RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the use of fertility-preserving (FP) treatments and fertility counseling that was offered in a cohort of newly diagnosed children with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). METHODS: In this observational study, boys and girls with cHL aged ≤ 18 years with scheduled treatment according to the EuroNet-PHL-C2 protocol were recruited from 18 sites (5 countries), between January 2017 and September 2021. In 2023, a subset of Dutch participants (aged ≥ 12 years at time of diagnosis) and parents/guardians were surveyed regarding fertility counseling. RESULTS: A total of 101 boys and 104 girls were included. Most post-pubertal boys opted for semen cryopreservation pre-treatment (85% of expected). Invasive FP treatments were occasionally chosen for patients at a relatively low risk of fertility based on scheduled alkylating agent exposure (4/5 testicular biopsy, 4/4 oocyte, and 11/11 ovarian tissue cryopreservation). A total of 17 post-menarchal girls (20%) received GnRH-analogue co-treatment. Furthermore, 33/84 parents and 26/63 patients responded to the questionnaire. Most reported receiving fertility counseling (97%/89%). Statements regarding the timing and content of counseling were generally positive. Parents and patients considered fertility counseling important (94%/87% (strongly agreed) and most expressed concerns about (their child's) fertility (at diagnosis 69%/46%, at present: 59%/42%). CONCLUSION: Systematic fertility counseling is crucial for all pediatric cHL patients and their families. FP treatment should be considered depending on the anticipated risk and patient factors. We encourage the development of a decision aid for FP in pediatric oncology.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer patients often remain uninformed regarding their potential risk of gonadal damage. In our hospital we introduced a five step standard oncofertility care plan for all newly diagnosed female patients aiming to identify, inform and triage 100% of patients and counsel 100% of patients at high risk (HR) of gonadal damage. This observational retrospective study (PEARL study) evaluated the use of this standard oncofertility care plan in the first full year in a national cohort. METHODS: The steps consist of 1)timely (preferably before start of gonadotoxic treatment) identification of all new patients, 2)triage of gonadal damage risk using a standardized gonadal damage risk stratification tool, 3)informing all patients and families, 4)counseling of a selected subset of girls, and 5) fertility preservation including ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) in HR patients using amended Edinburgh criteria. A survey of the medical records of all girls newly diagnosed with cancer the first year (1-1-2019 until 31-12-2019) was conducted. RESULTS: Of 261 girls, 228 (87.4%) were timely identified and triaged. Triage resulted in 151 (66%) low(LR), 32 (14%) intermediate(IR) and 45 (20%) high risk(HR) patients. Ninety-nine families were documented to be timely informed regarding gonadal damage risk. In total, 35 girls (5 LR, 5 IR, 25 HR) were counseled by an oncofertility expert. 16/25 HR patients underwent fertility preservation (1 ovariopexy + OTC, oocyte cryopreservation (1 with and 1 without OTC) and 13 OTC). Fertility preservation did not lead to complications or delay of cancer treatment in any patient. CONCLUSION: We timely identified and triaged most girls (88%) with cancer with a high risk of gonadal damage to be counseled for fertility preservation. We aim to optimize the oncofertility care plan and the standardized gonadal damage risk stratification tool based on this experience and these may be of value to other pediatric oncology centers.