Risk of adverse birth outcomes after adolescent and young adult cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many women diagnosed with cancer as adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years) want biological children after cancer but lack information on the potential impact of their cancer history on future reproductive outcomes. We investigated the risk of adverse birth outcomes among AYA cancer survivors. METHODS: We identified insured women diagnosed with AYA breast cancer, thyroid cancer, gynecologic cancers, lymphoma, or melanoma from 2003 to 2016 in the state of North Carolina or the Kaiser Permanente health care systems in northern and southern California. Post-diagnosis births to cancer survivors were each matched with up to 5 births to women without cancer. Risk ratios for preterm birth (<37 completed weeks), very preterm birth (<34 completed weeks), low birth weight (<2500 g), and small for gestational age (SGA, <10th percentile of weight for gestational age) were estimated using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Analyses included 1648 births to 1268 AYA cancer survivors and 7879 births to 6066 women without cancer. Overall, risk of preterm birth, very preterm birth, low birth weight, and SGA did not significantly differ between births to women with and without cancer. However, births to women with gynecologic cancers had a significantly increased risk of low birth weight (risk ratio = 1.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 3.21) and suggested increased risk of preterm birth (risk ratio = 1.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.99 to 2.54). Chemotherapy exposure was not associated with increased risk of adverse birth outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Women with gynecologic cancers, but not other cancers, had an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes compared to women without cancer.

Time to cancer treatment and reproductive outcomes after fertility preservation among adolescent and young adult women with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fertility preservation (FP) may be underused after cancer diagnosis because of uncertainty around delays to cancer treatment and subsequent reproductive success. METHODS: Women aged 15 to 39 years diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2015 were identified from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry. Use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) after cancer diagnosis between 2004 and 2018 (including FP) was assessed through linkage to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Linear regression was used to examine time to cancer treatment among women who did (n = 95) or did not (n = 469) use FP. Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for pregnancy and birth based on timing of ART initiation relative to cancer treatment (n = 18 initiated before treatment for FP vs n = 26 initiated after treatment without FP). RESULTS: The median time to cancer treatment was 9 to 33 days longer among women who used FP compared with women who did not, matched on clinical factors. Women who initiated ART before cancer treatment may be more likely to have a live birth given pregnancy compared with women who initiated ART after cancer treatment (age-adjusted RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.98-2.23), though this may be affected by the more frequent use of gestational carriers in the former group (47% vs 20% of transfer cycles, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: FP delayed gonadotoxic cancer treatment by up to 4.5 weeks, a delay that would not be expected to alter prognosis for many women. Further study of the use of gestational carriers in cancer populations is warranted to better understand its effect on reproductive outcomes.

Outcomes after assisted reproductive technology in women with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the associations between a history of cancer and outcomes after ART? SUMMARY ANSWER: Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer and a lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy and live birth after ART. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Small, single-institution studies have suggested that cancer and its treatment may negatively affect ART outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing ART outcomes between women with and without cancer. PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched for original, English-language studies published up to June 2021. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Inclusion criteria required reporting of ART outcomes after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) among women with a history of cancer compared to women without cancer who used ART for any indication. Outcomes of interest ranged from duration of COS to likelihood of live birth after embryo transfer. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs and 95% prediction intervals (PIs). We assessed heterogeneity by age-adjustment, referent group indication for ART, study location and among women with breast cancer and women who initiated ART before cancer treatment. We used visual inspection, Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method to assess funnel plot asymmetry. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of 6094 unique records identified, 42 studies met inclusion criteria, representing a median per study of 58 women with cancer (interquartile range (IQR) = 159) and 114 women without cancer (IQR = 348). Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.74; 95% PI: 0.00, 64.98); lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.73; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.35); and lower likelihood of live birth (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.83; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.69). Substantial among-study heterogeneity was observed for COS duration, gonadotropin dose, cycle cancellation, total oocytes and mature oocytes. Fertilization percentage showed less heterogeneity, but study-specific estimates were imprecise. Similarly, number of embryos showed less heterogeneity, and most studies estimated minimal differences by cancer history. Funnel plot asymmetry was observed for estradiol peak and oocyte maturation percentage. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Appreciable confounding is possible in 11 studies that lacked adequate control for group differences in age, and among-study heterogeneity was observed for most outcomes. Lack of data limited our ability to assess how cancer clinical factors (e.g. cancers other than breast, cancer stage and treatment) and ART cycle characteristics (e.g. fresh versus frozen embryo transfers and use of gestational carriers) may affect outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Women with cancer may be less likely to achieve pregnancy and live birth after embryo transfer. Further examination of reproductive outcomes and sources of heterogeneity among studies is warranted to improve evidence of the expected success of ART after a cancer diagnosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was supported in part by R01 CA211093 and P30 ES010126. C.M. was supported by the University of North Carolina Lineberger Cancer Control Education Program (T32 CA057726) and the National Cancer Institute (F31 CA260787). J.A.R.-H. was supported by the National Cancer Institute (K08 CA234333, P30 CA016672). J.A.R.-H. reports receiving consulting fees from Schlesinger Group and Guidepoint. The remaining authors declare no competing interests. REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Disparities in fertility preservation use among adolescent and young adult women with cancer.

