Literature DB >> 35870098

Fertility preservation practices for female oncofertility differ significantly across the USA: results of a survey of SREI members.

Leah J Cooper1, Benjamin R Emery2, Kenneth Aston2, Douglas Fair3, Mitchell P Rosen4, Erica Johnstone3, Joseph M Letourneau3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The field of oncofertility has maintained an important focus on improving access, yet standardized practices are lacking. To assess how female cancer patients are provided oncofertility care, we sought to determine provider-level differences and whether there are physician or practice characteristics that predict these variations.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was sent to SREI members. The survey included fifteen questions about physician practice characteristics and oncofertility cryopreservation protocols. Topics included ovarian stimulation protocols, fertilization techniques, stage of embryo cryopreservation, routine use of pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC). Statistical analyses assessed whether practice setting, geographic region, time in practice, and mandatory state insurance coverage had effects on cryopreservation protocols.
RESULTS: A total of 141 (17%) from diverse REI practice backgrounds completed the survey. The median number of new female oncofertility consults per year was 30 (range 1 to 300). Providers in academic settings treated more patients (median 40 vs. 15, p < 0.001). Providers in academic settings more often use gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (85% vs. 52%, p < 0.001) and perform OTC (41% vs. 4%, p < 0.001). Providers in academic practices were less likely to perform intracytoplasmic sperm injection in every cycle (37% vs. 55%, p = 0.032) and less likely to usually advise PGT-A (21% vs. 36%, p = 0.001). Mandated state insurance coverage had no effect on oncofertility practices.
CONCLUSION: Oncofertility practices vary among providers. Factors such as practice setting and region may affect the services provided. We do not yet know the best practices in oncofertility patients, and future research is needed.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assisted reproductive technology; Cancer; Fertility preservation; Laboratory techniques; Oncofertility

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35870098      PMCID: PMC9428095          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-022-02567-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.357


  23 in total

1.  How members of the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility and Society of Reproductive Surgeons evaluate, define, and manage hydrosalpinges.

Authors:  Kenan Omurtag; Natalia M Grindler; Kimberly A Roehl; Gordon Wright Bates; Angeline N Beltsos; Randall R Odem; Emily S Jungheim
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  The impact of malignancy on response to ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Volkan Turan; Molly M Quinn; Nurten Dayioglu; Mitchell P Rosen; Kutluk Oktay
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy: a committee opinion.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 4.  Fertility Preservation in Women.

Authors:  Jacques Donnez; Marie-Madeleine Dolmans
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 5.  In vitro maturation.

Authors:  Melanie L Walls; Roger J Hart
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 5.237

6.  Oncologic oocyte cryopreservation: national comparison of fertility preservation between women with and without cancer.

Authors:  Jennifer F Kawwass; Lisa M Shandley; Sheree L Boulet; Heather S Hipp
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-02-15       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Practice patterns, satisfaction, and demographics of reproductive endocrinologists: results of the 2014 Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Workforce Survey.

Authors:  Kurt T Barnhart; Steven T Nakajima; Elizabeth Puscheck; Thomas M Price; Valerie L Baker; James Segars
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Fertility services for human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients: provider policy, practice, and perspectives.

Authors:  Julie A Stanitis; Daniel R Grow; Halina Wiczyk
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2007-08-13       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 9.  Challenges and considerations in optimizing ovarian stimulation protocols in oncofertility patients.

Authors:  Kathryn Coyne; MacKenzie Purdy; Kathleen O'Leary; Jerome L Yaklic; Steven R Lindheim; Leslie A Appiah
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2014-12-05

Review 10.  In vitro maturation of human oocytes: Its role in infertility treatment and new possibilities.

Authors:  Eun Mi Chang; Hang Seok Song; Dong Ryul Lee; Woo Sik Lee; Tae Ki Yoon
Journal:  Clin Exp Reprod Med       Date:  2014-06-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.