Assisted reproductive technology use and outcomes in childhood cancer survivors

被引:0
|
作者
Keefe, Kimberly W. [1 ,8 ]
Lanes, Andrea [1 ]
Stratton, Kayla [2 ]
Green, Daniel M. [3 ]
Chow, Eric J. [2 ]
Oeffinger, Kevin C. [4 ]
Barton, Sara [5 ]
Diller, Lisa [6 ,7 ]
Yasui, Yutaka
Leisenring, Wendy M. [2 ]
Armstrong, Gregory T. [3 ]
Ginsburg, Elizabeth S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Ctr Infertil & Reprod Surg, Boston, MA USA
[2] Fred Hutchinson Canc Ctr, Seattle, WA USA
[3] St Jude Childrens Res Hosp, Memphis, TN USA
[4] Duke Univ, Durham, NC USA
[5] Colorado Ctr Reprod Med, Denver, CO USA
[6] Dana Farber Canc Inst, Boston, MA USA
[7] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA USA
[8] Ctr Infertil & Reprod Surg, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
assisted reproduction; cancer survivor; childhood cancer survivor; female infertility; in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcome; IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION; FEMALE SURVIVORS; OVARIAN RESERVE; PREGNANCY; CHEMOTHERAPY; MENOPAUSE; HISTORY; HEALTH; IMPACT; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1002/cncr.34995
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BackgroundTreatment exposures for childhood cancer reduce ovarian reserve. However, the success of assisted reproductive technology (ART) among female survivors is not well established.MethodsFive-year survivors of childhood cancer in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study were linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System, which captures national ART outcomes. The authors assessed the live birth rate, the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), and associations with treatment exposure using generalized estimating equations to account for multiple ovarian stimulations per individual. Siblings from a random sample of survivors were recruited to serve as a comparison group.ResultsAmong 9885 female survivors, 137 (1.4%; median age at diagnosis, 10 years [range, 0-20 years]; median years of follow-up after age 18 years, 11 years [range, 2-11 years]) underwent 224 ovarian stimulations using autologous or donor eggs and/or gestational carriers (157 autologous ovarian stimulation cycles, 67 donor ovarian stimulation cycles). In siblings, 33 (1.4%) underwent 51 autologous or donor ovarian stimulations. Of those who used embryos from autologous eggs without using gestational carriers, 97 survivors underwent 155 stimulations, resulting in 49 live births, for a 31.6% chance of live birth per ovarian stimulation (vs. 38.3% for siblings; p = .39) and a 43.9% chance of live birth per transfer (vs. 50.0%; p = .33). Prior treatment with cranial radiation therapy (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-0.97) and pelvic radiation therapy (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.73) resulted in a reduced chance of live birth compared with siblings. The likelihood of live birth after ART treatment in survivors was not affected by alkylator exposure (cyclophosphamide-equivalent dose, & GE;8000 mg/m2 vs. none; RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.52-2.05).ConclusionsChildhood cancer survivors are as likely to undergo treatment using ART as sibling controls. The success of ART treatment was not reduced after alkylator exposure. The results from the current study provide needed guidance on the use of ART in this population. Linking the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study database to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System revealed that childhood cancer survivors are as likely to undergo treatment with assisted reproductive technology as their siblings. The success of assisted reproductive technology was not reduced after alkylator exposure.
引用
收藏
页码:128 / 139
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Reproductive health of female childhood cancer survivors
    Zulpaite, Ruta
    Bumbuliene, Zana
    GINEKOLOGIA POLSKA, 2018, 89 (05) : 280 - 286
  • [32] Importance of Reproductive Care in Survivors of Childhood Cancer
    Gracia, Clarisa R.
    JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY PRACTICE, 2017, 13 (10) : 655 - +
  • [33] Reproductive health in female survivors of childhood cancer
    Gelson, Emily
    Prakash, Alka
    Macdougall, Jane
    Williams, Denise
    OBSTETRICIAN & GYNAECOLOGIST, 2016, 18 (04): : 315 - 322
  • [34] Assisted Reproductive Technology and Risk of Childhood Cancers
    Weng, Shiue-Shan
    Huang, Yen-Tsung
    Huang, Yi-Ting
    Li, Yi-Ping
    Chien, Li-Yin
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2022, 5 (08) : E2230157
  • [35] Reproductive Function and Outcomes in Female Survivors of Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancer: A Review
    van Dorp, Wendy
    Haupt, Riccardo
    Anderson, Richard A.
    Mulder, Renee L.
    van den Heuvel-Eibrink, Marry M.
    van Dulmen-den Broeder, Eline
    Su, H. Irene
    Winther, Jeanette Falck
    Hudson, Melissa M.
    Levine, Jennifer M.
    Wallace, W. Hamish
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 36 (21) : 2169 - 2180
  • [36] Neurocognitive outcomes in survivors of childhood cancer
    Moore, BD
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 30 (01) : 51 - 63
  • [37] Effect of the mode of assisted reproductive technology conception on obstetric outcomes for survivors of the vanishing twin syndrome
    La Sala, Giovanni B.
    Villani, Maria Teresa
    Nicoli, Alessia
    Gallinelli, Andrea
    Nucera, Giuseppe
    Blickstein, Isaac
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2006, 86 (01) : 247 - 249
  • [38] USE OF PENTOXIFYLLINE IN ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY
    TOURNAYE, H
    DEVROEY, P
    CAMUS, M
    VANDERLINDEN, M
    JANSSENS, R
    VANSTEIRTEGHEM, A
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 1995, 10 : 72 - 79
  • [39] Progesterone use in assisted reproductive technology
    Labarta, Elena
    Rodriguez, Cristina
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2020, 69 : 74 - 84
  • [40] Reproductive Late Effects in Female Survivors of Childhood Cancer
    Gnaneswaran, Shivany
    Deans, Rebecca
    Cohn, Richard J.
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 2012