PURPOSE: Women face multiple barriers to fertility preservation after cancer diagnosis, but few studies have examined disparities in use of these services. METHODS: Women aged 15-39 years diagnosed with cancer during 2004-2015 were identified from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and linked to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System. Women who cryopreserved oocytes or embryos for fertility preservation (n = 96) were compared to women who received gonadotoxic treatment but did not use fertility preservation (n = 7964). Conditional logistic and log-binomial regression were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) or prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Few adolescent and young adult women with cancer in our study (1.2%) used fertility preservation. In multivariable regression, women less likely to use fertility preservation were older at diagnosis (ages 25-29 vs. 35-39: OR = 6.27, 95% CI: 3.35, 11.73); non-Hispanic Black (vs. non-Hispanic White: PR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.79); and parous at diagnosis (vs. nulliparous: PR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.45); or lived in census tracts that were non-urban (vs. urban: PR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.37) or of lower socioeconomic status (quintiles 1-3 vs. quintiles 4 and 5: PR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Women with cancer who were older, non-Hispanic Black, parous, or living in areas that were non-urban or of lower socioeconomic position were less likely to use fertility preservation. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Clinical and policy interventions are needed to ensure equitable access to fertility services among women facing cancer treatment-related infertility.

Differential newborn DNA methylation among individuals with complex congenital heart defects and childhood lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: There is emerging evidence that children with complex congenital heart defects (CHDs) are at increased risk for childhood lymphoma, but the mechanisms underlying this association are unclear. Thus, we sought to evaluate the role of DNA methylation patterns on "CHD-lymphoma" associations. METHODS: From >3 million live births (1988-2004) in California registry linkages, we obtained newborn dried bloodspots from eight children with CHD-lymphoma through the California BioBank. We performed case-control epigenome-wide association analyses (EWAS) using two comparison groups with reciprocal discovery and validation to identify differential methylation associated with CHD-lymphoma. RESULTS: After correction for multiple testing at the discovery and validation stages, individuals with CHD-lymphoma had differential newborn methylation at six sites relative to two comparison groups. Our top finding was significant in both EWAS and indicates PPFIA1 cg25574765 was hypomethylated among individuals with CHD-lymphoma (mean beta = 0.04) relative to both unaffected individuals (mean beta = 0.93, p = 1.5 × 10-12 ) and individuals with complex CHD (mean beta = 0.95, p = 3.8 × 10-8 ). PPFIA1 encodes a ubiquitously expressed liprin protein in one of the most commonly amplified regions in many cancers (11q13). Further, cg25574765 is a proposed marker of pre-eclampsia, a maternal CHD risk factor that has not been fully evaluated for lymphoma risk in offspring, and the tumor microenvironment that may drive immune cell malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: We identified associations between molecular changes present in the genome at birth and risk of childhood lymphoma among those with CHD. Our findings also highlight novel perinatal exposures that may underlie methylation changes in CHD predisposing to lymphoma.

