Sana M Salih1, Sarah Z Elsarrag2, Elizabeth Prange3, Karli Contreras2, Radya G Osman2, Jens C Eikoff4, Diane Puccetti3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. Electronic address: salih@wisc.edu. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 4. Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Female childhood cancer survivors are at an increased risk of reproductive health impairment. We compared reproductive health outcomes with the recommended standard in a cohort of childhood cancer survivors. STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective chart review of 222 female childhood cancer survivors aged 21 years or younger that presented to a tertiary referral center between 1997-2008 was initiated. The main outcome measures were the compliance with the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines for childhood cancer survivor management of reproductive health. In particular, we evaluated menstrual cycle regularity, fertility preservation counseling, and endocrine profile, as defined by follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) levels as surrogate markers for ovarian reserve. Secondary outcomes were to study the contribution of survivor clinics in enforcing these guidelines. RESULTS: Of 136 patients older than 13 years at their last visit, 58 patients (43%) had FSH data available and none had AMH data. Patients were stratified into 3 groups according to FSH levels. Forty of 58 patients (69%) have normal ovarian reserve (FSH level < 10), 10 of 58 patients (17%) have decreased ovarian reserve (FSH levels 10-40), and 8 of 58 patients (14%) have premature menopause, defined as FSH > 40. Most patients with amenorrhea have elevated FSH levels indicating primary ovarian insufficiency, while 3 patients (2.2%) have low FSH levels consistent with hypothalamic amenorrhea. None of the patients were counseled on fertility preservation. CONCLUSIONS: Reproductive health follow-up in children with cancer, including FSH and AMH measurement when indicated, should be established and strictly adhered.
OBJECTIVE: Female childhood cancer survivors are at an increased risk of reproductive health impairment. We compared reproductive health outcomes with the recommended standard in a cohort of childhood cancer survivors. STUDY DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective chart review of 222 female childhood cancer survivors aged 21 years or younger that presented to a tertiary referral center between 1997-2008 was initiated. The main outcome measures were the compliance with the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines for childhood cancer survivor management of reproductive health. In particular, we evaluated menstrual cycle regularity, fertility preservation counseling, and endocrine profile, as defined by follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) levels as surrogate markers for ovarian reserve. Secondary outcomes were to study the contribution of survivor clinics in enforcing these guidelines. RESULTS: Of 136 patients older than 13 years at their last visit, 58 patients (43%) had FSH data available and none had AMH data. Patients were stratified into 3 groups according to FSH levels. Forty of 58 patients (69%) have normal ovarian reserve (FSH level < 10), 10 of 58 patients (17%) have decreased ovarian reserve (FSH levels 10-40), and 8 of 58 patients (14%) have premature menopause, defined as FSH > 40. Most patients with amenorrhea have elevated FSH levels indicating primary ovarian insufficiency, while 3 patients (2.2%) have low FSH levels consistent with hypothalamic amenorrhea. None of the patients were counseled on fertility preservation. CONCLUSIONS: Reproductive health follow-up in children with cancer, including FSH and AMH measurement when indicated, should be established and strictly adhered.
Authors: Mary B Zelinski; Mark K Murphy; Maralee S Lawson; Andrea Jurisicova; K Y Francis Pau; Natalia P Toscano; Darla S Jacob; John K Fanton; Robert F Casper; Stephen D Dertinger; Jonathan L Tilly Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2011-03-15 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Vicky Lehmann; Leena Nahata; Amanda C Ferrante; Jennifer A Hansen-Moore; Nicholas D Yeager; James L Klosky; Cynthia A Gerhardt Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Vicky Lehmann; Jessica S Flynn; Rebecca H Foster; Kathryn M Russell; James L Klosky Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Sana M Salih; Ashley K Ringelstetter; Mazin Z Elsarrag; David H Abbott; Elon C Roti Roti Journal: Biol Reprod Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 4.285
Authors: Matthew R Zanotelli; Joseph D Henningsen; Patrick M Hopkins; Aaron P Dederich; Tessa Herman; Tracy J Puccinelli; Sana M Salih Journal: J Ovarian Res Date: 2016-08-04 Impact factor: 4.234
Authors: Jenna Kropp; Elon C Roti Roti; Ashley Ringelstetter; Hasan Khatib; David H Abbott; Sana M Salih Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Caroline Z Berton; Caroline Brogliato; Ivan H Yoshida; Laura T Vellez; Claudia H Suganuma; Emerson B Cordts; Gabriel S Conceição; Caio P Barbosa Journal: JBRA Assist Reprod Date: 2020-07-14