Fertility Preservation Referral Research Articles

Comprehensive fertility preservation can be offered in a timely manner around gonadotoxic therapy in children and adolescents.

Treatment for certain childhood cancers and nonmalignant conditions can lead to future infertility and gonadal failure. The risk of treatment delay must be considered when offering fertility preservation (FP) options. We examined the timeline from FP referral to return to treatment (RTT) in pediatric patients who underwent FP due to iatrogenic risk for infertility. A retrospective review was performed of patients with FP consultation due to an increased risk of iatrogenic infertility at Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago from 2018 to 2022. Data on diagnosis, age, treatment characteristics, and procedure were collected. A total of 337 patients (n=149 with ovaries, n=188 with testes) had an FP consultation. Of patients with ovaries, 106 (71.1%) underwent ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC), 10 (6.7%) completed ovarian stimulation/egg retrieval (OSER), and 33 (22.1%) declined FP. Of the patients with testes, 98 (52.1%) underwent testicular tissue cryopreservation (TTC), 48 (25.5%) completed sperm banking (SB), and 42 (22.3%) declined FP. Median time from referral to FP consultation was short (ovaries: 2days, range: 0-6; testes: 1day, range: 0-5). OSER had a significantly longer RTT versus OTC and no FP (52.5 vs.19.5 vs. 12days, p=.01). SB had a significantly quicker RTT compared to TTC or no FP (9.0 vs. 21.0 vs. 13.5days; p=.008). For patients who underwent OTC/TTC and those who declined FP, there was no significant difference in time from consultation to treatment. It is feasible to promptly offer and complete FP with minimal delay to disease-directed treatment.

Fertility preservation before and after cancer treatment in children, adolescents, and young adults.

Fertility is a top concern for many survivors of cancer diagnosed as children, adolescents and young adults (CAYA). Fertility preservation (FP) treatments are effective, evidence-based interventions to support their family building goals. Fertility discussions are a part of quality oncology care throughout the cancer care continuum. For nearly 2 decades, clinical guidelines recommend counseling patients about the possibility of infertility promptly at diagnosis and offering FP options and referrals as indicated. Multiple guidelines now recommend post-treatment counseling. Infertility risks differ by cancer treatments and age, rendering risk stratification a central part of FP care. To support FP decision-making, online tools for female risk estimation are available. At diagnosis, females can engage in mature oocyte/embryo cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, ovarian suppression with GnRH agonists, in vitro oocyte maturation, and/or conservative management for gynecologic cancers. Post-treatment, several populations may consider undergoing oocyte/embryo cryopreservation. Male survivors' standard of care FP treatments center on sperm cryopreservation before cancer treatment and do not have the same post-treatment indication for additional gamete cryopreservation. In practice, FP care requires systemized processes to routinely screen for FP needs, bridge oncology referrals to fertility, offer timely fertility consultations and access to FP treatments, and support financial navigation. Sixteen US states passed laws requiring health insurers to provide insurance benefits for FP treatments, but variation among the laws and downstream implementation are barriers to accessing FP treatments. To preserve the reproductive futures of CAYA survivors, research is needed to improve risk stratification, FP options, and delivery of FP care.

Improving rates of referrals for fertility preservation among adult patients with cancer.

462 Background: Urgent fertility preservation (FP) represents a critical unmet need for patients of child-bearing potential undergoing cancer-directed therapies. A retrospective review of electronic medical record (EMR) based FP referrals placed prior to initiation of systemic cancer-directed therapies in patients aged 18-50 years, identified only 26 referrals to urology and 2 referrals to reproductive endocrinology during 2020. To address this issue, we conducted a division-wide survey to identify barriers to FP and designed and implemented a new FP referral EMR order set to facilitate timely fertility evaluation in patients about to begin cancer-directed therapy. Methods: We conducted a division-wide survey of faculty and fellows to identify barriers to FP (PDSA cycle 1), which identified that 50% of respondents did not know how to make a referral and 85% did not know the correct pre-requisite labs. Based on these results, we gathered multi-stakeholder input from reproductive endocrinology, urology, and stakeholders from different hematology/oncology disease groups to develop and design a common FP referral EMR order set (PDSA 2). The FP order set was tested and refined based on stakeholder input. Once the order set was implemented, we gave educational presentations at division-wide and disease group-specific conferences, placed informational flyers throughout the Cancer Center, and Cancer Center-wide communications via email to increase provider awareness (PDSA 3). The primary objective of the study was to increase in number of referrals for FP evaluation in patients aged 18-50 years undergoing cancer-directed therapy. We tracked number of FP referrals pre and post-intervention using EMR data. Results: In PDSA Cycle 2 and 3, the number of referrals increased further to 62 for urology and 35 for reproductive endocrinology. Of those referred, 35/97 (36.1%) were female. Regarding race/ethnicity, the largest percentage of patients referred identified as White and Asian with the lowest percentage being of Southwest Asian/North African or Black/African American (see Table 1). Conclusions: The development and implementation of a FP order set greatly increased the number of patients who underwent fertility evaluation prior to starting cancer-directed therapy. We did identify differences in groups with regards to referral rates with fewer women being referred, and fewer number of racial/ethnic minorities being referred. Further analysis is needed to identify potential areas of intervention to increase referrals and access to FP, particularly in under-represented groups.[Table: see text]