The risks of birth defects and childhood cancer with conception by assisted reproductive technology.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there an association between fertility status, method of conception and the risks of birth defects and childhood cancer? SUMMARY ANSWER: The risk of childhood cancer had two independent components: (i) method of conception and (ii) presence, type and number of birth defects. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The rarity of the co-occurrence of birth defects, cancer and ART makes studying their association challenging. Prior studies have indicated that infertility and ART are associated with an increased risk of birth defects or cancer but have been limited by small sample size and inadequate statistical power, failure to adjust for or include plurality, differences in definitions and/or methods of ascertainment, lack of information on ART treatment parameters or study periods spanning decades resulting in a substantial historical bias as ART techniques have improved. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a population-based cohort study linking ART cycles reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2017 that resulted in live births in 2004-2018 in Massachusetts and North Carolina and live births in 2004-2017 in Texas and New York. A 10:1 sample of non-ART births were chosen within the same time period as the ART birth. Non-ART siblings were identified through the ART mother's information. Children from non-ART births were classified as being born to women who conceived with ovulation induction or IUI (OI/IUI) when there was an indication of infertility treatment on the birth certificate, and the woman did not link to the SART CORS; all others were classified as being naturally conceived. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The study population included 165 125 ART children, 31 524 non-ART siblings, 12 451 children born to OI/IUI-treated women and 1 353 440 naturally conceived children. All study children were linked to their respective State birth defect registries to identify major defects diagnosed within the first year of life. We classified children with major defects as either chromosomal (i.e. presence of a chromosomal defect with or without any other major defect) or nonchromosomal (i.e. presence of a major defect but having no chromosomal defect), or all major defects (chromosomal and nonchromosomal), and calculated rates per 1000 children. Logistic regression models were used to generate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CIs of the risk of birth defects by conception group (OI/IUI, non-ART sibling and ART by oocyte source and embryo state) with naturally conceived children as the reference, adjusted for paternal and maternal ages; maternal race and ethnicity, education, BMI, parity, diabetes, hypertension; and for plurality, infant sex and State and year of birth. All study children were also linked to their respective State cancer registries. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of cancer by birth defect status (including presence of a defect, type and number of defects), and conception group. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 29 571 singleton children (2.0%) and 3753 twin children (3.5%) had a major birth defect (chromosomal or nonchromosomal). Children conceived with ART from autologous oocytes had increased risks for nonchromosomal defects, including blastogenesis, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and, for males only, genitourinary defects, with AORs ranging from 1.22 to 1.85; children in the autologous-fresh group also had increased risks for musculoskeletal (AOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.13, 1.45) and orofacial defects (AOR 1.40, 95% CI 1.17, 1.68). Within the donor oocyte group, the children conceived from fresh embryos did not have increased risks in any birth defect category, whereas children conceived from thawed embryos had increased risks for nonchromosomal defects (AOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03, 1.40) and blastogenesis defects (AOR 1.74, 95% CI 1.14, 2.65). The risk of cancer was increased among ART children in the autologous-fresh group (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.08, 1.59) and non-ART siblings (1.34, 95% CI 1.02, 1.76). The risk of leukemia was increased among children in the OI/IUI group (HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.04, 4.47) and non-ART siblings (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.02, 2.61). The risk of central nervous system tumors was increased among ART children in the autologous-fresh group (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.14, 2.48), donor-fresh group (HR 2.57, 95% CI 1.04, 6.32) and non-ART siblings (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.12, 3.03). ART children in the autologous-fresh group were also at increased risk for solid tumors (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09, 1.77). A total of 127 children had both major birth defects and cancer, of which 53 children (42%) had leukemia. The risk of cancer had two independent components: (i) method of conception (described above) and (ii) presence, type and number of birth defects. The presence of nonchromosomal defects increased the cancer risk, greater for two or more defects versus one defect, for all cancers and each type evaluated. The presence of chromosomal defects was strongly associated with cancer risk (HR 8.70 for all cancers and HR 21.90 for leukemia), further elevated in the presence of both chromosomal and nonchromosomal defects (HR 21.29 for all cancers, HR 64.83 for leukemia and HR 4.71 for embryonal tumors). Among the 83 946 children born from ART in the USA in 2019 compared to their naturally conceived counterparts, these risks translate into an estimated excess of 761 children with major birth defects, 31 children with cancer and 11 children with both major birth defects and cancer. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In the SART CORS database, it was not possible to differentiate method of embryo freezing (slow freezing versus vitrification), and data on ICSI were only available in the fresh embryo ART group. In the OI/IUI group, it was not possible to differentiate type of non-ART treatment utilized, and in both the ART and OI/IUI groups, data were unavailable on duration of infertility. Since OI/IUI is underreported on the birth certificate, some OI/IUI children were likely included among the naturally conceived children, which will decrease the difference between all the groups and the naturally conceived children. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The use of ART is associated with increased risks of major nonchromosomal birth defects. The presence of birth defects is associated with greater risks for cancer, which adds to the baseline risk in the ART group. Although this study does not show causality, these findings indicate that children conceived with ART, non-ART siblings, and all children with birth defects should be monitored more closely for the subsequent development of cancer. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This project was supported by grant R01 HD084377 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, or the National Institutes of Health, nor any of the State Departments of Health which contributed data. M.L.E. reports consultancy for Ro, Hannah, Dadi, Sandstone and Underdog; presidency of SSMR; and SMRU board member. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Association between infertility and all-cause mortality: analysis of US claims data.

BACKGROUND: The consequences of an infertility diagnosis extend beyond the pursuit of family building, because women with infertility also face increased risks for severe maternal morbidity, cancer, and chronic disease. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the association between female infertility and all-cause mortality. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective analysis compared 72,786 women with infertility, identified in the Optum Clinformatics Datamart from 2003 to 2019 by infertility diagnosis, testing, and treatment codes, with 3,845,790 women without infertility seeking routine gynecologic care. The baseline comorbidities were assessed using the presence of ≥1 metabolic syndrome diagnoses and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. The primary outcome, which was all-cause mortality, was identified by linkage to the Social Security Administration Death Master File outcomes and medical claims. The association between infertility and mortality was examined using a Cox proportional hazard regression by adjusting for age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, type II diabetes, year of evaluation, smoking, number of visits per year, nulliparity, obesity, region of the country, and race. RESULTS: Among 16,473,458 person-years of follow-ups, 13,934 women died. Women with infertility had a 32% higher relative risk for death from any cause (0.42% vs 0.35%, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.48) than women without infertility. The mean follow-up time per patient was 4.0±3.7 years vs 4.2±3.8 years for women with and without infertility, respectively. When stratified by age of <35 or ≥35 years or baseline medical comorbidity, the association between infertility and mortality remained. Women with infertility who delivered a child during the follow-up period faced a similar increased risk for mortality than the overall infertile group. Finally, receiving fertility treatment was not associated with a higher risk for death than receiving an infertility diagnosis or testing alone. CONCLUSION: Although the absolute risk for death was low in both groups, women with infertility faced a higher relative risk for mortality than women without infertility. The association remained across all age, race and ethnicity groups, morbidities, and delivery strata. Importantly, infertility treatment was not associated with an increased risk for death. These findings reinforce the disease burden associated with infertility and its potential for long-term sequelae.

