Puberty Suppression for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria and the Child's Right to an Open Future.

In this essay, we consider the clinical and ethical implications of puberty blockers for pediatric gender dysphoria through the lens of "the child's right to an open future," which refers to rights that children do not have the capacity to exercise as minors, but that must be protected, so they can exercise them in the future as autonomous adults. We contrast the open future principle with the beliefs underpinning the gender affirming care model and discuss implications for consent. We evaluate claims that puberty blockers are reversible, discuss the scientific uncertainty about long-term benefits and harms, summarize international developments, and examine how suicide has been used to frame puberty suppression as a medically necessary, lifesaving treatment. In discussing these issues, we include relevant empirical evidence and raise questions for clinicians and researchers. We conclude that treatment pathways that delay decisions about medical transition until the child has had the chance to grow and mature into an autonomous adulthood would be most consistent with the open future principle.

Patient burden and healthcare resource utilization of regimens for ovarian stimulation.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Do women receiving corifollitropin alfa with a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist experience less emotional and/or physical exhaustion than women receiving standard of care gonadotrophin with daily administration of GnRH agonist or antagonist? DESIGN: The CoRifollitropin EvAluation in PracTicE (CREATE) study was a prospective observational study of fertility clinics in 17 countries in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Women undergoing IVF were categorized by treatment. Group A received single-dose corifollitropin alfa plus a GnRH antagonist; group B received usual care daily gonadotrophin regimens with a GnRH agonist or antagonist; and group B1i received daily GnRH agonist injections. For the primary analysis, two items from the Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Impact questionnaire were used to assess the level of emotional and physical exhaustion associated with ovarian stimulation. Secondary end-points included the impact of ovarian stimulation-related healthcare resource use. RESULTS: No statistical difference was found between the percentage of participants reporting emotional exhaustion in group A (11.6%) and B (13.1%) or the percentage reporting being 'often' or 'always' physically exhausted. More participants in group B1i (16.4%) reported being emotionally exhausted 'often' or 'always' during ovarian stimulation compared with group A (11.6%; P = 0.026). Patient questionnaire scores for psychological impact were higher in group A compared with group B, indicating less negative impact (72.7 versus 70.9; P = 0.004). Group A had fewer clinic visits, physician consultations, nurse contacts and transvaginal ultrasound scans (all P < 0.001) than group B1. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with corifollitropin alfa resulted in similar or numerically small differences in psychological impact and lower clinic service use compared with daily gonadotrophin regimens.