PurposeOncofertility focuses on providing fertility and endocrine-sparing options to patients who undergo life-preserving but gonadotoxic cancer treatment. The resources needed to meet patient demand often are fragmented along disciplinary lines. We quantify assets and gaps in oncofertility care on a global scale.MethodsSurvey-based questionnaires were provided to 191 members of the Oncofertility Consortium Global Partners Network, a National Institutes of Health–funded organization. Responses were analyzed to measure trends and regional subtleties about patient oncofertility experiences and to analyze barriers to care at sites that provide oncofertility services.ResultsSixty-three responses were received (response rate, 25%), and 40 were analyzed from oncofertility centers in 28 countries. Thirty of 40 survey results (75%) showed that formal referral processes and psychological care are provided to patients at the majority of sites. Fourteen of 23 respondents (61%) stated that some fertility preservation services are not offered because of cultural and legal barriers. The growth of oncofertility and its capacity to improve the lives of cancer survivors around the globe relies on concentrated efforts to increase awareness, promote collaboration, share best practices, and advocate for research funding.ConclusionThis survey reveals global and regional successes and challenges and provides insight into what is needed to advance the field and make the discussion of fertility preservation and endocrine health a standard component of the cancer treatment plan. As the field of oncofertility continues to develop around the globe, regular assessment of both international and regional barriers to quality care must continue to guide process improvements.

PurposeIn the accompanying article, “Analysis of Fertility Preservation Options Available to Patients With Cancer Around the Globe,” we showed that specific fertility preservation services may not be offered at various sites around the world because of cultural and legal barriers. We assessed global and regional experiences as well as the legal status of third-party reproduction and adoption to serve as a comprehensive international data set and resource for groups that wish to begin oncofertility interventions.MethodsWe provide data on the legalities of third-party assisted reproductive technologies and other family-building options in the 28 oncofertility-practicing countries surveyed.ResultsWe found regional and country differences that will be important in the development of tailored resources for physicians and for patient brochures that are sensitive to these local restrictions and cultural norms.ConclusionBecause many patients first consult Web-based materials, the formal assessment of the availability of these options provides members of the global oncofertility community with data to which they might otherwise not have ready access to better serve their patients.

The current trends to postpone motherhood and the increase in demand for assistance in reproductive medicine highlight the need for seeking guidelines for the establishment of individualized treatment protocols. Currently available ovarian reserve tests do not provide sufficient evidence to be solely considered ideal, but they may occupy important place in initial counseling, predicting unsatisfactory results that could be improved by individualized induction schemes and reducing excessive psychological and financial burdens, and adverse effects. In this paper, we revise the role of hormonal basal and dynamic tests, as well as ultrasonographic markers, as ovarian reserve markers, in order to provide embasement for propaedeutic strategies and their interpretation in order to have reproductive success.

Multinational data on assisted reproduction techniques undertaken in 2014 were collected from 159 institutions in 15 countries in Latin America. Treatments included IVF/ ICSI, FET, OD, PGD and fertility preservation (FP). 41.34% of IVF/ICSI cycles were performed in women aged 35 to 39 years and 23.35% in women aged 40 and older. After removing cases with total freezing, delivery rate per oocyte retrieval was 25.05% for ICSI and 27.41% for IVF. Multiple births included 20.78% twins and 0.92 % triplets and over. In OD, twins reached 28.93% and triplets 1.07 %. Preterm deliveries reached 16.4% in singletons, 55.02% in twins and 76% in triplets. Perinatal mortality in 18,162 births was 23 per 1000 in singletons, 35 per 1000 in twins, and 36 per 1000 in high-order multiples. Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) represented only 2.63 % of fresh transfers, with a delivery rate of 32.15% per transfer. Elective double embryo transfer (eDET) represented 23.74% of transfers, with a delivery rate of 41.03% per transfer. Among babies born during this period 11,373 (62.6%) were singletons; 6,398 (35.2%) twins, and 391 (2.2%), triplets and more. Given the effect of multiple births on prematurity, morbidity and perinatal mortality, reinforcing the existing trend of reducing the number of embryos transferred is mandatory

Research question: What was the utilization, effectiveness and safety of assisted reproductive techniques performed in Latin America during 2017. Design: Retrospective collection of multinational data on ART performed in 188 institutions from 15 Latin American countries. Results: We are reporting 93,600 initiated cycles, 16,976 deliveries and the birth of 20,404 babies. ART utilization was 221 cycles/million inhabitants (15 to 535). Despite women aged ≥40 represented 30.5% of fresh IVF/ ICSI, after removing freeze-all cycles, delivery rate per oocyte retrieval was 19.9% for ICSI and 20.2% for IVF. Overall, single embryo transfer (SET) represented 26.9% of fresh transfers, with 18.2% delivery rate per transfer; increasing to 32.3% in elective SET. Delivery rate in double embryo transfers (DET) was 28.3% increasing to 37.3% with elective DET. This 5% increment in births in eDET over eSET resulted in10-fold increase in twin births, almost 3 weeks' shorter gestations and 3-fold increase in perinatal mortality. Delivery rate in frozen/thawed SET, reached 25.5% increasing to 30.8% with DET; the majority being blastocysts transfers. Of all births, 67% were singletons, 31.4% twins, and 1.6% triplets and higher. Overall, preterm deliveries reached 9.5% in singletons, 64.3% in twins and 97.9% in triplets; and perinatal mortality was 9.4‰ in singletons, 25.3‰ in twins, and 63.3‰ in high-order multiples. Conclusions: The number of initiated cycles slowly increases. Frozen embryo transfers, blastocyst transfers and SET are also increasing. Our data shows that especially in young women and oocyte recipients, when there is more than one blastocyst for transfer, elective SET should be the rule.