The use of fertility preservation services for cancer patients: a single institution experience

To analyze the use of services regarding fertility preservation (FP) in cancer patients at a single institution. A retrospective cohort study. Academic medical center. A total of 208 FP referrals. None. Method of FP; time from referral to FP intervention. A total of 553 patients were referred to a reproductive specialist for FP in the setting of a medical diagnosis from 2011 to 2016. Of these, 208 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria and met with a reproductive specialist. Ninety patients underwent FP services. The average age at referral was 30.9 ± 7.9 years. Breast cancer (n=94, 45%) and leukemia/lymphoma (n=62, 30%) were the most prevalent cancer diagnoses. A 68.9% of patients underwent oocyte cryopreservation (n=62), 26.7% underwent embryo cryopreservation (n=24) and 4.4% underwent ovarian tissue preservation (n=4). The time interval from the referral to the FP intervention ranged from 1 to 810 days, with a median of 17 days. In the setting of a cancer diagnosis, most patients undergoing FP intervention underwent oocyte cryopreservation, were <35 years old, and underwent FP intervention in <30 days from referral. Whereas FP should ideally be initiated at the time of cancer diagnosis, all patients with a cancer diagnosis should be referred to a reproductive specialist and counseled on options for FP to preserve the optionality for the reproductive future they desire.

Perceptions and attitudes of medical oncologists regarding fertility preservation and pregnancy in high-risk cancer patients: A survey among Canadian medical oncologists.

Infertility is a critical late toxicity that impacts adolescent and young adult (AYA, ages 15-39 years) cancer survivors. International oncology societies recommend discussing fertility preservation (FP) for all AYA patients, regardless of stage or prognosis. We aim to understand Canadian medical oncologists' perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge toward FP and pregnancy in patients with cancer, including advanced stages and high risk for recurrence. An anonymous electronic survey utilizing hypothetical scenarios was sent to medical oncologists in the province of Ontario, Canada. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize all data. Logistic regression models were constructed to identify factors that predicted FP discussions and referrals. The survey was received by 91 medical oncologists, and the response rate was 44%. Fifty-eight percent of respondents offer FP for all patients. Physicians are more likely to refer patients for FP before curative intent therapy than before palliative chemotherapy (95% vs. 39.5%, p < 0.001). Most respondents (86%) are comfortable discussing FP; however, only 31% self-reported feeling up-to-date on knowledge of current FP methods. Female physicians were more likely to report up-to-date knowledge and confidence discussing FP with patients. Forty percent of respondents identified that concerns about the welfare of the resulting offspring should not be a cause for denying patients assistance in reproduction. There is a significant difference in physician attitude toward offering FP based on the cancer stage. Increased awareness of standard of care guidelines and resources for difficult situations may improve the frequency of discussions about FP in motivated cancer patients.

How Accurate Is Oncologist Knowledge of Fertility Preservation Options, Cost, and Time in Female Adolescents and Young Adults?

