Introduction In Scandinavian countries, programs for fertility preservation are offered free of charge at tertiary‐care university hospitals to all patients facing treatments with risk of subsequent sterility. In this prospective study we aimed to investigate trends in female patients’ choices after counseling and fertility preservation outcomes during follow up in relation to benign vs malignant indications. Material and methods Data on 1254 females including 1076 adults and 178 girls who received fertility preservation counseling for either oncologic (n = 852) or benign indications (n = 402) at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, between 1 October 1998 and 1 December 2018 were analyzed. As appropriate, t tests and chi‐square tests were used to compare groups. Logistic regression was used to compare outcomes among groups depending on indications. Results Adult women generally elected to undergo oocyte retrieval after controlled ovarian stimulation for cryopreservation of embryos or oocytes (n = 538, 73%), whereas a minor proportion opted for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue retrieved through laparoscopy (n = 221, 27%). More than half of the women with a partner chose either not to fertilize their oocytes aiming at cryopreservation of oocytes or to share obtained oocytes attempting both cryopreservation of oocytes and cryopreservation of embryos. All pre‐pubertal (n = 48) and 73% of post‐pubertal girls (n = 66) elected cryopreservation of ovarian tissue. In recent years, an increasing number of teenagers have opted for controlled ovarian stimulation aiming at cryopreservation of oocytes, either before (n = 24, 17%) or after completion of cancer treatment (n = 15, 10%). During follow up, 27% of the women returned for a new reproductive counseling, additional fertility preservation or to attempt pregnancy. Utilization rates among individuals who were alive and of childbearing age by December 2018 indicated 29%, 8% and 5% for embryos, oocytes and ovarian tissue with live birth rates of 54%, 46% and 7%, respectively. Women with benign indications were significantly younger than women with previous malignant indications at the time of attempting pregnancy. Although the pregnancy rates were similar among both groups, the live birth rate was significantly higher in women with benign vs previous malignant indications (47% vs 21%, P = .002). Conclusions Trends in fertility preservation choices have changed over time. Women with previous malignancy had lower live birth rates than women with benign fertility preservation indications.
SUMMARY Smoking during pregnancy has been linked to an increased risk of several adverse birth outcomes. Associations with deficits in cognitive development have also been suggested. It is unclear if these associations are due to genetic and/or environmental confounding. In a population-based Swedish cohort study on 205 777 singleton males born to Nordic mothers between 1983 and 1988, we examined the association between maternal smoking during pregnancy and the risk of poor intellectual performance in young adult male offspring. In the cohort analyses, the risk of poor intellectual performance was increased in sons of smoking mothers compared to sons of non-smokers. Stratifying for maternal smoking habits across two pregnancies, there was an increased risk of poor intellectual performance for both sons if the mother was only smoking in the first pregnancy, but in neither son if the mother was only smoking in the second pregnancy. The effect of smoking during pregnancy on intellectual performance was not present when the association was evaluated within sibling pairs. Thus, the association between prenatal smoking exposure and offspring risk of low intellectual performance appears to be completely confounded by familial (genetic and early environmental) factors.
Background: Differences in cancer survival between the Nordic countries have previously been reported. The aim of this study was to examine whether these differences in outcome remain, based on updated information from five national cancer registers. Materials and methods: The data used for the analysis was from the NORDCAN database focusing on nine common cancers diagnosed 1990-2016 in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden with maximum follow-up through 2017. Relative survival (RS) was estimated at 1 and 5 years using flexible parametric RS models, and percentage point differences between the earliest and latest years available were calculated. Results: A consistent improvement in both 1-and 5-year RS was found for most studied sites across all countries. Previously observed differences between the countries have been attenuated. The improvements were particularly pronounced in Denmark that now has cancer survival similar to the other Nordic countries. Conclusion: The reasons for the observed improvements in cancer survival are likely multifactorial, including earlier diagnosis, improved treatment options, implementation of national cancer plans, uniform national cancer care guidelines and standardized patient pathways. The previous survival disadvantage in Denmark is no longer present for most sites. Continuous monitoring of cancer survival is of importance to assess the impact of changes in policies and the effectiveness of health care systems.
The practice of fertility preservation (FP) in women with breast cancer (BC) is spreading, but long-term reproductive outcomes after FP are largely unknown. OBJECTIVE To investigate the long-term reproductive outcomes in women who did or did not undergo FP at the time of BC diagnosis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A Swedish nationwide cohort study was conducted to investigate the long-term reproductive outcomes of women with BC receiving FP at 1 of the regional FP programs from 1994 to 2017 (n = 425). Population comparators with BC but without history of FP (n = 850) were sampled from regional BC registers, matched on age, calendar period of diagnosis, and county. Data on live births, assisted reproductive technology (ART) use, and mortality were retrieved from population-based registers. Data analysis was performed from January to September 2020. EXPOSURES History of having received FP compared with no history of FP (unexposed). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was hazard ratios (HRs) of live births and ART treatments following BC in women with vs without FP and the cumulative incidence of these events in the presence of the competing risk of death. RESULTS Women who had undergone FP (n = 425) had lower parity (302 [71.1%] were nulliparous compared with 171 [20.1%] in the unexposed group), were younger (mean [SD] age, 32.1 [4.0] vs 33.3 [3.6] years), more often had estrogen receptor-positive tumors (289 [68.0%] vs 515 [60.6%]), and were more often scheduled for chemotherapy (399 [93.9%] vs 745 [87.7%]). Of 425 women exposed to FP, 97 (22.8%) had at least 1 post-BC live birth (mean follow-up, 4.6 years), compared with 74 of 850 women (8.7%) unexposed to FP (mean follow-up, 4.8 years). Overall, live birth rates after BC were significantly higher among women with FP (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6-3.3). The 5-year and 10-year cumulative incidence of post-BC live births was 19.4% and 40.7% among FP-exposed women vs 8.6% and 15.8% among comparators, respectively. Rates of ART use were also higher in the FP group (aHR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.2-10.7). The all-cause mortality rate was lower in women exposed to FP (aHR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.7), with 5-year cumulative incidence of death of 5.3% (95% CI, 3.1%-9.0%) vs 11.1% (95% CI, 8.7%-14.1%) for women with vs without FP. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study of Swedish women after a BC diagnosis, successful pregnancy after BC was possible both in women with and without FP at the time of diagnosis, but a significantly higher likelihood of post-BC live births and ART treatments was observed in women who underwent FP, without any negative association with all-cause survival. This information is valuable for health care clinicians responsible for oncologic treatment and reproductive counseling of women diagnosed with breast cancer at reproductive age.
Some studies have suggested that infertility is a risk factor for endometrial, ovarian and breast cancer. The study aimed to create a comprehensive picture of the association between infertility and the risk of ovarian, endometrial and breast cancer, and whether any association could be explained by ovulatory disturbances, endometriosis or nulliparity. In a population-based cohort of 2,882,847 women, cox regression analysis was used to investigate cancer incidence among infertile women. Overall, infertility was associated with a higher incidence rate of ovarian (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38–1.71) and endometrial cancer (aHR 1.25, 95% CI 1.11–1.40), but not of breast cancer (aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92–1.01). Ovarian cancer incidence was higher in women diagnosed with endometriosis, and in nulliparous women with ovulatory disturbances, compared to women with none of the diagnoses. Endometrial cancer incidence was higher in women with ovulatory disturbances, but not in women with endometriosis. These findings suggest that infertility could have long-term consequences of importance to physicians and public health workers. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10654-018-0474-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.