Assessment of Birth Defects and Cancer Risk in Children Conceived via In Vitro Fertilization in the US.

Importance: Children with birth defects have a greater risk of developing cancer, but this association has not yet been evaluated in children conceived with in vitro fertilization (IVF). Objective: To assess whether the association between birth defects and cancer is greater in children conceived via IVF compared with children conceived naturally. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of live births, birth defects, and cancer from Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, and Texas included 1 000 639 children born to fertile women and 52 776 children conceived via IVF (using autologous oocytes and fresh embryos) during 2004-2016 in Massachusetts and North Carolina, 2004-2015 in New York, and 2004-2013 in Texas. Children were followed up for an average of 5.7 years (6 008 985 total person-years of exposure). Data analysis was conducted from April 1 to August 31, 2020. Exposures: Conception by IVF for state residents who gave birth to liveborn singletons during the study period. Birth defect diagnoses recorded by statewide registries. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cancer diagnosis as recorded by state cancer registries. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for birth defect-cancer associations separately in fertile and IVF groups. Results: A total of 1 000 639 children (51.3% boys; 69.7% White; and 38.3% born between 2009-2012) were in the fertile group and 52 776 were in the IVF group (51.3% boys; 81.3% White; and 39.6% born between 2009-2012). Compared with children without birth defects, cancer risks were higher among children with a major birth defect in the fertile group (hazard ratio [HR], 3.15; 95% CI, 2.40-4.14) and IVF group (HR, 6.90; 95% CI, 3.73-12.74). The HR of cancer among children with a major nonchromosomal defect was 2.07 (95% CI, 1.47-2.91) among children in the fertile group and 4.04 (95% CI, 1.86-8.77) among children in the IVF group. The HR of cancer among children with a chromosomal defect was 15.45 (95% CI, 10.00-23.86) in the fertile group and 38.91 (95% CI, 15.56-97.33) in the IVF group. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that among children with birth defects, those conceived via IVF were at greater risk of developing cancer compared with children conceived naturally.

Increased risk of severe maternal morbidity among infertile women: analysis of US claims data.

BACKGROUND: Severe maternal morbidity continues to be an issue of national and global concern and is increasing in incidence. The incidence of infertility is also on the rise, and infertile women experience a higher risk of incident chronic medical disease and cancer, suggesting that fertility may serve as a window to a woman's overall health. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the risk of severe maternal morbidity by maternal fertility status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort analysis using Optum's de-identifed Clinformatics Data Mart Database between 2003 and 2015. Infertile women stratified by infertility diagnosis, testing, or treatment were compared to fertile women seeking routine gynecologic care. In both groups, only women who underwent pregnancy and delivery of a singleton during the follow-up period were included. Main outcomes were severe maternal morbidity indicators, defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and identified by International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision and Common Procedural Technology codes within 6 weeks of each delivery. Results were adjusted for maternal age, race, education, nulliparity, smoking, obesity, delivery mode, preterm birth, number of prenatal visits, and year of delivery. RESULTS: A total of 19,658 women comprised the infertile group and 525,695 women comprised the fertile group. The overall incidence of any severe maternal morbidity indicator was 7.0% among women receiving fertility treatment, 6.4% among women receiving a fertility diagnosis, 5.5% among women receiving fertility testing, and 4.3% among fertile women. Overall, infertile women had a significantly higher risk of developing any severe maternal morbidity indicator (adjusted odds ratio, 1.22; confidence interval, 1.14-1.31, P < .01) as well as a significantly higher risk of disseminated intravascular coagulation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; confidence interval, 1.26-1.73, P < .01), eclampsia (adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; confidence interval, 1.05-1.79, P < .01), heart failure during procedure or surgery (adjusted odds ratio, 1.54; confidence interval, 1.21-1.97, P < .01), internal injuries of the thorax, abdomen, or pelvis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.59; confidence interval, 1.12-2.26, P < .01), intracranial injuries (adjusted odds ratio, 1.77; confidence interval, 1.20-2.61, P < .01), pulmonary edema (adjusted odds ratio, 2.18; confidence interval, 1.54-3.10, P < .01), thrombotic embolism (adjusted odds ratio, 1.58; confidence interval, 1.14-2.17, P < .01), and blood transfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 1.50; confidence interval, 1.30-1.72, P < .01) compared to fertile women. Fertile women did not face a significantly higher risk of any maternal morbidity indicator compared to infertile women. In subgroup analysis by maternal race/ethnicity, the likelihood of severe morbidity was significantly higher among fertile black women compared to fertile white women. There was no difference between infertile black women and infertile white women after multivariable adjustment. CONCLUSION: Using an insurance claims database, we report that women diagnosed with infertility and women receiving fertility treatment experience a significantly higher risk of multiple indicators of severe maternal morbidity compared to fertile women. The increased risk of severe maternal morbidity noted among fertile black women compared to fertile white women is attenuated among infertile black women, who face risks similar to those of infertile white women.

Association of In Vitro Fertilization With Childhood Cancer in the United States.