Purpose: Often cited barriers to fertility preservation (FP) among female adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients include cost and time. We hypothesized that oncologists overestimate the time and costs required for female FP. Methods: We distributed an electronic survey to physicians in oncology-related departments. The survey assessed the knowledge and utilization of gonadotoxic therapies, FP options and requirements, and FP referral patterns. Student's t, Fisher's exact, ANOVA, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for continuous variables as appropriate; the chi-squared test was used for categorical variables. Results: Among respondents who reported prescribing gonadotoxic agents to AYAs (n = 38), 79% reported often/always discussing FP options, while only half referred to a reproductive specialist often/always. A smaller proportion of pediatric oncologists discussed FP often/always (p = 0.04) and most referred <25% of patients to a reproductive specialist; however, the majority of other specialists referred ≥75% of patients to a reproductive specialist (p = 0.001). While most respondents accurately estimated the time required to complete FP, the majority overestimated the cost of an FP procedure. Knowledge of FP options was inconsistent, with 63.2% reporting that suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian-axis is an option for FP, with 82.6% of these classifying it as standard of care. Conclusions: With variation across specialties, most oncology specialists prescribing gonadotoxic therapies for AYA females discuss FP, while a smaller proportion refer patients for FP. Despite relative accuracy in estimating the time required for FP, they overestimate costs of FP. Educational curricula related to FP are necessary across oncology specialties, especially pediatric oncology.

ASO Visual Abstract: Surgeon and Patient Reports of Fertility Preservation Referral and Uptake in a Prospective Pan-Canadian Study of Young Women with Breast Cancer

ASO Visual Abstract: Surgeon and Patient Reports of Fertility Preservation Referral and Uptake in a Prospective Pan-Canadian Study of Young Women with Breast Cancer

Surgeon and Patient Reports of Fertility Preservation Referral and Uptake in a Prospective, Pan-Canadian Study of Young Women with Breast Cancer.

Prompt referral by their surgeon enables fertility preservation (FP) by young women with breast cancer (YWBC) without treatment delay. Following a FP knowledge intervention, we evaluated surgeon and patient reports of fertility discussion, FP referral offer and uptake, and FP choices and reasons for declining FP among patients enrolled in the Reducing Breast Cancer in Young Women, prospective pan-Canadian study. Between September 2015 and December 2020, 1271 patients were enrolled at 31 sites. For each patient, surgeons were sent a questionnaire inquiring whether: (1) fertility discussion was initiated by the surgical team; (2) FP referral was offered; (3) referral was accepted; a reason was requested for any "no" response. Patients were surveyed about prediagnosis fertility plans and postdiagnosis oncofertility management. Surgeon questionnaires were completed for 1068 (84%) cases. Fertility was discussed with 828 (84%) and FP consultation offered to 461 (47%) of the 990 YWBC with invasive disease. Among the 906 responding YWBC, referral was offered to 220 (82%) of the 283 (33%) with invasive disease who stated that they had definitely/probably not completed childbearing prediagnosis. Of these, 133 (47%) underwent FP. The two most common reasons for not choosing FP were cost and unwillingness to delay treatment. Although the rates of surgeon fertility discussion and FP referral was higher than most reports, likely due to our previous intervention, further improvement is desirable. FP should be offered to all YWBC at diagnosis, regardless of perceived childbearing intent. Cost remains an important barrier to FP uptake.

Fertility Counseling Practices for Patients with Turner Syndrome in Pediatric Endocrine Clinics: Results of a Pediatric Endocrine Society Survey.

Turner syndrome (TS) is associated with a high risk of primary ovarian insufficiency. Current guidelines recommend early fertility counseling for affected youth and their families. This study assessed clinical providers' (MD, NP, or PA) fertility counseling practices for girls with TS. TS providers were invited to complete a survey via the Pediatric Endocrine Society listserv. Descriptive statistics summarized variables of interest. Correlations were used to identify associations between barriers/practice characteristics and fertility preservation (FP) referral. Thematic analysis was used to examine qualitative responses. 119 providers completed the survey. Seventy percent reported discussing fertility implications of TS routinely in pediatric care. Fifty-six percent reported often or always referring patients with spontaneous menarche to FP specialists, whereas only 19% reported often or always referring their patients without spontaneous menarche (p < 0.001). Barriers associated with FP referral frequency included unfamiliarity with FP options, belief that FP is not a possible goal for their patients, and absence of a local reproductive endocrinologist. Qualitatively, four referral barrier themes were identified: (1) questionable utility of referral, (2) lack of perceived interest among patients/families, (3) provider barriers (e.g., lack of knowledge), (4) logistical/structural barriers to accessing fertility-related care. Pediatric endocrinology providers report inconsistently discussing fertility implications of TS. The frequency of referral to an FP specialist and factors/barriers affecting the decision to refer remain variable. Future research should focus on expanding provider education, addressing barriers to high-quality fertility counseling and referral for patients with TS, and investigating FP outcomes in TS.

