Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Results from the survey for preservation of adolescent reproduction (SPARE) study: gender disparity in delivery of fertility preservation message to adolescents with cancer

  • Fertility Preservation
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Diminished reproductive capacity is a devastating consequence of life-sparing therapies for childhood malignancy. In 2006, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) published fertility preservation recommendations (ASCOR) emphasizing the importance of early discussion and intervention for fertility preservation strategies. Using the Survey for Preservation of Adolescent REproduction (SPARE), we sought to determine fertility preservation attitudes and practice patterns post-ASCOR from pediatric oncology specialists nationwide.

Materials and methods

The SPARE survey consists of 22 questions assessing pediatric oncology specialists’ attitudes and practice patterns toward fertility preservation. Broad perspectives on fertility preservation, including a willingness to discuss fertility, knowledge of current fertility preservation methods and awareness of ASCOR, were assessed.

Results

The majority of respondents acknowledged that fertility threats are a major concern for them and agreed that all pubertal cancer patients should be offered a fertility consultation, but only 46% reported they refer male pubertal cancer patients to a fertility specialist prior to cancer treatment >50% of the time, and only 12% reported they refer female pubertal cancer patients to a fertility specialist prior to cancer treatment > 50% of the time. While 44% of respondents were familiar with the 2006 ASCOR, only 39% of those utilized them to guide decision-making in greater than half of their patients.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates pediatric oncologists’ motivation to preserve fertility in pediatric cancer patients; however, barriers to both gamete cryopreservation and referral to fertility specialists persist. Female pubertal patients are referred to fertility preservation specialists with much less frequency than are male pubertal patients, highlighting a disparity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bracken RB, Smith KD. Is semen cryopreservation helpful in testicular cancer? Urology. 1980;15:581–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sanger WG, Armitage JO, Schmidt MA. Feasibility of semen cryopreservation in patients with malignant disease. JAMA. 1980;244:789–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Zapzalka DM, Redmon JB, Pryor JL. A survey of oncologists regarding sperm cryopreservation and assisted reproductive techniques for male cancer patients. Cancer. 1999;86:1812–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Glaser A, Wilkey O, Greenberg M. Sperm and ova conservation: existing standards of practice in North America. Med Pediatr Oncol. 2000;35:114–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schover LR, Brey K, Lichtin A, Lipshultz LI, Jeha S. Oncologists’ attitudes and practices regarding banking sperm before cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1890–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schover LR, Brey K, Lichtin A, Lipshultz LI, Jeha S. Knowledge and experience regarding cancer, infertility, and sperm banking in younger male survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1880–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fertility preservation and reproduction in cancer patients. Fertil Steril. 2005;83: 1622−1628.

  8. Ovarian tissue and oocyte cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2006;86: S142−147.

  9. Lee SJ, Schover LR, Partridge AH, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations on fertility preservation in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2917–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nieman CL, Kinahan KE, Yount SE, et al. Fertility preservation and adolescent cancer patients: lessons from adult survivors of childhood cancer and their parents. Cancer Treat Res. 2007;138:201–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dilley KJ. Managing fertility in childhood cancer patients. Cancer Treat Res. 2007;138:50–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gosiengfiao Y. Progress, history and promise of ovarian cryopreservation and transplantation for pediatric cancer patients. Cancer Treat Res. 2007;138:130–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kinahan KE, Didwania A, Nieman CL. Childhood cancer: fertility and psychosocial implications. Cancer Treat Res. 2007;138:191–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gracia CR, Ginsberg JP. Fertility risk in pediatric and adolescent cancers. Cancer Treat Res. 2007;138:57–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Goodwin T, Elizabeth Oosterhuis B, Kiernan M, Hudson MM, Dahl GV. Attitudes and practices of pediatric oncology providers regarding fertility issues. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007;48:80–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vadaparampil ST, Clayton H, Quinn GP, King LM, Nieder M, Wilson C. Pediatric oncology nurses’ attitudes related to discussing fertility preservation with pediatric cancer patients and their families. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 2007;24:255–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. van den Berg H, Langeveld NE. Parental knowledge of fertility in male childhood cancer survivors. Psychooncology 2007.

