (GV)-stage (before IVM). Both vitrification of immature oocyte before/after IVM is not currently satisfactory. Nevertheless, many IVF centers worldwide are doing IVM oocyte cryopreservation as one of the options to preserve fertility for female cancer. Therefore, more studies are urgently required to improve IVM- and vitrification method to successfully preserve oocytes collected from cancer patients. In this review, present oocyte maturation mechanisms and recent progress of human IVM cycles will be discussed first, followed by some studies of the vitrification of human IVM oocyte.

Interdisciplinary Screening, Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up of Breast Cancer. Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3-Level, AWMF Registry Number 032/045OL, December 2017) - Part 2 with Recommendations for the Therapy of Primary, Recurrent and Advanced Breast Cancer

Purpose The aim of this official guideline coordinated and published by the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the German Cancer Society (DKG) was to optimize the screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of breast cancer. Method The process of updating the S3 guideline published in 2012 was based on the adaptation of identified source guidelines. They were combined with reviews of evidence compiled using PICO (Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome) questions and with the results of a systematic search of literature databases followed by the selection and evaluation of the identified literature. The interdisciplinary working groups took the identified materials as their starting point and used them to develop suggestions for recommendations and statements, which were then modified and graded in a structured consensus process procedure. Recommendations Part 2 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations for the therapy of primary, recurrent and metastatic breast cancer. Loco-regional therapies are de-escalated in the current guideline. In addition to reducing the safety margins for surgical procedures, the guideline also recommends reducing the radicality of axillary surgery. The choice and extent of systemic therapy depends on the respective tumor biology. New substances are becoming available, particularly to treat metastatic breast cancer.

Motherhood after breast cancer: can we balance fertility preservation and cancer treatment? A narrative review of the literature

Breast cancer may affect young women who have not yet completed childbearing. Assisted reproductive technology (ART) provides alternatives for fertility preservation such as oocyte, embryo or ovarian tissue cryopreservation. We reviewed the published literature on fertility-preserving management in breast cancer, aiming at finding evidence to answer the following questions: (1) What are the fertility sparing options available?; (2) How do these women respond to IVF? and (3) Can pregnancy influence breast cancer recurrence? There is a paucity of publications describing clinical experience and outcome data which limits accessibility to fertility preservation in this setting. Presently, oocyte or embryo cryopreservation are the main options for fertility preservation. IVF success rates are comparable to the ones of non-oncological populations according to the woman's age but current published studies lack data on definitive success rates following embryo banking for cancer patients. The perception that IVF and pregnancy may worsen cancer prognosis remains, despite the lack of scientific evidence to support this notion. Published studies show reassuring results for pregnancies occurring >2 years after breast cancer diagnosis. The best published evidence suggests pregnancy after breast cancer does not increase the risk of disease recurrence, thus pregnancy should not be forbidden once treatment is completed. Decision making for women diagnosed with cancer requires up-to-date knowledge of the efficacy and safety of available options. Providing consultation with a reproductive specialist and appropriate information on fertility preservation for these women should be an essential aspect of their supportive care.

Thirteen years' experience in fertility preservation for cancer patients after in vitro fertilization and in vitro maturation treatments

PURPOSE

This study aims to describe the experience and outcomes of in vitro maturation without ovarian stimulation (IVM-FP) and conventional in vitro fertilization after ovarian stimulation (IVF-FP) in a fertility preservation (FP) program for women with cancer.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study from 2003 to 2015 was conducted. The study population consisted of 353 women with cancer who underwent 394 FP cycles (187 IVF-FP cycles and 207 IVM-FP) for oocytes and/or embryos cryopreservation.

RESULT(S)

Comparatively with IVM-FP, IVF-FP had a higher median [25th-75th percentile] number of oocytes collected-12 [8-18] vs 7 [5-13]; oocytes cryopreserved-10 [6-15] vs 5 [2-8]; and, where applicable, embryos cryopreserved-5 [3-7] vs 3 [2-5] (p < 0.000001). Following FP treatment, 32 patients (9.0%) died, 18 patients (5.6%) conceived spontaneously, and 23 patients (6.5%) returned to attempt pregnancy with a median lapse of returning of 4.6 [3.1-6.1] years. Of these, cryopreserved oocytes or embryos were used in 33 cycles (19 after IVF-FP and 14 after IVM-FP). Overall, the cumulative pregnancy rate (CPR) was 47.6% (10/21) and the live birth rate (LBR) was 38.1% (8/21). Per cycle, CPR and LBR were 37 and 31% following IVF-FP and 14 and 7% following IVM-FP, although these differences did not reach statistical significance. We report the fourth live birth after IVM-FP in cancer, and the first one after IVM embryo warming resulting from in vivo oocyte retrieval and IVM procedure.

CONCLUSION(S)

Both IVF-FP and IVM-FP are possible options for FP women with cancer. Due to minimal data regarding ultimate outcomes, further follow-up is needed.