Importance: In vitro fertilization (IVF) is associated with birth defects and imprinting disorders. Because these conditions are associated with an increased risk of childhood cancer, many of which originate in utero, descriptions of cancers among children conceived via IVF are imperative. Objective: To compare the incidence of childhood cancers among children conceived in vitro with those conceived naturally. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, population-based cohort study linking cycles reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinical Outcomes Reporting System from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2012, that resulted in live births from September 1, 2004, to December 31, 2013, to the birth and cancer registries of 14 states, comprising 66% of United States births and 75% of IVF-conceived births, with follow-up from September 1, 2004, to December 31, 2014. The study included 275 686 children conceived via IVF and a cohort of 2 266 847 children, in which 10 births were randomly selected for each IVF birth. Statistical analysis was performed from April 1, 2017, to October 1, 2018. Exposure: In vitro fertilization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cancer diagnosed in the first decade of life. Results: A total of 321 cancers were detected among the children conceived via IVF (49.1% girls and 50.9% boys; mean [SD] age, 4.6 [2.5] years for singleton births and 5.9 [2.4] years for multiple births), and a total of 2042 cancers were detected among the children not conceived via IVF (49.2% girls and 50.8% boys; mean [SD] age, 6.1 [2.6] years for singleton births and 4.7 [2.6] years for multiple births). The overall cancer rate (per 1 000 000 person-years) was 251.9 for the IVF group and 192.7 for the non-IVF group (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.00-1.36). The rate of hepatic tumors was higher among the IVF group than the non-IVF group (hepatic tumor rate: 18.1 vs 5.7; hazard ratio, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.29-4.70); the rates of other cancers did not differ between the 2 groups. There were no associations with specific IVF treatment modalities or indication for IVF. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found a small association of IVF with overall cancers of early childhood, but it did observe an increased rate of embryonal cancers, particularly hepatic tumors, that could not be attributed to IVF rather than to underlying infertility. Continued follow-up for cancer occurrence among children conceived via IVF is warranted.

National survey of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology membership regarding insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technologies.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the attitudes of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) members regarding expanding insurance coverage for patients seeking assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and identify some of the factors that may influence such attitudes. DESIGN: An anonymous online 14-question survey of SART membership; 1,556 surveys were sent through the SART Research Portal from June to December 2017. Questions were incremental in scope, beginning with expanding insurance coverage for ART for vulnerable populations (e.g., fertility preservation for cancer, couples with same recessive gene, fertility preservation for transgender individuals) to extending coverage to include patients who were uninsured for ART. Additional questions assessed attitudes about assuming some fiscal responsibility if mandated insurance were contingent on elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) and lower charges in anticipation of increased number of cases. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): Not applicable. INTERVENTION(S): Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Specific response to 14 survey questions. RESULT(S): The overall response rate was 43.4% (675/1,556). A large majority (>95%) favored insurance for fertility preservation for cancer patients and for avoidance of genetic disorders; 62.3% were supportive of infertility insurance coverage for transgender patients; 78% supported expanding insurance for the broadest segment of the general uninsured population; 76.7% supported expanding insurance contingent on eSET; and 51.3% would consider expanding insurance contingent on lowering charge per cycle in general, but only 23% responded as to what lower charge would be acceptable. Three of four factors were shown by multivariable logistic regression to be predictive of attitudes willing to expand insurance: practice setting (academic > hybrid > private), practicing in a mandated state, and higher annual volume of cases (>500 cycles); these had significant increased adjusted odds ratios ranging from 1.7 to 2.9. A fourth factor, the professional role one had in the practice, was not found to be of significant predictive value. CONCLUSION(S): The great majority of respondents were supportive of expanding insurance for specific segments of vulnerable populations with special needs and for the population who are presently uninsured. Furthermore, the majority of respondents would consider expanding insurance coverage contingent on age-appropriate eSET but have concerns about reduced reimbursement. Those most likely to be willing to expand insurance are those who practice in an academic setting or a mandated state and/or have a high annual volume of cases.

Childbirth after adolescent and young adult cancer: a population-based study.

PURPOSE: Annually, > 45,000 US women are diagnosed with cancer during adolescence and young adulthood (AYA). Since 2006, national guidelines have recommended fertility counseling for cancer patients. We examined childbirth after AYA cancer by calendar period, cancer diagnosis, and maternal characteristics. METHODS: We identified a cohort of women with an incident invasive AYA cancer diagnosis at ages 15-39 during 2000-2013 in North Carolina. Cancer records were linked with statewide birth certificates through 2014. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for first post-diagnosis live birth were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 17,564 AYA cancer survivors, 1989 had ≥ 1 birth after diagnosis during 98,397 person-years. The 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence of live birth after cancer was 10 and 15%, respectively. AYA survivors with a post-diagnosis birth were younger at diagnosis, had lower stage disease, and had less often received chemotherapy than those without a birth. The 5-year cumulative incidence of post-diagnosis birth was 10.0% for women diagnosed during 2007-2012, compared to 9.4% during 2000-2005 (HR = 1.01; 0.91, 1.12), corresponding to periods before and after publication of American Society of Clinical Oncology fertility counseling guidelines in 2006. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in fertility preservation options and recognition of fertility counseling as a part of high-quality cancer care, the incidence of post-diagnosis childbirth has remained stable over the last 15 years. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Our study uses statewide data to provide recent, population-based estimates of how often AYA women have biological children after a cancer diagnosis.

