Barriers to offering female fertility preservation to pediatric and young adult oncology patients: A national survey of pediatric hematology oncology providers in the United States and Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e24088 Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recently updated its guidelines on fertility preservation based on similar rates of pregnancy from oocyte and embryo preservation. However, fertility preservation in female pediatric and young adults undergoing cancer treatment remains a challenge due to barriers in communication, lack of awareness and resources. Methods: A survey created using SurveyMonkey was sent electronically to all physicians who were Children’s Oncology Group (COG) members (2190), weekly for 4 weeks. Results: 304 physicians (13.8%) responded to the survey. While most providers discuss the possibility of infertility with all female patients (83%), only 43% offer fertility preservation irrespective of age. Cancer diagnosis is a key factor in the decision to offer fertility preservation to patients (63%). Ewing sarcoma (75%), osteosarcoma (69%), and bone marrow transplant candidacy (70%) are the most common diagnoses associated with physician offering of fertility preservation. It is typically offered prior to the first round of chemotherapy (53%). Seventy-five percent of providers report that insufficient time before starting chemotherapy is a major barrier to offering fertility preservation. Severity of patient illness (58%), insurance issues and high cost (19%), provider belief that it is not necessary in every patient (25%), and lack of data supporting female fertility preservation and experimental methods (16%) are other barriers which impact the decision to offer fertility preservation. Ovarian suppression (77%), cryopreservation (egg freezing) (85%), and ovarian tissue freezing (66%) are the most discussed fertility preservation options with only one out of four providers discussing freezing embryos. Only one out of five providers check Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels prior to starting cancer treatment; however, two out of five check AMH levels after completion of therapy. Most providers do not check AMH levels. Conclusions: Despite high risk for infertility among female cancer patients due to treatment and several advances that have been made in the field, the practice of offering fertility preservation is not universal due to various barriers at the physician and institutional level. Physician education and familiarity with ASCO’s newer guidelines is one way to promote a healthier dialogue and informed decision making. We also conclude that detailed guidelines and monitoring practices for diminished ovarian reserve are lacking and need further thought.[Table: see text]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".