Juliana Assi1, Juliana Santos1, Tatiana Bonetti1,2, Paulo C Serafini1,3, Eduardo L A Motta1,2, Mauricio Barbour Chehin4,5,6. 1. Huntington-Medicina Reprodutiva, Av Republica do Líbano, 529 Ibirapuera, São Paulo, 04501-000, Brazil. 2. Disciplina de Ginecologia Endocrinológica, Departamento de Ginecologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina da Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP-EPM), Rua Napoleão de Barros, 608 Vila Clementino, São Paulo, SP, 04024-002, Brazil. 3. Disciplina de Ginecologia, Departamento de Obstetrícia e Ginecologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455 Cerqueira César, São Paulo, SP, 01246-903, Brazil. 4. Huntington-Medicina Reprodutiva, Av Republica do Líbano, 529 Ibirapuera, São Paulo, 04501-000, Brazil. mchehin@huntington.com.br. 5. Disciplina de Ginecologia Endocrinológica, Departamento de Ginecologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina da Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP-EPM), Rua Napoleão de Barros, 608 Vila Clementino, São Paulo, SP, 04024-002, Brazil. mchehin@huntington.com.br. 6. Universidade Santo Amaro (UNISA), Rua Prof. Enéas de Siqueira Neto, 340, São Paulo, SP, CEP: 04829-300, Brasil. mchehin@huntington.com.br.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The risk of ovarian failure after radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy is a concern among oncologic women. There is no doubt regarding the psycho-emotional benefits of fertility preservation (FP) after a cancer diagnosis because concerns about biological conception are a source of anxiety and can even affect the patient's cancer recovery. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncology patients' feelings, concerns, and life quality impacts related to FP. METHODS: This qualitative cross-sectional study was based on a questionnaire administered to a selected group of women diagnosed with cancer who underwent FP. Thirty-four eligible women (23-39 years old) completed this questionnaire. RESULTS: Two of the participants already had a child, and most of them (61.8%) stated a desire to have children at the time of FP. Their feelings primarily involved safety (44.1%) and hope (23.5%). Time and/or financial issues (82.4%) were the main challenge for FP. All of the women noted the importance of FP, with many stating that it is warranted to allow the possibility of a biological pregnancy due to the risk of infertility. Finally, questions about the impact on their lives if they had not undergone FP indicated emotional impairment, low quality of life, relationship problems, and uncertainty about maternity. CONCLUSIONS: FP for oncology patients is a positive strategy. The women in this study felt that FP was a worthwhile process and that the security of having undergone FP brought them peace during oncological treatment and contributed to their quality of life.
PURPOSE: The risk of ovarian failure after radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy is a concern among oncologic women. There is no doubt regarding the psycho-emotional benefits of fertility preservation (FP) after a cancer diagnosis because concerns about biological conception are a source of anxiety and can even affect the patient's cancer recovery. The aim of this study was to evaluate oncology patients' feelings, concerns, and life quality impacts related to FP. METHODS: This qualitative cross-sectional study was based on a questionnaire administered to a selected group of women diagnosed with cancer who underwent FP. Thirty-four eligible women (23-39 years old) completed this questionnaire. RESULTS: Two of the participants already had a child, and most of them (61.8%) stated a desire to have children at the time of FP. Their feelings primarily involved safety (44.1%) and hope (23.5%). Time and/or financial issues (82.4%) were the main challenge for FP. All of the women noted the importance of FP, with many stating that it is warranted to allow the possibility of a biological pregnancy due to the risk of infertility. Finally, questions about the impact on their lives if they had not undergone FP indicated emotional impairment, low quality of life, relationship problems, and uncertainty about maternity. CONCLUSIONS: FP for oncology patients is a positive strategy. The women in this study felt that FP was a worthwhile process and that the security of having undergone FP brought them peace during oncological treatment and contributed to their quality of life.
Authors: Peter F Coccia; Alberto S Pappo; Jessica Altman; Smita Bhatia; Scott C Borinstein; Joseph Flynn; A Lindsay Frazier; Suzanne George; Robert Goldsby; Robert Hayashi; Mary S Huang; Rebecca H Johnson; Lynda Kwon Beaupin; Michael P Link; Kevin C Oeffinger; Kathleen M Orr; Damon Reed; Holly L Spraker; Deborah A Thomas; Margaret von Mehren; Daniel S Wechsler; Kimberly F Whelan; Brad Zebrack; Dorothy A Shead; Hema Sundar Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 11.908
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: Alison W Loren; Pamela B Mangu; Lindsay Nohr Beck; Lawrence Brennan; Anthony J Magdalinski; Ann H Partridge; Gwendolyn Quinn; W Hamish Wallace; Kutluk Oktay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 44.544