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
  • [21] Insights and Limitations of the Study on Temporary Interruption of Endocrine Therapy and Assisted Reproductive Technology Use in Breast Cancer Survivors
    Liu, Sijia
    Hu, Ruwei
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2024, 42 (34)
  • [22] Paternity through use of assisted reproduction technology in male adult and childhood cancer survivors: a nationwide register study
    Kitlinski, Michael
    Giwercman, Aleksander
    Elenkov, Angel
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2023, 38 (05) : 973 - 981
  • [23] Reproductive Outcomes in Male Childhood Cancer Survivors A Linked Cancer-Birth Registry Analysis
    Chow, Eric J.
    Kamineni, Aruna
    Daling, Janet R.
    Fraser, Alison
    Wiggins, Charles L.
    Mineau, Geraldine P.
    Hamre, Merlin R.
    Severson, Richard K.
    Drews-Botsch, Carolyn
    Mueller, Beth A.
    ARCHIVES OF PEDIATRICS & ADOLESCENT MEDICINE, 2009, 163 (10): : 887 - 894
  • [24] Use of technology as an adjunct to improve health outcomes for survivors of cancer
    Laakso, E.
    Tandy, J.
    PHYSICAL THERAPY REVIEWS, 2011, 16 (01) : 39 - 45
  • [25] Outcomes from assisted reproductive technology
    Van Voorhis, B
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 107 (01): : 183 - 200
  • [26] Obesity and assisted reproductive technology outcomes
    Bellver, Jose
    Busso, Cristiano
    Pellicer, Antonio
    Remohí, José
    Simón, Carlos
    REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2006, 12 (05) : 562 - 568
  • [27] Assisted reproductive technology and pregnancy outcomes
    Helmerhorst, F. M.
    Keirse, M. J. N. C.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2016, 123 (08) : 1329 - 1329
  • [28] Assisted Reproductive Technology and Developmental Outcomes
    Kirby, Russell S.
    PEDIATRICS, 2018, 142 (06)
  • [29] Outcomes research in assisted reproductive technology
    DeCherney, AH
    Petrozza, JC
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 1996, 11 (02) : 7 - 11
  • [30] REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES IN FAMILIES WITH CHILDHOOD CANCER SURVIVORS
    Guseva, M.
    Tseitlin, G.
    Anotonov, A.
    Lebed, O.
    PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER, 2015, 62 : S207 - S208