Fertility preservation discussions, referral and follow-up in male-to-female and female-to-male adolescent transgender patients

The number of patients seeking transgender healthcare is growing, and there is a potential impact of gender-affirming therapies on fertility. The use of fertility preservation (FP), particularly among transgender adolescents, has been limited. We aimed to examine differences in FP counselling, referral and utilisation between male-to-female (MtF) and female-to-male (FtM) transgender adolescents. A retrospective review of the medical records of patients ages 12–17 seen at an academic medical centre between 2012 and 2017 with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria was conducted. A total of 22 MtF and 45 FtM adolescents were included. The counselling on the potential fertility impact of gender-affirming therapy was documented in 55%, and of those counselled, 73% were counselled before receiving medication. There was no significant difference between the timing of counselling for MtF versus FtM adolescents. Of patients with documented reproductive wishes, 77% reported either desire for adopted children or no desire for biological children. Among patients offered FP referral, 2 (22.2%) MtF and 3 (12.5%) FtM patients accepted; both MtF patients cryopreserved sperm. While most adolescents were counselled on the fertility impact of gender-affirming therapy, there is room for improvement as 45% of patients had no documented counselling. The rate of transgender adolescents pursuing FP consultation and gamete cryopreservation was low, consistent with prior studies in this population.

Perceptions of Oncology Nurses Regarding Fertility Preservation and Providing Oncofertility Services for Men of Childbearing Age with Cancer.

This study investigated the knowledge, thoughts, and attitudes of oncology nurses in China regarding fertility preservation for male cancer patients of childbearing age, and for offering counseling or oncofertility services for the men in their care. Data was collected from 18 oncology nurses in Southwest China through voluntary self-report and in-depth interviews. The qualitative interview data were analyzed using a descriptive phenomenology method based on the lived experience of the nurses. The interviewees commonly reported 6 main concerns regarding fertility preservation (FP): their insufficient knowledge and inadequate nursing education; the importance of offering such services to cancer patients; legal vulnerability if FP information is withheld from patients; the role of the nurse in counseling; and barriers to discussing FP in practice. Nurses had a positive attitude toward FP, but most had no practical role in routinely informing male patients of their options, and the nurses believed that discussion of FP was outside their scope of practice. This study offers insight into the perceptions of oncology nurses in a developing country regarding the provision of FP services for adult male cancer patients. These results lead us to recommend that local fertility nurses should be given new training regarding FP. Furthermore, nurse-led clinics are desirable. Future research should focus on the effectiveness of nurse participation in FP counseling and referral, and how to improve the professional confidence of oncology nurses for addressing FP issues.

A survey study of knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding oncofertility among health professionals in Uruguay.

e24041 Background: Oncofertility is a field dedicated to preserve fertility of children, adolescents, and young cancer patients'. For young cancer patients, fertility preservation (FP) has become an important concern that needs to be addressed before cancer treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the general knowledge, attitudes, and practice towards FP and pregnancy-related issues of health care professionals in Uruguay. Methods: We conducted an online survey distributed to physicians from multidisciplinary areas (Oncology, Radiotherapy, Hematology, Pediatric hematology-oncology, Gynecology, Urology) involved in daily medical care to young cancer patients. Results: 208 physicians from 16 geographical regions completed the survey. 53 % of the subjects were less than 40 years old, and 77.7% identified themselves as women. Most of the responders (99 %) agreed that FP counseling should be part of cancer treatment; however, only 49 % discusses FP and refers their patients in their daily clinical practice. Regarding referral of patients to an Oncofertility specialist, 36% do it occasionally, and 15% have never referred. Half of the responders (50%) stated that they know the available FP options for young cancer patients, 49% have an idea, and 1% are not aware. 37 % of participants consider that FP treatments would delay cancer treatment initiation, impacting their attitude towards FP recommendation and referral. Regarding FP coverage, 51.7 % were not aware of financial coverage for fertility preservation treatments availableness. 57% of physicians directly involved in breast cancer (BC) care agreed with the statement that oocyte cryopreservation is safe in BC patients with positive hormonal receptors, 35% are not sure, and 8% believe it is not safe, 46% believe pregnancy is safe after BC, 34% is not sure, while 20% consider it is unsafe. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the need to increase FP awareness in Uruguayan health care professionals. Moreover, several misconceptions on FP and pregnancy-related issues in BC patients have been identified. Focused research and education to improve physicians' knowledge and adherence to available international guidelines are urgently required to improve the care of young cancer patients who desire future fertility. Key Words: Oncofertility, fertility preservation, oocyte cryopreservation, breast cancer, pregnancy.