Fertility treatments among female cancer survivors giving birth - a Finnish register-based study

BACKGROUND

Long-term survival rates for most types of childhood cancers have improved dramatically over the past decades. However, because of advances in multimodality treatments, cancer survivors nowadays more often face long-term complications, including diminished gonadal and reproductive function. The aim of this study was to identify whether the use of fertility treatments among early onset (0-34 years) cancer survivors giving birth differed from that among siblings giving birth and to identify the subgroups of cancer survivors that were most likely to require fertility treatments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nationwide cancer and birth registries were merged to identify 1974 post-diagnosis deliveries of cancer survivors and 6107 deliveries of female siblings in 2004-2013. Unconditional multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the risk for different fertility treatments namely assisted reproductive technology, intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction. We adjusted for maternal age, year of delivery, parity and smoking.

RESULTS

We found overall significantly increased odds for use of any fertility treatments in survivors compared to siblings (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.18-2.86). As time from cancer treatment increased, the odds for need of fertility treatments increased, being highest at 11 to 15 years post cancer treatment (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.13-7.30). Survivors diagnosed at ages 25-34 years had the highest odds for use of fertility treatments compared to siblings (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.01-5.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports previous findings indicating that cancer survivors have an increased risk for subfertility. Survivors diagnosed in their childhood had the lowest risk for fertility treatment and seemed to get pregnant with less extensive fertility treatments than survivors diagnosed as adults. Time elapsed from cancer treatment played a central role, increasing the need for fertility treatments compared to siblings, suggesting that cancer therapies might lead to diminished ovarian reserve.

Oocyte cryopreservation for fertility preservation in women with cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

It is necessary to clarify the fertility preservation-related points of concern that often frighten patients or physicians when it comes to deciding about oocyte cryopreservation for fertility preservation, which are often perceived as procedure limitations, are sometimes real and often theoretical and may make the prognosis worse.

RECENT FINDINGS

Letrozole added to gonadotrophins for controlled ovarian stimulation is safe when applied to hormone-sensitive cancer patients as it avoids associated high estradiol levels. This benefit is only for estrogens, but not for progesterone. Triggering ovulation with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist bolus and adding the gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist after oocyte retrieval help minimize its effect. A random start is currently widespread as neither results nor offspring are compromised, and it avoids waiting for menstruation and, therefore, delaying treatment.

SUMMARY

The cumulative live birth rate is conditioned by the number of available oocytes and patient's age. Assisted reproductive technologies may help cancer patients to achieve pregnancy with good obstetric outcomes and apparent oncological safety. Although counseling should be provided on an individual basis, fertility preservation in cancer patients and later pregnancy in survivors after adequate treatment and follow-up should not be discouraged.

The role of in-depth reproductive health counseling in addressing reproductive health concerns in female survivors of nongynecologic cancers

The purpose of this study was to characterize reproductive concerns among female cancer survivors and determine the role of targeted counseling in improving overall reproductive quality of life (QOL). A survey was administered to women from the California Cancer Registry, ages 18-40, with nongynecologic cancers diagnosed from 1993 to 2007, who received fertility-compromising treatments. In total, 356 women completed the survey, which included questions regarding their reproductive health counseling history and the reproductive concerns scale (RCS), a validated reproductive QOL tool. Factors independently associated with higher RCS scores included a desire for children at the time of diagnosis, posttreatment infertility, treatment with chemoradiation or bone marrow transplant, and income less than $100,000 per year at diagnosis. Among the highest reported reproductive concerns were those related to loss of control over one's reproductive future and concerns about the effect of illness on one's future fertility. Across our population and independent of age, in-depth reproductive health counseling prior to cancer treatment was associated with significantly lower RCS scores. Our findings highlight the importance of early counseling and targeting high-risk groups for additional counseling after completion of cancer treatment. This approach may be an effective strategy for optimizing long-term reproductive QOL in this vulnerable population.

Deliveries After Malignant Disease Before Pregnancy: Maternal Characteristics, Pregnancy, and Delivery Complications

PURPOSE

Survival after cancer has increased, and the question of risks in later pregnancies has become important. A previous malignancy may affect pregnancy outcome.

METHODS

Comparison of women with malignant disease before pregnancy with all other women giving birth during 1994-2011. Data were obtained by linkage between Swedish national health registers. Subfertility, evaluated as time to pregnancy, and in vitro fertilization (IVF) before the relevant delivery were studied. The following delivery diagnoses were studied: gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, placenta previa, placenta abruption, placenta retention, bleeding around delivery, and premature rupture of membranes. The rates of cesarean section and vacuum extraction or forceps delivery were also studied.

RESULTS

We identified 3931 women with 7176 deliveries and with a malignancy diagnosed at least 1 year before the delivery. The total number of deliveries in Sweden in these years was 1,746,870. Overall, an increased risk of subfertility (odds ratio [OR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.28), use of IVF (OR = 1.36, CI 1.21-1.53), delivery complications (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.24), and rate of caesarean sections (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.20-1.34) was observed among women with a history of malignancy compared with other women.

CONCLUSION

We found an increased risk of subfertility, pregnancy, and delivery complications in women with a history of malignant disease. Further studies are needed to evaluate the risks of specific treatments and to provide these women with reliable information that could affect their family planning.