Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II

M. Salama; L. Nahata; Y. Jayasinghe; V. Gomez-Lobo; Mm Laronda; Mb Moravek; Lr Meacham; Ms Christianson; M. Lambertini; A. Anazodo; Gp Quinn; Tk Woodruff

doi:10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7

Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II

M. Salama^*, L. Nahata, Y. Jayasinghe, V. Gomez-Lobo, Mm Laronda, Mb Moravek, Lr Meacham, Ms Christianson, M. Lambertini, A. Anazodo, Gp Quinn, Tk Woodruff^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: As a secondary report to elucidate the diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II. Methods: We surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered in case of childhood cancer as well as their degree of utilization. Results: In the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for childhood cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings for ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation; (2) frequent utilization of gonadal shielding, fractionation of anticancer therapy, oophoropexy, and GnRH analogs; (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM); and (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, in vitro spermatogenesis, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings. Conclusions: Based on Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, we presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to help optimize care for children with cancer in various resource settings. Special ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options to children.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	443-454
Number of pages	12
Journal	Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Volume	40
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7
State	Published - Mar 2023

Funding

Collaborators of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I Salama M, Ataman-Millhouse L, Braham M, Berjeb K, Khrouf M, Rodrigues JK, Reis FM, Silva TC, Sánchez F, Romero S, Smitz J, Vásquez L, Vega M, Sobral F, Terrado G, Lombardi MG, Scarella A, Bourlon MT, Verduzco-Aguirre H, Sánchez AM, Adiga SK, Tholeti P, Udupa KS, Mahajan N, Patil M, Dalvi R, Venter C, Demetriou G, Geel J, Quintana R, Rodriguez G, Quintana T, Viale L, Fraguglia M, Coirini M, Remolina-Bonilla YA, Noguera JAR, Velásquez JC, Suarez A, Arango GD, Pineda JID, Aldecoa MDC, Javed M, Al Sufyan H, Daniels N, Oranye BC, Ogunmokun AA, Onwuzurigbo KI, Okereke CJ, Whesu TC, Woodruff TK. Collaborators of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II Salama M, Laronda MM, Rowell E, Erickson L, Goldman K , Smith K, Pavone M, Duncan FE, Brannigan R, Ataman-Millhouse L, Patrizio P, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Okutsu-Horage Y, Suzuki N, Lambertini M, Stern C, Gomez-Lobo V, Maher JY, Hsieh MH, Moravek MB, Anazodo A, Westphal LM, Anderson RA, Wallace WH, Mitchell RT, Nahata L, Whiteside S, Senapati S, Shah DK, Gracia C, Fino ME, Blakemore JK, Quinn GP, Krüssel JS, Baston-Büst DM, Liebenthron J, Andersen CY, Kristensen SG, Mamsen LS, Jayasinghe Y, Su HI, Dolmans MM, Amorim CA, Demeestere I, De Vos M, Van Moer E, Isachenko V, Isachenko E, Mallmann P, Rahimi G, Valli-Pulaski H, Steimer SR, McMahon KV, Orwig KE, Rios JS, Smith JF, Mok-Lin E, Woodruff TK.

Keywords

Best practice
Childhood cancer
Fertility preservation
Limited resource settings
Oncofertility
Optimum resource settings

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Genetics(clinical)
Genetics
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Reproductive Medicine
Developmental Biology

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7

Cite this

Salama, M., Nahata, L., Jayasinghe, Y., Gomez-Lobo, V., Laronda, M., Moravek, M., Meacham, L., Christianson, M., Lambertini, M., Anazodo, A., Quinn, G., & Woodruff, T. (2023). Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 40(3), 443-454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7

@article{25c00b162b024862a2069ae348930fca,

title = "Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II",

abstract = "Purpose: As a secondary report to elucidate the diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II. Methods: We surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered in case of childhood cancer as well as their degree of utilization. Results: In the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for childhood cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings for ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation; (2) frequent utilization of gonadal shielding, fractionation of anticancer therapy, oophoropexy, and GnRH analogs; (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM); and (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, in vitro spermatogenesis, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings. Conclusions: Based on Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, we presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to help optimize care for children with cancer in various resource settings. Special ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options to children.",

keywords = "Best practice, Childhood cancer, Fertility preservation, Limited resource settings, Oncofertility, Optimum resource settings",

author = "M. Salama and L. Nahata and Y. Jayasinghe and V. Gomez-Lobo and Mm Laronda and Mb Moravek and Lr Meacham and Ms Christianson and M. Lambertini and A. Anazodo and Gp Quinn and Tk Woodruff",

