Fertility preservation is an important issue among patients diagnosed
with cancer during or before their reproductive years. About 75% of patients
without children at the time of their cancer diagnosis wish to have future
offspring, according to data from one review article. Despite concerns about
fertility among patients undergoing potentially sterilizing cancer treatments,
oncologists may not always be discussing options for fertility preservation
with their patients.
This year at the ASCO Annual Meeting, researchers presented data from a
national survey of physician practice patterns to determine whether oncologists
communicate the risk for infertility with patients undergoing cancer treatment.
Although the majority of oncologists discussed fertility preservation with
their patients, less than 25% reported referring patients to reproductive
specialists for fertility preservation.
|
 Kutluk Oktay, MD, FACOG, medical director of
the Institute for Fertility Preservation, stressed counseling patients at risk
for infertility.
Photo by William Taufic |
The damage that cancer drugs do to fertility is highly
underestimated, said Kutluk Oktay, MD, FACOG, professor of
obstetrics and gynecology, director in the division of reproductive medicine
and infertility at Westchester Medical Center at New York Medical College, and
medical director at the Institute for Fertility Preservation. It is important
that patients who face this risk are counseled properly and referred to experts
who can inform them of their options.
To determine the importance of the oncologists role in fertility
preservation and to explore the options available to patients with cancer,
HemOnc Today spoke with experts in the fields of psychology,
obstetrics and gynecology, reproduction, and oncology.
We, as medical oncologists, are generally the point guard for
caring for patients for everything at diagnosis, through the trajectory
of their disease and into survivorship, Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH,
assistant professor in medicine at Harvard Medical School, told HemOnc
Today. We continue to follow them, especially if we gave them
chemotherapy or other medication; they rely on us to give advice about whether
something is safe, whether it will compromise their cancer care and whether it
will compromise their ultimate survival.
In 2006, ASCO published Recommendations for Fertility Preservation in
People Treated for Cancer to inform oncologists of available preservation
options and to guide them through the discussion and referral processes.
However, according to the data presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting, only 38%
of oncologists were aware of the recommendations.
When discussing fertility preservation, the guidelines recommend that
infertility be discussed as a potential risk of cancer therapy much like
cognitive or cardiac complications because infertility can affect
survivors indefinitely, sometimes making future reproduction virtually
impossible.
Although ASCOs recommendations encourage oncologists to use their
clinical judgment to determine the best time to inform patients about fertility
preservation, they also emphasize the importance of discussing and referring
patients to specialists at the earliest possible opportunity to allow men to
collect samples and women to undergo egg or embryo cryopreservation.
Marvin Meistrich, PhD, professor of experimental radiation
oncology, Florence M. Thomas Professor of Cancer Research at The University of
Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, also stressed the importance of informing
patients undergoing potentially sterilizing therapy as early as possible of
their risk for infertility.
|
 Marvin Meistrich
|
In women [who are having eggs or embryos frozen], we have to start
our treatments around the second or third day of the menstrual period,
Oktay told HemOnc Today. Often times we see that oncologists
might be waiting and we miss that window of opportunity and then have to wait
about a month for the next menstrual cycle.
Currently, cryopreservation technologies are the most commonly used and
the most effective forms of fertility preservation, according to Oktay. Women
undergoing infertility-producing treatment for breast cancer, hematologic
malignancies and other solid tumor cancers have two cryopreservation options:
embryo freezing and egg freezing.
According to Christine Duffy, MD, MPH, assistant professor of
medicine at The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, embryo
freezing is a good option for women who have a male partner or a donor they are
willing to use. The technique works by stimulating the ovary to produce eggs
that are fertilized in vitro and then stored for later use. The process takes
two to six weeks, depending on where a woman is in her cycle, Duffy said.
Women who may not have a partner, those who are not ready to select a
donor, or women with religious concerns about the creation of embryos may
prefer egg freezing compared with embryo freezing. The process is similar to
embryo cryopreservation but involves freezing the egg itself. According to
Duffy, although success rates are a bit lower with this technique compared with
embryo freezing, progress has been made in this area.
A third, but still experimental cryopreservation technique for women, is
ovarian tissue freezing. This technique involves a biopsy of the ovarian tissue
that is then frozen and implanted into the patient at a later time. According
to Duffy, the hope is that the patient will regain ovarian function. Although
live births have occurred using this technique, it is still under
investigation. One important concern surrounding this technique, however, is
the risk for reintroducing the cancer from the biopsied tissue back into the
patient after treatment.
The future of ovarian tissue freezing, according to Teresa Woodruff,
PhD, Watkins Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, director of the
Oncofertility Consortium at the Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern
University, involves taking the follicles from the tissue and growing them
completely in vitro to produce a mature egg that can be fertilized and then
transferred back to the patient.
In that case, the theoretical advantage would be that you could
have an embryo and no residual cancer cells, but of course it is still very
experimental, she told HemOnc Today. Woodruff and colleagues
are currently working on this technique.
Another experimental and somewhat controversial technique uses
gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists to shut the ovaries down during cancer
treatment. According to Duffy, women who view fertility preservation as
important should not rely solely on this technique due to the lack of evidence
regarding its efficacy.
According to Meistrich, sperm banking semen and cryopreservation are the
most proven techniques for preserving fertility in men with cancer. Current
assisted reproductive techniques are more advanced than they were several
decades ago.