Inpatient hospitalizations in women with and without assisted reproductive technology live birth.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to evaluate frequency of hospitalization before, during, and after assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment by cycle outcome. METHODS: Six thousand and one hundred thirty women residing in Massachusetts undergoing 17,135 cycles of ART reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SARTCORS) from 2004 to 2011 were linked to hospital discharges and vital records. Women were grouped according to ART treatment cycle outcome as: no pregnancy (n = 1840), one or more pregnancies but no live birth (n = 968), or one or more singleton live births (n = 3322). Hospital delivery discharges during 1998-2011 were categorized as occurring before, during, or after the ART treatment. The most prevalent ICD-9 codes for non-delivery hospital discharges were compared. Groups were compared using chi square test using SAS 9.3 software. RESULTS: The proportion of any hospitalization was 57.0, 58.3, and 91.3% for women with no pregnancy, no live birth, and ART singleton live birth, respectively; the proportion of non-delivery hospitalizations was 30.4, 31.0, and 28.3%, respectively. The non-ART delivery proportion after ART treatment did not differ by group (33.4, 36.2, and 36.9%, respectively, p = 0.17). Most frequent non-delivery diagnoses (including fibroids, obesity, ectopic pregnancy, depression, and endometriosis) also did not differ by group. A secondary analysis limited to only women with no delivery discharges before the first ART cycle showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: All groups had live birth deliveries during the study period, suggesting an important contribution of non-ART treatment or treatment-independent conception to overall delivery and live births. Hospitalizations not associated with delivery suggested similarity in morbidity for all ART patients regardless of success with ART treatment.

Adverse effects of female obesity and interaction with race on reproductive potential.

Across the reproductive spectrum, obesity is associated with greater risks for adverse health outcomes, including higher rates of infertility, subfertility, early pregnancy loss, fetal deaths and stillbirths, congenital anomalies, and pregnancy complications. The excess reproductive morbidity associated with obesity may increase with longer duration, making the current trends among children and young adults particularly critical in terms of their future reproductive potential. Obese women have a lower chance of pregnancy following in vitro fertilization (IVF), require higher dosages of gonadotropins, and have reduced rates of implantation, clinical intrauterine gestation, and live birth rates and increased rates of pregnancy loss, as well as greater risks for prematurity and preeclampsia even when stratified by plurality. Racial and ethnic differences by overweight and obesity in IVF outcomes have been reported. Compared with normal-weight women, failure to achieve a clinical intrauterine gestation is significantly more likely among obese women overall, normal-weight and obese Asian women, normal-weight Hispanic women, and overweight and obese Black women. Among women who do conceive, compared with normal-weight women, failure to achieve a live birth is significantly more likely among overweight and obese women overall, and among overweight and obese Asian women, overweight and obese Hispanic women, and normal-weight and obese Black women. Although weight loss should theoretically be the first line of therapy for obese women, other lifestyle factors, such as regular physical exercise, elimination of tobacco use and alcohol consumption, and stress management, may be of more immediate benefit in achieving conception.

Embryo banking among women diagnosed with cancer: a pilot population-based study in New York, Texas, and Illinois.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to estimate the proportion of women with cancer who return to use the embryos that they have banked and to compare this proportion to that of women without cancer who bank embryos. METHODS: This is a cohort study of three groups of women from New York, Texas, and Illinois who used embryo banking in their first assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment cycle: two groups with cancer (222 women without an infertility diagnosis and 48 women with an infertility diagnosis) and a control group without cancer (68 women with the infertility diagnosis of male factor only). Women were included only if their first ART cycle reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) occurred between 2004 and 2009. Cancer cases were identified from each State Cancer Registry from 5 years prior to initiation of ART treatment to 6 months post-initiation; mean follow-up after the first ART cycle was 2.0 years. RESULTS: Women with cancer without an infertility diagnosis returned for a subsequent ART cycle at a lower rate (10.8 %) than those with an infertility diagnosis (31.3 %, p = 0.0010) or the control group (85.3 %, p < 0.0001). Among those who returned for a subsequent cycle, women with cancer waited a longer time to return (14.3 months without an infertility diagnosis and 8.3 months with an infertility diagnosis, p = 0.13) compared to the control group (2.8 months, p = 0.0007). The live birth rate among women who did not utilize embryo banking in their second cycle did not differ significantly across the three study groups, ranging from 25.0 and 42.9 % for women with cancer with and without an infertility diagnosis, respectively, to 36.2 % for women in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Women with cancer without an infertility diagnosis are either less likely to return for subsequent treatment or will wait a longer time to return than women with an infertility diagnosis or those that do not have cancer. A longer-term study is necessary to assess whether these women return to use their frozen embryos after cancer treatment or are able to spontaneously conceive and if those subsequent pregnancies are adversely affected by the cancer diagnosis or therapy.

Assisted reproductive technology use and outcomes among women with a history of cancer.