note = "Funding Information: Collaborators of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I Salama M, Ataman-Millhouse L, Braham M, Berjeb K, Khrouf M, Rodrigues JK, Reis FM, Silva TC, S{\'a}nchez F, Romero S, Smitz J, V{\'a}squez L, Vega M, Sobral F, Terrado G, Lombardi MG, Scarella A, Bourlon MT, Verduzco-Aguirre H, S{\'a}nchez AM, Adiga SK, Tholeti P, Udupa KS, Mahajan N, Patil M, Dalvi R, Venter C, Demetriou G, Geel J, Quintana R, Rodriguez G, Quintana T, Viale L, Fraguglia M, Coirini M, Remolina-Bonilla YA, Noguera JAR, Vel{\'a}squez JC, Suarez A, Arango GD, Pineda JID, Aldecoa MDC, Javed M, Al Sufyan H, Daniels N, Oranye BC, Ogunmokun AA, Onwuzurigbo KI, Okereke CJ, Whesu TC, Woodruff TK. Collaborators of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II Salama M, Laronda MM, Rowell E, Erickson L, Goldman K , Smith K, Pavone M, Duncan FE, Brannigan R, Ataman-Millhouse L, Patrizio P, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Okutsu-Horage Y, Suzuki N, Lambertini M, Stern C, Gomez-Lobo V, Maher JY, Hsieh MH, Moravek MB, Anazodo A, Westphal LM, Anderson RA, Wallace WH, Mitchell RT, Nahata L, Whiteside S, Senapati S, Shah DK, Gracia C, Fino ME, Blakemore JK, Quinn GP, Kr{\"u}ssel JS, Baston-B{\"u}st DM, Liebenthron J, Andersen CY, Kristensen SG, Mamsen LS, Jayasinghe Y, Su HI, Dolmans MM, Amorim CA, Demeestere I, De Vos M, Van Moer E, Isachenko V, Isachenko E, Mallmann P, Rahimi G, Valli-Pulaski H, Steimer SR, McMahon KV, Orwig KE, Rios JS, Smith JF, Mok-Lin E, Woodruff TK. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.",

year = "2023",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "40",

pages = "443--454",

journal = "Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics",

issn = "1058-0468",

publisher = "Springer New York",

number = "3",

}

Salama, M, Nahata, L, Jayasinghe, Y, Gomez-Lobo, V, Laronda, M, Moravek, M, Meacham, L, Christianson, M, Lambertini, M, Anazodo, A, Quinn, G & Woodruff, T 2023, 'Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II', Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 443-454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings

T2 - results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II

AU - Salama, M.

AU - Nahata, L.

AU - Jayasinghe, Y.

AU - Gomez-Lobo, V.

AU - Laronda, Mm

AU - Moravek, Mb

AU - Meacham, Lr

AU - Christianson, Ms

AU - Lambertini, M.

AU - Anazodo, A.

AU - Quinn, Gp

AU - Woodruff, Tk

N1 - Funding Information: Collaborators of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I Salama M, Ataman-Millhouse L, Braham M, Berjeb K, Khrouf M, Rodrigues JK, Reis FM, Silva TC, Sánchez F, Romero S, Smitz J, Vásquez L, Vega M, Sobral F, Terrado G, Lombardi MG, Scarella A, Bourlon MT, Verduzco-Aguirre H, Sánchez AM, Adiga SK, Tholeti P, Udupa KS, Mahajan N, Patil M, Dalvi R, Venter C, Demetriou G, Geel J, Quintana R, Rodriguez G, Quintana T, Viale L, Fraguglia M, Coirini M, Remolina-Bonilla YA, Noguera JAR, Velásquez JC, Suarez A, Arango GD, Pineda JID, Aldecoa MDC, Javed M, Al Sufyan H, Daniels N, Oranye BC, Ogunmokun AA, Onwuzurigbo KI, Okereke CJ, Whesu TC, Woodruff TK. Collaborators of Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II Salama M, Laronda MM, Rowell E, Erickson L, Goldman K , Smith K, Pavone M, Duncan FE, Brannigan R, Ataman-Millhouse L, Patrizio P, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Okutsu-Horage Y, Suzuki N, Lambertini M, Stern C, Gomez-Lobo V, Maher JY, Hsieh MH, Moravek MB, Anazodo A, Westphal LM, Anderson RA, Wallace WH, Mitchell RT, Nahata L, Whiteside S, Senapati S, Shah DK, Gracia C, Fino ME, Blakemore JK, Quinn GP, Krüssel JS, Baston-Büst DM, Liebenthron J, Andersen CY, Kristensen SG, Mamsen LS, Jayasinghe Y, Su HI, Dolmans MM, Amorim CA, Demeestere I, De Vos M, Van Moer E, Isachenko V, Isachenko E, Mallmann P, Rahimi G, Valli-Pulaski H, Steimer SR, McMahon KV, Orwig KE, Rios JS, Smith JF, Mok-Lin E, Woodruff TK. Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

PY - 2023/3

Y1 - 2023/3

N2 - Purpose: As a secondary report to elucidate the diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II. Methods: We surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered in case of childhood cancer as well as their degree of utilization. Results: In the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for childhood cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings for ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation; (2) frequent utilization of gonadal shielding, fractionation of anticancer therapy, oophoropexy, and GnRH analogs; (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM); and (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, in vitro spermatogenesis, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings. Conclusions: Based on Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, we presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to help optimize care for children with cancer in various resource settings. Special ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options to children.

AB - Purpose: As a secondary report to elucidate the diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II. Methods: We surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered in case of childhood cancer as well as their degree of utilization. Results: In the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for childhood cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings for ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation; (2) frequent utilization of gonadal shielding, fractionation of anticancer therapy, oophoropexy, and GnRH analogs; (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM); and (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, in vitro spermatogenesis, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings. Conclusions: Based on Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, we presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to help optimize care for children with cancer in various resource settings. Special ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options to children.

KW - Best practice

KW - Childhood cancer

KW - Fertility preservation

KW - Limited resource settings

KW - Oncofertility

KW - Optimum resource settings

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144437259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85144437259&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7

DO - 10.1007/s10815-022-02679-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 36542312

AN - SCOPUS:85144437259

SN - 1058-0468

VL - 40

SP - 443

EP - 454

JO - Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

JF - Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

IS - 3

ER -

Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this