Now with assisted reproductive techniques, you dont need
that many [semen] samples, you dont need that high of a sperm count, and
you dont need high motility because youre injecting the sperm
directly into the egg, he said. In the past you needed several good
quality semen samples; now any semen sample would be adequate.
Although there is no proven way to protect fertility during treatment,
the use of less toxic chemotherapies and shielding during radiotherapy can
help. According to Meistrich, the higher the dose of treatment, the higher the
chance for sterility.
Using lower dose chemotherapy and radiation may also allow fertility to
return after a period of sterility following treatment. Men should be aware
that after several months of azoospermia, spermatogenesis may resume, so it is
important to use proper contraception, Meistrich said.
In addition, the genetic safety of sperm recovered after treatment
should not be of great concern. Currently there is little evidence for
genetic risk when the sperm has recovered more than one year after
therapy, Meistrich said. [Patients] shouldnt be apprehensive
that the sperm are going to carry long-term genetic damage. But we found that
within the first three months and others have found within the first
year there is some genetic damage in the sperm. So an important thing is
not to conceive during or immediately after chemotherapy or radiotherapy but to
wait a period of at least six months to a year.
Fertility preservation does not solely apply to adult patients with
cancer; this concept is also important to parents of boys who undergo cancer
treatment. There is currently no proven option for fertility preservation in
children, but researchers such as Meistrich are working to harvest and freeze
spermagonial cells to be reimplanted later.
Even though animal studies have shown some success, there are no
clinical reports of success yet with humans; however, in prepubertal boys
theres really no other option, Oktay said.
Despite not yet being clinically proven, some spermagonial cells have
been frozen with the hope that this technology will be perfected and available
in the future, Meistrich said.
According to data from the national physician survey, some physicians
reported not discussing fertility preservation with their patients because of
the physicians perceived high costs associated with the procedure. In
addition, data published in 2002 in The Journal of Clinical
Oncology demonstrated that 51% of oncologists believed that most men
could not afford the out-of-pocket costs of sperm banking before cancer
treatment.
However, a companion study published by the same group demonstrated that
only 7% of men chose not to bank their sperm because of financial reasons.
Oncologists feel bad about that; they feel bad about bringing up
something they know a patient might not be able to afford, Leslie R.
Schover, PhD, professor of behavioral science at The University of Texas
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, and a researcher involved in the studies, told
HemOnc Today. But actually, when we looked at
oncologists and patients perceptions, we found that the oncologists
were much more likely to think it was unaffordable than the patients.
Patients interested in banking sperm or freezing eggs or embryos who are
in need of financial assistance may find it through patient advocacy groups
such as Fertile Hope, a non-profit organization that provides information and
support to cancer patients and survivors. Organizations such as this and the
Oncofertility Consortium provide support not only to patients, but also to
oncologists looking for the appropriate resources for fertility preservation.
The Oncofertility Consortium was developed to improve communication
between oncologists and fertility specialists and ensure that each group is
part of the solution to the fertility needs of patients with cancer. The
consortium, which is funded by NIH grants, has more than 60 sites in the United
States to provide rapid fertility treatment among patients with cancer.
The word oncofertility is meant to bridge the gap and
ensure that there are teams of clinicians and scientists working together to
effectively manage the men and women who have fertility threats associated with
cancer treatment, said Woodruff, director of the consortium.
According to Duffy, oncologists cannot be expected to know in-depth
details of fertility preservation options. Resources for oncologists are vital.
To ensure that oncologists are equipped with these resources, the
consortium established a hotline that allows oncologists from across the nation
to connect with the nearest oncofertility site to help them navigate patients
toward the appropriate information source and provide a seamless transition
from cancer care to fertility care and back again.
More importantly, however, oncologists must discuss fertility
preservation with patients undergoing cancer treatment. Although there are
valuable resources for patients interested in fertility preservation, the best
resource may be their oncologist.
According to the ASCO recommendations, physician encouragement
affects patient interest in fertility preservation options. In addition,
data from the 2002 study conducted by Schover and colleagues found that
physician recommendations were strong predictors of whether or not a man banked
sperm. The recommendation was almost as influential as the patients own
desire for future children.
Oncologists are really the critical link in this whole story; they
are doing an extraordinary job of early detection of the disease and treating
the disease, so theres been a remarkable increase in the survivorships
rate of cancer patients, and thats really exciting, Woodruff said.
But now what oncologists have to put into the equation is that their
patient is going to survive the disease, in many cases, and young patients have
expectations of what life will be like once they go back to their ordinary
life. by Stacey L. Adams

Are GnRH-agonists
effective for fertility preservation in women undergoing treatment for
cancer?
For more information:
- Jeruss JS. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:902-911.
- Lee SJ. J Clin Oncol.
2009;doi:10.1200/jco.2006.06.5888.
- Quinn G. #CRA9508. Presented at: 2009 ASCO Annual Meeting; May
31-June 2, 2009; Orlando.
- Robbins WA. Nature Genetics. 1997;16:74-78.
- Schover LR. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1880-1889.
- Schover LR. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1890-1897.
- Schover LR. Pediatr Blood Cancer.
2009;53:281-284.
- For information regarding The Oncofertility Consortium, visit:
www.oncofertility.northwestern.edu.