| Literature DB >> 34973107 |
Miyuki Harada1, Fuminori Kimura2, Yasushi Takai3, Takeshi Nakajima4, Kimio Ushijima5, Hiroaki Kobayashi6, Toyomi Satoh7, Akiko Tozawa8, Kohei Sugimoto9, Shigehira Saji10, Chikako Shimizu11, Kyoko Akiyama12, Hiroko Bando13, Akira Kuwahara14, Tatsuro Furui15, Hiroshi Okada9, Koji Kawai16, Nobuo Shinohara17, Koichi Nagao18, Michio Kitajima19, Souichi Suenobu20, Toshinori Soejima21, Mitsuru Miyachi22, Yoko Miyoshi23, Akihiro Yoneda24, Akihito Horie25, Yasushi Ishida26, Noriko Usui27, Yoshinobu Kanda28, Nobuharu Fujii29, Makoto Endo30, Robert Nakayama31, Manabu Hoshi32, Tsukasa Yonemoto33, Chikako Kiyotani34, Natsuko Okita35, Eishi Baba36, Manabu Muto37, Iwaho Kikuchi38, Ken-Ichirou Morishige15, Koichiro Tsugawa12, Hiroyuki Nishiyama39, Hajime Hosoi40, Mitsune Tanimoto41, Akira Kawai42, Kazuhiko Sugiyama43, Narikazu Boku44, Masato Yonemura45, Naoko Hayashi46, Daisuke Aoki47, Yutaka Osuga48, Nao Suzuki8.
Abstract
In 2017, the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology (JSCO) published the JSCO Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017 for Fertility Preservation in Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancer Patients. These were the first Japanese guidelines to address issues of oncofertility. In this field of medicine, sustained close cooperation between oncologists and reproductive specialists is essential from the diagnosis of cancer until many years after completion of cancer treatment. These JSCO guidelines were intended to guide multidisciplinary medical staff in considering the availability of fertility preservation options and to help them decide whether to provide fertility preservation to childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer patients before treatment starts, with the ultimate goal of improving patient survivorship. The guidelines are presented as Parts 1 and 2. This article (Part 1) summarizes the goals of the guidelines and the methods used to develop them and provides an overview of fertility preservation across all oncology areas. It includes general remarks on the basic concepts surrounding fertility preservation and explanations of the impacts of cancer treatment on gonadal function by sex and treatment modality and of the options for protecting/preserving gonadal function and makes recommendations based on 4 clinical questions. Part 2 of these guidelines provides specific recommendations on fertility preservation in 8 types of cancer (gynecologic, breast, urologic, pediatric, hematologic, bone and soft tissue, brain, and digestive).Entities:
Keywords: Childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) ; Fertility preservation; Practice guideline
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34973107 PMCID: PMC8816532 DOI: 10.1007/s10147-021-02081-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Clin Oncol ISSN: 1341-9625 Impact factor: 3.402
Categories of evidence levels
| Category of evidence level | Description |
|---|---|
| Level I | Evidence from a systematic review or meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) |
| Level II | Evidence from 1 or more RCTs |
| Level III | Evidence from 1 or more non-randomized controlled studies |
| Level IVa | Evidence from 1 or more analytical epidemiology studies (cohort studies) |
| Level IVb | Evidence from 1 or more analytical epidemiology studies (case–control studies and/or cross-sectional studies) |
| Level V | Evidence from 1 or more descriptive studies (1 or more case reports and/or 1 or more case-series studies) |
| Level VI | Based on the opinion of experts (boards and/or individuals) without supportive patient data |
Definitions of recommendation grades
| Recommendation grade | Definition |
|---|---|
| A | Based on full scientific evidence, the approach is strongly recommended |
| B | Based on scientific evidence, the approach is recommended |
| C1 | Despite the presence of limited scientific evidence, the approach is recommended |
| C2 | Because of the paucity of scientific evidence, the approach is not recommended |
| D | Based on scientific evidence for its non-efficacy or harm(s), the approach is not recommended |
Impacts of cancer treatment on gonadal function by sex and treatment modality
| Impacts in female patients | |
| Surgery | Ovarian and other pelvic organ surgery may reduce the number of ovarian follicles (each of which is a cellular aggregation containing an immature oocyte surrounded by its encasing cells, such as granulosa cells and theca cells; the maturation of follicles is associated with the maturation of oocytes) and suppress ovarian sex hormone production, leading to ovarian failure |
| Chemotherapy | Many anticancer agents inhibit the growth of ovarian follicles, causing temporary, i.e., reversible, amenorrhea. On the other hand, alkylating agents (e.g., cyclophosphamide and busulfan) and platinum analogs (e.g., cisplatin) are highly gonadotoxic and can reduce the number of oocytes. Treatment with any such agent at a high cumulative dose can cause permanent loss of oocytes soon after treatment and reduce ovarian hormone production |
| Radiotherapy | Ovarian radiation can reduce the number of oocytes and impair ovarian function. Radiation at a high cumulative dose can cause permanent loss of oocytes soon after treatment and reduce ovarian hormone production. Hypothalamic or pituitary radiation may impair ovulation |
| Impacts in males | |
| Surgery | Testicular surgery may interfere with spermatogenesis, testicular hormone production, and spermatozoa transportation, leading to testicular failure |
| Chemotherapy | Alkylating agents (e.g., cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, busulfan, and procarbazine) reduce the number of spermatogonia. Treatment with any such agent at a high cumulative dose can cause permanent impairment of spermatogenesis soon after treatment |
| Radiotherapy | Testicular radiation can reduce the number of spermatogonia. Radiation at a high cumulative dose can cause permanent impairment of spermatogenesis soon after treatment. Hypothalamic or pituitary radiation may impair spermatogenesis and/or hormone production |
| Impacts in both sexes | |
| Interferon-α and tyrosine kinase inhibitors can induce thyroid function abnormalities | |
Fertility preservation options available for female cancer patients
| Embryo (fertilized oocyte) cryopreservation | Unfertilized oocyte cryopreservation | Ovarian tissue cryopreservation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligible malignancies | Leukemia, breast cancer, lymphoma, digestive system cancer, gynecological cancer, malignant melanoma, germ cell tumor, brain tumor, sarcoma, etc | Leukemia, breast cancer, lymphoma, digestive system cancer, gynecological cancer, malignant melanoma, germ cell tumor, brain tumor, sarcoma, etc | Breast cancer, lymphoma, etc. (in cases where auto-grafting is considered) |
| Eligible agesa | 16–45 years | 16–40 years | 0–40 years |
| In women with or without a partner | With a partner | Without a partner | With or without a partner |
| Time required for intervention | 2–8 weeks | 2–8 weeks | 1–2 weeks |
| Method for freezing | Vitrification | Vitrification | Slow freezing or vitrification |
| Oocyte viability after thawing | ≥ 95%–99% | ≥ 90% | ≥ 90%c |
| No. of successful deliveriesb | Innumerable | ≥ 6,000 | ≥ 60 |
| Advantages/disadvantages | Pregnancy rate per embryo transfer: 30–35% | Pregnancy rate per oocyte retrieval: 4.5–12% | Can cryopreserve many oocytes; risk of minimal residual disease; low efficiency of ovarian follicle survival |
aEligible ages vary among clinics
bAccording to data published up to and including November 2015
cNot conclusive