Jacqueline B Stone1, Joanne F Kelvin1, Lisa M DeAngelis1. 1. Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York (J.B.S., L.M.D.); Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York (J.F.K.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fertility preservation (FP) is an infrequently addressed issue for young adults with primary brain tumors. Given the improved prognosis and enhanced technology in reproductive medicine, more primary brain tumor patients see procreation as feasible, making the discussion of FP increasingly important. The goals of this study were to describe patients who received FP counseling by a fertility nurse specialist (FNS) and determine which sociodemographic and disease-related factors predict acceptance of referral to a reproductive specialist. METHODS: Institutional review board-approved retrospective review of primary brain tumor patients, ages 18 to 45, who were referred for FP counseling with a FNS from 2009 to 2013. RESULTS: Seventy patients were referred for FP counseling: 38 men, 32 women, with a median age of 32 years and median KPS of 90. Eighty-nine percent had gliomas; 58% grade III, 17% grade IV. Sixty-seven percent were referred for counseling at initial diagnosis. Of those referred, 73% accepted referral to a sperm bank (87% of men) or reproductive endocrinologist (56% of women). Patients were more likely to accept referral if they had no prior children (P = .048). There was no statistically significant difference in referral acceptance by age, race/ethnicity, marital status, religion, or tumor grade. After treatment, 3 men conceived naturally, 2 men conceived using banked sperm, and 2 women conceived naturally. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the historically poor prognosis of patients with primary brain tumors, there is significant interest in FP among these patients, particularly if they have no prior children. Clinicians should develop strategies to incorporate FP counseling into practice.
BACKGROUND: Fertility preservation (FP) is an infrequently addressed issue for young adults with primary brain tumors. Given the improved prognosis and enhanced technology in reproductive medicine, more primary brain tumor patients see procreation as feasible, making the discussion of FP increasingly important. The goals of this study were to describe patients who received FP counseling by a fertility nurse specialist (FNS) and determine which sociodemographic and disease-related factors predict acceptance of referral to a reproductive specialist. METHODS: Institutional review board-approved retrospective review of primary brain tumor patients, ages 18 to 45, who were referred for FP counseling with a FNS from 2009 to 2013. RESULTS: Seventy patients were referred for FP counseling: 38 men, 32 women, with a median age of 32 years and median KPS of 90. Eighty-nine percent had gliomas; 58% grade III, 17% grade IV. Sixty-seven percent were referred for counseling at initial diagnosis. Of those referred, 73% accepted referral to a sperm bank (87% of men) or reproductive endocrinologist (56% of women). Patients were more likely to accept referral if they had no prior children (P = .048). There was no statistically significant difference in referral acceptance by age, race/ethnicity, marital status, religion, or tumor grade. After treatment, 3 men conceived naturally, 2 men conceived using banked sperm, and 2 women conceived naturally. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the historically poor prognosis of patients with primary brain tumors, there is significant interest in FP among these patients, particularly if they have no prior children. Clinicians should develop strategies to incorporate FP counseling into practice.
Entities:
Keywords:
fertility; fertility preservation; primary brain tumor; young adult
Authors: R E Strowd; R Blackwood; M Brown; M Harmon; J Lovato; T Yalcinkaya; G Lesser Journal: J Oncol Pharm Pract Date: 2013-01-04 Impact factor: 1.809
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
Authors: Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil; Clement K Gwede; Cheryl Miree; Lindsey M King; Heather B Clayton; Crystal Wilson; Pamela Munster Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Taylor Nordan; Ann M Thomas; Elizabeth S Ginsburg; Patrick Y Wen; Andrey V Dolinko; Pietro Bortoletto Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2020-02-14 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Erin M Mobley; Ginny L Ryan; Amy E Sparks; Varun Monga; William W Terry Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2019-10-25 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Kee Kiat Yeo; Darcy E Burgers; Katelynn Brodigan; Karen Fasciano; A Lindsay Frazier; Katherine E Warren; David A Reardon Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2021-02-18