STUDY QUESTION: How do the assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes of women presenting for ART after cancer diagnosis compare to women without cancer? SUMMARY ANSWER: The likelihood of a live birth after ART among women with prior cancer using autologous oocytes is reduced and varies by cancer diagnosis but is similar to women without cancer when donor oocytes are used. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Premenopausal patients faced with a cancer diagnosis frequently present for fertility preservation. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Population-based cohort study of women treated with ART in NY, TX and IL, USA. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women with their first ART treatment between 2004 and 2009 were identified from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System database and linked to their respective State Cancer Registries based on name, date of birth and social security number. Years were rounded, i.e. year 1 = 6-18 months before treatment. This study used reports of cancer from 5 years, 6 months prior to treatment until 6 months after first ART treatment. Women who only presented for embryo banking were omitted from the analysis. The likelihood of pregnancy and of live birth with ART using autologous oocytes was modeled using logistic regression, with women without prior cancer as the reference group, adjusted for woman's age, parity, cumulative FSH dosage, infertility diagnosis, number of diagnoses, number of ART cycles, State of residency and year of ART treatment. Results of the modeling are reported as adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and (95% confidence intervals). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The study population included 53 426 women; 441 women were diagnosed with cancer within 5 years prior to ART cycle start. Mean (±SD) age at cancer diagnosis was 33.4 ± 5.7 years; age at start of ART treatment was 34.9 ± 5.8 for women with cancer compared with 35.3 ± 5.3 years for women without cancer (P = 0.03). Live birth rates among women using autologous oocytes differed substantially by cancer status (47.7% without cancer versus 24.7% with cancer, P < 0.0001), and cancer diagnosis (ranging from 53.5% for melanoma to 14.3% for breast cancer, P < 0.0001. The live birth rates among women using donor oocytes did not vary significantly by cancer status (60.4% for women with any cancer versus 64.5% for women without cancer), or by cancer diagnosis (ranging from 57.9% for breast cancer to 63.6% for endocrine cancer). Women with breast cancer make up about one-third of all cancers in this cohort. Among women with breast cancer, 2.8% of the 106 women who underwent ART within 6 months of being diagnosed with cancer used donor oocytes compared with 34.8% of the 46 women who received ART treatment a longer time after being diagnosed with cancer (P < 0.0001). We conjecture that the former group were either unaware that they had cancer or decided to undergo ART therapy prior to cancer treatment. However, their live birth rate was only 11.7% compared with 28.8%, the overall live birth rate for all women with cancer using autologous oocytes (P < 0.0001). The live birth rate for women diagnosed with breast cancer more than 6 months before ART (23.3%) did not differ significantly from the overall live birth rate for cancer (P = 0.49). If this difference is substantiated by a larger study, it would indicate a negative effect of severe recent illness itself on ART success, rather than the poor outcome being only related to the destructive effects of chemotherapies on ovarian follicles. Alternatively, because of the short time difference between cancer diagnosis and ART treatment, these pre-existing cancers may have been detected due to the increased medical surveillance during ART therapy. In women who only used autologous oocytes, women with prior cancers were significantly less likely to become pregnant and to have a live birth than those without cancer (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.34, [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27, 0.42] and 0.36 [0.28, 0.46], respectively). This was also evident with specific cancer diagnoses: breast cancer (0.20 [0.13, 0.32] and 0.19 [0.11, 0.30], respectively), cervical cancer (0.36 [0.15, 0.87] and 0.33 [0.13, 0.84], respectively) and all female genital cancers (0.49 [0.27, 0.87] and 0.47 [0.25, 0.86], respectively). Of note, among women with cancer who became pregnant, their likelihood of having a live birth did not differ significantly from women without cancer (85.8 versus 86.7% for women using autologous oocytes, and 85.3 versus 86.9% for women using donor oocytes). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Women may not have been residents of the individual States for the entire 5-year pre-ART period, and therefore some cancers may not have been identified through this linkage. As a result, the actual observed number of cancers may be an underestimate. In addition, the overall prevalence is low due to the age distributions. Also, because we restricted the pre-ART period to 5 years prior, we would not have identified women who were survivors of early childhood cancers (younger than age 13 years at cancer diagnosis), or who had ART more than 5 years after being diagnosed with cancer. Additional analyses are currently underway evaluating live birth outcomes after embryo banking among women with cancer prior to ART, cycles which were excluded from the analyses in this paper. Future studies are planned which will include more States, as well as linkages to vital records to obtain information on spontaneous conceptions and births, to further clarify some of the issues raised in this analysis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Since the live birth rates using donor oocytes were not reduced in women with a prior cancer, but were reduced with autologous cycles, this suggests that factors acting in the pre- or peri-conceptional periods may be responsible for the decline. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was funded by grant R01 CA151973 from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, USA. B.L. is a research consultant for the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. All other authors report no conflict of interest.

