BACKGROUND Fertility preservation (FP) is an important quality of life issue for cancer survivors of reproductive age. Despite the existence of broad international guidelines, the delivery of oncofertility care, particularly amongst paediatric, adolescent and young adult patients, remains a challenge for healthcare professionals (HCPs). The quality of oncofertility care is variable and the uptake and utilization of FP remains low. Available guidelines fall short in providing adequate detail on how oncofertility models of care (MOC) allow for the real-world application of guidelines by HCPs. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the components of oncofertility care as defined by patient and clinician representatives, and identify the barriers, facilitators and challenges, so as to improve the implementation of oncofertility services. SEARCH METHODS A systematic scoping review was conducted on oncofertility MOC literature published in English between 2007 and 2016, relating to 10 domains of care identified through consumer research: communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, training, supportive care during treatment, reproductive care after cancer treatment, psychosocial support and ethical practice of oncofertility care. A wide range of electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, AEIPT, Education Research Complete, ProQuest and VOCED) were searched in order to synthesize the evidence around delivery of oncofertility care. Related citations and reference lists were searched. The review was undertaken following registration (International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42017055837) and guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). OUTCOMES A total of 846 potentially relevant studies were identified after the removal of duplicates. All titles and abstracts were screened by a single reviewer and the final 147 papers were screened by two reviewers. Ten papers on established MOC were identified amongst the included papers. Data were extracted from each paper and quality scores were then summarized in the oncofertility MOC summary matrix. The results identified a number of themes for improving MOC in each domain, which included: the importance of patients receiving communication that is of a higher quality and in different formats on their fertility risk and FP options; improving provision of oncofertility care in a timely manner; improving access to age-appropriate care; defining the role and scope of practice of all HCPs; and improving communication between different HCPs. Different forms of decision aids were found useful for assisting patients to understand FP options and weigh up choices. WIDER IMPLICATIONS This analysis identifies core components for de...

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.

Fertility preservation in the cancer setting, known as oncofertility, is a field that requires cross-disciplinary interaction between physicians, basic scientists, clinical researchers, ethicists, lawyers, educators, and religious leaders. Funded by the National Institutes of Health, the Oncofertility Consortium (OC) was formed to be a scientifically grounded, transparent, and altruistic resource, both intellectual and monetary, for building this new field of practice capable of addressing the unique needs of young patients with cancer. The OC has expanded its attention to include other nonmalignant conditions that can threaten fertility, and the work of the OC now extends around the globe, involving partners who together have created a community of shared effort, resources, and practices. The OC creates materials that are translated, disseminated, and amended by all participants in the field, and local programs of excellence have developed worldwide to accelerate the pace and improve the quality of oncofertility research and practice. Here we review the global oncofertility programs and the capacity building activities that strengthen these research and clinical programs, ultimately improving patient care.

Background. Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. Currently, oncofertility competencies do not exist. The aim of this study was to develop an oncofertility competency framework that defines the key components of oncofertility care, develops a model for prioritizing service development, and defines the roles that health care professionals (HCPs) play. Materials and Method. A quantitative modified Delphi methodology was used to conduct two rounds of an electronic survey, querying and synthesizing opinions about statements regarding oncofertility care with HCPs and patient and family advocacy groups (PFAs) from 16 countries (12 high and 4 middle income). Statements included the roles of HCPs and priorities for service development care across ten domains (communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, oncofertility training, reproductive survivorship care and fertility-related psychosocial support, supportive care, and ethical frameworks) that represent 33 different elements of care.Results. The first questionnaire was completed by 457 participants (332 HCPs and 125 PFAs). One hundred and thirty-eight participants completed the second questionnaire (122 HCPs and 16 PFAs). Consensus was agreed on 108 oncofertility competencies and the roles HCPs should play in oncofertility care. A three-tier service development model is proposed, withThe Oncologist 2019;24:e1450-e1459 www.TheOncologist.com Symptom Management and Supportive Care Implications for Practice: Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. The competency framework gives 108 competencies that will allow health care professionals (HCPs) and services a structure for the development of oncofertility care, as well as define the role HCPs play to provide care and support. The framework also proposes a three-tier oncofertility service development model which prioritizes the development of components of oncofertility care into essential, enhanced, and expert services, giving clear recommendations for service development. The competency framework will enhance the implementation of FP guidelines, improving the equitable access to medical and psychological oncofertility care. Initial QuestionnaireQuestionnaires were developed for HCPs and PFAs. These questionnaires were reviewed by PFA to ensure consensus on appropriate terminology and language and breadth of

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.

Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and methylglyoxal (MG), an important intermediate in AGEs synthesis, are thought to contribute to protein aging and to the pathogenesis of age-and diabetes-associated complications. This study was intended to investigate brain mitochondria bioenergetics and oxidative status of rats previously exposed to chronic treatment with MG and/or with pyridoxamine (PM), a glycation inhibitor. Brain mitochondrial fractions were obtained and several parameters were analyzed: respiratory chain [states 3 and 4 of respiration, respiratory control ratio (RCR), and ADP/O index] and phosphorylation system [transmembrane potential (ΔΨm), ADP-induced depolarization, repolarization lag phase, and ATP levels]; hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) production levels, mitochondrial aconitase activity, and malondialdehyde levels as well as non-enzymatic antioxidant defenses (vitamin E and glutathione levels) and enzymatic antioxidant defenses (glutathione disulfide reductase (GR), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), and manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD) activities). MG treatment induced a statistical significant decrease in RCR, aconitase and GR activities, and an increase in H2O2 production levels. The administration of PM did not counteract MG-induced effects and caused a significant decrease in ΔΨm. In mitochondria from control animals, PM caused an adaptive mechanism characterized by a decrease in aconitase and GR activities as well as an increase in both α-tocopherol levels and GPx and MnSOD activities. Altogether our results show that high levels of MG promote brain mitochondrial impairment and PM is not able to reverse MG-induced effects.

Objective To assess the viability of bovine ovarian tissue after cryopreservation through either slow freezing or vitrification, and to compare it to that of control tissue by performing morphological analyses. Methods The study included 20 bovine ovarian cortex fragments that were divided into control, vitrification, and slow freezing groups. Each group consisted of four fragments of the same ovary, two fixed without cultivation, and two fixed with cultivation. Tissues were evaluated based on follicular morphology immediately after heating and after 7 days of culture, and compared with the control group. Results A total of 240 fragments were analyzed, generating a sample of 1,344 follicles without cultivation and 552 with cultivation. When the non-cultivated samples were classified as non-atretic follicles, 572 were found in the control group, 289 in the vitrification group, and 373 in the slow freezing group, showing no significant differences. When classified as atretic, 46 follicles were found in the control group, 23 in the vitrification group, and 41 in the slow freezing group, also showing no statistical difference. In the post-culture sample, an evolution of the follicular stages could be observed. This finding was important to support that the follicles considered non-atretic in the non-cultivated group were actually viable in the morphological evaluation. Conclusion With no differences between the protocols, vitrification was shown to be an advanced and alternative method for patients who will undergo treatments that

No abstract