Sperm count and future challenges for cancer patients

Cancer has significantly harmful effects on sperm count, motility and sexual life of the survivor, thereby adversely affecting the fertility and post cancer quality of life. Use of safer chemotherapeutic agents, protection from radiation damage, cryopreservation of sperm and testicular tissue and use of protective drugs to reduce testicular damage is recommended. More research is needed to safeguard fertility of cancer affected children as testicular tissue cryopreservation is the only fertility preservation option. Advanced understanding of in vitro sperm production is needed. In this era of advanced assisted reproduction, the minimum requirement for fertilization is one healthy sperm for one oocyte. Children born after chemotherapy do not have statistically significant increase in malignant neoplasms. Proper cancer counseling and referral for fertility preservation are of high importance to protect fertility. The focus of this review is to share knowledge of sperm formation, importance of sperm count, nature of damage to male fertility, remedies to overcome damage and to improve post cancer quality of life of male cancer survivors.

Effect of a Knowledge-Translation Intervention on Breast Surgeons' Oncofertility Attitudes and Practices.

The breast surgeon, generally the first oncology specialist consulted, is ideally suited to offer fertility preservation (FP) referral to young women with breast cancer (YWBC). In the authors' 2015 survey of 84 surgeons participating in the pan-Canadian RUBY study of YWBC, oncofertility knowledge and rates of FP referral were suboptimal. The authors designed an oncofertility knowledge-translation intervention for surgeons. A customized oncofertility toolbox was created including a seminar/webinar, an option grid, a three-question FP survey sent upon registration of each RUBY patient, and a management checklist. In 2018, the 28 site lead surgeons were re-invited to participate in a follow-up telephone interview, and 85 non-site lead surgeons were invited to complete a follow-up online questionnaire. A total of 27 site lead surgeons consented to be re-interviewed. After the intervention, 85% indicated that they "routinely" initiated a fertility discussion compared with 54% at baseline (p < 0.005), with 56% stating that the toolbox had been helpful for making positive changes in their practice regarding oncofertility, and 44% stating that they found it easier to initiate a fertility discussion. Among the 55 non-site lead surgeons who completed the questionnaire, a significant improvement in oncofertility knowledge was found. The percentage reporting "rarely" or "never" discussing FP options decreased from 41 to 14% (p < 0.005), and 84% stated that they referred patients who had not completed their families and were at risk for infertility to FP consultation compared with 32% before the intervention (p < 0.001). A multi-pronged but simple knowledge-translation intervention improved the attitudes, knowledge, and FP practice of Canadian breast surgeons.

Fertility preservation for transgender adolescents and young adults: a systematic review.

Many transgender individuals choose to undergo gender-affirming hormone treatment (GAHT) and/or sex reassignment surgery (SRS) to alleviate the distress that is associated with gender dysphoria. Although these treatment options often succeed in alleviating such symptoms, they can also negatively impact future reproductive potential. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the available psychosocial and medical literature on fertility preservation (FP) for transgender adolescents and young adults (TAYAs), to identify gaps in the current research and provide suggestions for future research directions. A systematic review of English peer-reviewed papers published from 2001 onwards, using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines, was conducted. Four journal databases (Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed Medline, Ovid Embase and Ovid PsychINFO) were used to identify all relevant studies exploring psychosocial or medical aspects of FP in TAYAs. The search strategy used a combination of subject headings and generic terms related to the study topic and population. Bibliographies of the selected articles were also hand searched and cross-checked to ensure comprehensive coverage. All selected papers were independently reviewed by the co-authors. Characteristics of the studies, objectives and key findings were extracted, and a systematic review was conducted. Included in the study were 19 psychosocial-based research papers and 21 medical-based research papers that explore fertility-related aspects specific for this population. Key psychosocial themes included the desire to have children for TAYAs; FP discussions, counselling and referrals provided by healthcare providers (HCPs); FP utilization; the attitudes, knowledge and beliefs of TAYAs, HCPs and the parents/guardians of TAYAs; and barriers to accessing FP. Key medical themes included fertility-related effects of GAHT, FP options and outcomes. From a synthesis of the literature, we conclude that there are many barriers preventing TAYAs from pursuing FP, including a lack of awareness of FP options, high costs, invasiveness of the available procedures and the potential psychological impact of the FP process. The available medical data on the reproductive effects of GAHT are diverse, and while detrimental effects are anticipated, the extent to which these effects are reversible is unknown. FP counselling should begin as early as possible as a standard of care before GAHT to allow time for informed decisions. The current lack of high-quality medical data specific to FP counselling practice for this population means there is a reliance on expert opinion and extrapolation from studies in the cisgender population. Future research should include large-scale cohort studies (preferably multi-centered), longitudinal studies of TAYAs across the FP process, qualitative studies of the parents/guardians of TAYAs and studies evaluating the effectiveness of different strategies to improve the attitudes, knowledge and beliefs of HCPs.

Barriers to fertility preservation (FP) in a prospective pan-Canadian study of young women with breast cancer (YWBC).

136 Background: Despite ASCO recommendations that oncologists routinely offer FP to young cancer patients prior to treatment, studies show that only a minority of YWBC are given this option. We sought to determine whether an intervention, including educational materials and regular reminders to breast surgeons, would improve FP referral. The current report examines the rates of FP discussion, referral, uptake and reasons for declining, according to participants’ self-reported pre-diagnosis fertility plans. Methods: Consecutive women ≤ age 40 newly diagnosed with breast cancer at 30 Canadian sites were offered enrolment in a national study of YWBC. At 3 months each participant was surveyed regarding her pre-diagnosis (dx) fertility plans and post-dx oncofertility management. Results: Of the 712 recruits (09/15 to 08/18) with invasive disease (mean age 36), 46%, 15% and 29% had 0, 1 or 2 children respectively and 77% were in a stable relationship. Among the 480 women who completed the fertility survey, 392 (82%) indicated they had a pre-treatment fertility discussion initiated by a health care provider (HCP) - in 232 cases (48%) the surgeon/nurse and in 130 cases (27%) the medical oncologist/ nurse. Only 14 (16%) of the 88 women not approached by a HCP initiated such a discussion. Rates of FP discussion, referral and uptake are shown below. Among the 38 women who definitely wanted (more) children prior to dx and were offered FP but declined the consult or procedure, the commonest reasons were cost (n = 9) and fear that treatment delay (n = 8) or FP (n = 4) could cause recurrence. Conclusions: Post-intervention FP discussion rates were higher than previously reported. Yet 26% of patients who had definitely/probably not completed their family were not referred for a FP consult. Cost remains a significant FP barrier. Studies are needed to confirm the long-term safety of FP for ER+ patients. [Table: see text]

Outcomes of delivering a fertility preservation service for women with cancer over a 12-year period at a UK assisted conception unit

This service evaluation aimed to appraise the delivery of a fertility preservation service for women with cancer which was established in 2005 as part of an Assisted Conception Unit. First, the ACU-database was interrogated between 08/2005 and 01/2017; revealing 174 women received referrals over the 12-year period with a steady referral increase each year. Demographic analyses revealed factors, such as being partnered, to be strong indicators of whether women would seek FP or not. To improve service provision, women who had consented to be contacted for audit, administrative and research purposes, received questionnaires to ascertain their perspectives on the FP decision-making process, their outcomes and ACU after-care. The majority perceived their experience as excellent due to the care they received from ACU staff, speed and efficiency in service delivery. The increasing number of referrals since 2005 is reassuring. However, this audit also highlighted shortcomings of the service, such as limited awareness of the fertility counselling service and lack of after-care.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? There has been an increase in women diagnosed with cancer undergoing fertility preservation (FP) before starting potential gonadotoxic treatment. Offering FP to these women is essential as the ability to have future children is often perceived as equally as important as survivorship, and a source of hope for the future.What do the results of this study add? This study presents a service evaluation, across a 12-year period, of delivering FP services to women with cancer in one UK Assisted Conception Unit (ACU). Women’s experiences of the service were evaluated to enhance service delivery and make recommendations for clinical practice.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or future research? The current service evaluation demonstrated increased rates of FP referral over a 12-year period for women with cancer. While this increasing number is reassuring and reflecting increased awareness among professionals and patients; shortcomings in the care pathway were also found: women reported limited opportunity to see fertility counsellors and desired better after care. This information may also be of benefit to other ACUs seeking to enhance and improve service provision in the care of women with cancer, contemplating fertility preservation.