Cancer in women after assisted reproductive technology.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of cancer after assisted reproductive technology (ART) therapy. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): New York, Texas, and Illinois residents between 2004 and 2009, treated with ART, comprising cycles of 113,226 women, including 53,859 women without prior ART treatment, who were linked to their respective state cancer registries and whose cycles were reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System (SART CORS). INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Diagnosis of cancer, as reported to the state cancer registry; standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and their 95% confidence intervals, comparing the observed to expected cancer cases based on age-specific cancer rates in the general population of each state. RESULT(S): Among the cohort of women without prior ART therapy, hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for treatment parameters and reproductive history factors. The mean follow-up period was 4.87 years; among women without prior ART, 450 women developed 460 cancers. Women treated with ART had a statistically significantly lower risk for all cancers (for all women: SIR 0.78; CI, 0.73-0.83; women without prior ART: SIR 0.75; CI, 0.68-0.82), breast cancer, and all female genital cancers; a non-statistically-significant lower risk for endocrine and uterine cancer; and a non-statistically-significant higher risk for melanoma and ovarian cancer. Among women without prior ART, we found no statistically significant increased HR by parity, number of cycles, cumulative follicle-stimulating hormone dosage, or cycle outcome. CONCLUSION(S): Women initiating ART treatment have no greater risk for developing cancer after nearly 5 years of follow-up compared with the general population and with other women treated with ART.

Use of assisted reproductive technology treatment as reported by mothers in comparison with registry data: the Upstate KIDS Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of maternally reported assisted reproductive technologies (ART) use and to identify predictors of reporting errors. DESIGN: Linkage study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): A total of 5,034 (27%) mothers enrolled, from whom 4,886 (97%) self-reported information about use of infertility treatment, including ART, for the index birth. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Four measures of validity (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) and use of net reclassification improvement (NRI) methods to identify predictors associated with concordant/discordant maternal reporting. RESULT(S): The Upstate New York Infant Development Screening Program (Update KIDS Study) was linked with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) using a defined algorithm for 2008-2010. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were high (0.93, 0.99, 0.80, and 1.00, respectively). The validity of maternal report was high, reflecting few differences by participant characteristics except for maternal age dichotomized at 29 years as identified with NRI methods. CONCLUSION(S): Maternally reported ART is valid, with little variation across various characteristics. No strong predictors of discordant reporting were found, supporting the utility of population-based research with SART CORS linkage.

Maternal morbidity and infant death in twin vs triplet and quadruplet pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to calculate nationally representative, population-based estimates of maternal and neonatal risks in triplet and quadruplet pregnancies compared with twin pregnancies. STUDY DESIGN: The study population included 316,696 twin, 12,193 triplet, and 778 quadruplet pregnancies from the 1995-2000 Matched Multiple Birth Data Set. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CIs estimated the risk of complications and were controlled for maternal age, race, parity, and smoking status. RESULTS: Compared with mothers of twins, mothers of triplets and quadruplets were more likely to be diagnosed with preterm premature rupture of membranes (AORs, 1.53, 1.74, respectively), pregnancy-associated hypertension (AORs, 1.22, 1.27), and excessive bleeding (AORs, 1.50, 2.22), to require tocolysis (AORs, 2.85, 5.03), and to be delivered by cesarean (AORs, 6.55, 7.38) at < 29 weeks of gestation (AORs, 3.76, 7.96), and to have > or = 1 infants die (AORs, 3.02, 4.07). CONCLUSION: Triplet and quadruplet pregnancies have significantly higher risks than twin pregnancies for most maternal and neonatal complications. Maternal anthropometric, nutritional, and previous reproductive factors may be particularly important in the reduction of these excess risks and improvement of outcomes in multiple births.

Gender mix in twins and fetal growth, length of gestation and adult cancer risk.

This study evaluated the effect of gender mix (the gender combinations of twin pairs) on fetal growth and length of gestation, and reviewed the literature on the long-term effects of this altered fetal milieu on cancer risk. In singletons, it is well established that females weigh less than males at all gestations, averaging 125-135 g less at full term. This gender difference is generally believed to be the result of the effect of androgens on fetal growth. The gender difference in fetal growth is greater before the third trimester and less towards term, with males growing not only more, but also earlier than females. Plurality is a known risk factor for reduced fetal growth and birthweight. Compared with singletons, the mean birthweight percentiles of twins fall substantially (by 10% or more) below the singleton 10th percentile by 28 weeks, below the singleton 50th percentile by 30 weeks, and below the singleton 90th percentile by 34 weeks. In unlike-gender twin pairs, it has been reported that the female prolongs gestation for her brother, resulting in a higher birthweight for the male twin than that of like-gender male twins. Other researchers have demonstrated that females in unlike-gender pairs had higher birthweights than females in like-gender pairs. Analyses from our consortium on 2491 twin pregnancies with known chorionicity showed longer gestations and faster rates of fetal growth in both males and females in unlike-gender pairs compared with like-gender male or female pairs, although these differences were not statistically significant. The post-natal effects for females growing in an androgenic-anabolic environment include increased sensation-seeking behaviour and aggression, lowered visual acuity, more masculine attitudes and masculinising effects of the auditory system and craniofacial growth. In contrast, there is no evidence to suggest that there might be a similar feminising effect on males from unlike-gender pairs. This hormonal exposure in utero may influence adult body size and susceptability to breast cancer.