PURPOSE: National guidelines recommend patients with cancer of reproductive age be informed of their risk for infertility resulting from cancer treatment. Despite existing technologies to preserve fertility, many patients report not receiving timely information about fertility risk, and oncology providers report multiple barriers to discussing or referring patients on this topic. METHODS: Nine cancer centers have been recognized as Fertile Hope Centers of Excellence, a designation awarded to cancer centers with an institutionalized approach to addressing fertility issues. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with each of these centers to identify strengths of and challenges to their approaches. RESULTS: All institutions had procedures for the provision of topical professional and patient education and for notification of patients. Notification methods varied widely, from use of customized consent forms to highly automated electronic alerts for providers. Referral routines and enactment of institutional policies also differed. Key components of successful programs emerged, including the value of internal champions, affiliation with complementary programs, and resource sharing. CONCLUSION: The programs described provide examples of systems that can be assembled in different types of clinical settings, depending on the availability of resources and infrastructure. As institutions develop programs, metrics to evaluate notification systems, in particular, as well as the supportive program components, should be used so identification of best practices can continue. Widespread adoption of programs that incorporate the baseline elements identified will not only comply with national guidelines but also address patients' reproductive needs and fundamentally affect future quality of life.
PURPOSE: National guidelines recommend patients with cancer of reproductive age be informed of their risk for infertility resulting from cancer treatment. Despite existing technologies to preserve fertility, many patients report not receiving timely information about fertility risk, and oncology providers report multiple barriers to discussing or referring patients on this topic. METHODS: Nine cancer centers have been recognized as Fertile Hope Centers of Excellence, a designation awarded to cancer centers with an institutionalized approach to addressing fertility issues. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with each of these centers to identify strengths of and challenges to their approaches. RESULTS: All institutions had procedures for the provision of topical professional and patient education and for notification of patients. Notification methods varied widely, from use of customized consent forms to highly automated electronic alerts for providers. Referral routines and enactment of institutional policies also differed. Key components of successful programs emerged, including the value of internal champions, affiliation with complementary programs, and resource sharing. CONCLUSION: The programs described provide examples of systems that can be assembled in different types of clinical settings, depending on the availability of resources and infrastructure. As institutions develop programs, metrics to evaluate notification systems, in particular, as well as the supportive program components, should be used so identification of best practices can continue. Widespread adoption of programs that incorporate the baseline elements identified will not only comply with national guidelines but also address patients' reproductive needs and fundamentally affect future quality of life.
Authors: Stephanie J Lee; Leslie R Schover; Ann H Partridge; Pasquale Patrizio; W Hamish Wallace; Karen Hagerty; Lindsay N Beck; Lawrence V Brennan; Kutluk Oktay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil; Ji-Hyun Lee; Paul B Jacobsen; Gerold Bepler; Johnathan Lancaster; David L Keefe; Terrance L Albrecht Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-10-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jill P Ginsberg; Susan K Ogle; Lisa K Tuchman; Claire A Carlson; Maureen M Reilly; Wendy L Hobbie; Mary Rourke; Huaqing Zhao; Anna T Meadows Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil; Lindsey King; Cheryl A Miree; Crystal Wilson; Opal Raj; Jordan Watson; Alana Lopez; Terrance L Albrecht Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2009-10-01
Authors: Jeremy Lewin; Justin Ming Zheng Ma; Laura Mitchell; Seline Tam; Natasha Puri; Derek Stephens; Amirrtha Srikanthan; Philippe Bedard; Albiruni Razak; Michael Crump; David Warr; Meredith Giuliani; Abha Gupta Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-02-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Molly B Moravek; Leslie C Appiah; Antoinette Anazodo; Karen C Burns; Veronica Gomez-Lobo; Holly R Hoefgen; Olivia Jaworek Frias; Monica M Laronda; Jennifer Levine; Lillian R Meacham; Mary Ellen Pavone; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Erin E Rowell; Andrew C Strine; Teresa K Woodruff; Leena Nahata Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2019-01-14 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Gwendolyn P Quinn; Rebecca G Block; Marla L Clayman; Joanne Kelvin; Sarah R Arvey; Ji-Hyun Lee; Joyce Reinecke; Ivana Sehovic; Paul B Jacobsen; Damon Reed; Luis Gonzalez; Susan T Vadaparampil; Christine Laronga; M Catherine Lee; Julio Pow-Sang; Susan Eggly; Anna Franklin; Bijal Shah; William J Fulp; Brandon Hayes-Lattin Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: John M Salsman; Betina Yanez; Kristin N Smith; Jennifer L Beaumont; Mallory A Snyder; Khouri Barnes; Marla L Clayman Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Meghan Bowman-Curci; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Joyce Reinecke; Richard R Reich; Susan T Vadaparampil Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-09-22 Impact factor: 3.603