Surgical management and gynecologic care of the transgender patient.

Over 1.4 million adults are identified as transgender in 2014. Many of these individuals have undergone, or plan to undergo, gender-affirming surgery. This review summarizes the medical and surgical options available for the transgender population and reviews screening guidelines and fertility preservation options. In addition, it highlights the role gynecologists have in caring for this population. Gynecologists perform certain gender-affirming surgeries, such as hysterectomies and bilateral salpingooophorectomies. They also can play an important role in providing hormone therapy, anatomy specific cancer screening, and discussion of and/or referral for fertility preservation. Gynecologists are skilled to perform certain gender-affirming surgeries and play an important role in gender-affirming care.

Patterns of Referral for Fertility Preservation Among Female Adolescents and Young Adults with Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

Purpose: To assess the fertility preservation (FP) referral rates and patterns of newly diagnosed breast cancer in female adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients.Methods: Women aged 15–39 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer in Ontario from 2000 to 2017 were identified using the Ontario Cancer Registry. Exclusion criteria included prior sterilizing procedure, health insurance ineligibility, and prior infertility or cancer diagnosis. Women with a gynecology consult between cancer diagnosis and chemotherapy commencement with the billed infertility diagnostic code (ICD-9 628) were used as a surrogate for FP referral. The effect of age, parity, year of cancer diagnosis, staging, income, region, neighborhood marginalization, and rurality on referral status was investigated.Results: A total of 4452 patients aged 15–39 with newly diagnosed breast cancer met the inclusion criteria. Of these women, 178 (4.0%) were referred to a gynecologist with a billing code of infertility between cancer diagnosis and initiation of chemotherapy. Older patients, prior parity, and advanced disease were inversely correlated with referrals. Referral rates also varied regionally: patients treated in the south-east and south-west Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs) had the highest probability of referral, and patients covered by north LHINs had the lowest (central LHIN as reference). General surgeons accounted for 36.5% of all referrals, the highest percentage of all specialists. Referral rates significantly increased over time from 0.4% in 2000 to 10.7% in 2016.Conclusion: FP referral rates remain low and continue to be influenced by patient demographics and prognosis. These findings highlight the need for further interdisciplinary coordination in addressing the fertility concerns of AYA with newly diagnosed breast cancers.

Knowledge, Practice Behaviors, and Perceived Barriers to Fertility Care Among Providers of Transgender Healthcare

PurposeTransgender individuals may experience impaired fertility due to gender-affirming hormonal interventions (e.g., pubertal suppression treatment and/or exogenous hormones). Clinical practice guidelines recommend providers discuss fertility implications and options for fertility preservation. The goal of this study was to examine fertility knowledge, practice behaviors, and perceived barriers to fertility care among multidisciplinary providers who care for transgender pediatric and/or adult patients. MethodsA 46-item survey was distributed to relevant listservs and at conferences with a focus on transgender health. ResultsTwo hundred two providers completed the survey: (1) physicians (n = 87), (2) psychologists (n = 51), (3) Master (MA)-level mental health providers (n = 39), and (4) nonphysician healthcare providers, comprising advanced practice nurses, registered nurses, and physician assistants (n = 25). Overall knowledge was high (M = 3.64, SD = 1.61). Significant differences were identified in knowledge by provider type (p <.001) but not patient age group (p = .693). Physicians had significantly greater knowledge than MA-level mental health providers (p = .005). Variables associated with fertility discussion included provider-related barriers [b = –.42, p < .001], and perceived patient-related barriers, including perceptions that patients are unwilling to delay treatment [b = .12, p = .011] or are unable to afford fertility preservation (FP) [b = .12, p = .029]. ConclusionsWhile overall fertility-related knowledge was high, there was variability in domains of knowledge, as well as provider practice behaviors related to fertility counseling and referral for FP. Findings related to perceived barriers to fertility counseling and fertility preservation warrant further investigation; qualitative studies may be particularly helpful in understanding how specific provider- and patient-related barriers impact counseling and referral for fertility-related care.