  18. Oosterhuis BE, Goodwin T, Kiernan M, Hudson MM, Dahl GV. Concerns about infertility risks among pediatric oncology patients and their parents. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2008;50:85–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jeruss JS, Woodruff TK. Preservation of fertility in patients with cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:902–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Arnon J, Meirow D, Lewis-Roness H, Ornoy A. Genetic and teratogenic effects of cancer treatments on gametes and embryos. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7:394–403.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Brannigan RE. Fertility preservation in adult male cancer patients. Cancer Treat Res. 2007;138:28–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shalet SM. Effect of irradiation treatment on gonadal function in men treated for germ cell cancer. Eur Urol. 1993;23:148–51. discussion 152.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Meirow D, Nugent D. The effects of radiotherapy and chemotherapy on female reproduction. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7:535–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hoyer PB, Sipes IG. Assessment of follicle destruction in chemical-induced ovarian toxicity. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1996;36:307–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Landis SH, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 1999;49:8–31. 31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ries L, Harkins D, Krapcho M, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975−2004. Available from URL: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/2009].

  27. Ries L, Melbert D, Krapcho M, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975−2004. Available from URL: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/2009].

  28. Nieman CL, Kazer R, Brannigan RE, et al. Cancer survivors and infertility: a review of a new problem and novel answers. J Support Oncol. 2006;4:171–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Dolin G, Roberts D, Rodriguez L, Woodruff T. Medical hope, legal pitfalls: potential legal issues in the emerging field of oncofertility Santa Clara Law Review 2009;673−716.

  30. Morice P, Castaigne D, Haie-Meder C, et al. Laparoscopic ovarian transposition for pelvic malignancies: indications and functional outcomes. Fertil Steril. 1998;70:956–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Smitz J, Dolmans MM, Donnez J, et al. Current achievements and future research directions in ovarian tissue culture, in vitro follicle development and transplantation: implications for fertility preservation. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(4):395–414.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Blumenfeld Z. How to preserve fertility in young women exposed to chemotherapy? The role of GnRH agonist cotreatment in addition to cryopreservation of embrya, oocytes, or ovaries. Oncologist. 2007;12:1044–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, IL, USA

    Tobias S. Köhler

  2. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Laxmi A. Kondapalli

  3. Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Amul Shah

  4. Division of Urology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Sarah Chan

  5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Teresa K. Woodruff

  6. Department of Urology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Robert E. Brannigan

  7. Oncofertility Consortium, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Tobias S. Köhler, Laxmi A. Kondapalli, Teresa K. Woodruff & Robert E. Brannigan

  8. Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Northwestern University, 303 East Chicago Avenue, Tarry 16-703, Chicago, IL, 60611-3008, USA

    Robert E. Brannigan

Authors
  1. Tobias S. Köhler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laxmi A. Kondapalli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amul Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sarah Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Teresa K. Woodruff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Robert E. Brannigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert E. Brannigan.

Additional information

Capsule

The SPARE survey captured marked disparities between pediatric oncologists’ attitudes and practice patterns regarding fertility preservation for male and female pediatric oncology patients.

Statement of Financial Support

This research was supported by the Oncofertility Consortium NIH 1 UL1 RR024926-01 as part of the NIH Roadmap Interdisciplinary Research Consortia and the NIH/NRSA Reproductive Biology Training Grant T32 HD07068.

The Authors have no financial disclosures to report.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Köhler, T.S., Kondapalli, L.A., Shah, A. et al. Results from the survey for preservation of adolescent reproduction (SPARE) study: gender disparity in delivery of fertility preservation message to adolescents with cancer. J Assist Reprod Genet 28, 269–277 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-010-9504-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-010-9504-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation