Use of fertility services in Australian lesbian, bisexual and queer women's pathways to parenthood.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that up to one in three lesbian, bisexual or queer (LBQ) women in Australia have children. In the past decade, it has become common for LBQ women to pursue pregnancy using clinic-acquired donor sperm. AIMS: The aims of this paper are to explore pathways to parenthood among Australian LBQ women in the context of increased access to fertility clinics and identify the type of clinical fertility services being used. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This paper reports on female LBQ parents and expectant/prospective parents who participated in a 2016/2017 online survey of Australian lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) adults exploring reproductive choices, pathways to parenthood, conception method and use of clinical fertility services. RESULTS: More than half the children reported on by current parents (52%) had been conceived using clinical fertility services. When asked what factors influenced a parent respondent's decision to use fertility services: 80% indicated access to donor sperm, 41% indicated fertility problems. Of respondents who had accessed donor sperm, over half (57%) had used in vitro fertilisation (IVF) services. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that use of fertility clinics to access donor sperm is common for LBQ women, including those with no known fertility problems, and that most women who access donor sperm conceive using IVF rather than intrauterine insemination. More needs to be known about the context and reasons for this, including factors that influence LBQ women's decision making on their pathway to parenthood.

Screen-detected subsolid pulmonary nodules: long-term follow-up and application of the PanCan lung cancer risk prediction model.

OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term follow-up of subsolid nodules (SSNs) detected in participants of a prospective low-dose CT lung cancer screening cohort, and to investigate the utility of the PanCan model in stratifying risk in baseline SSNs. METHODS: Participants underwent a baseline scan, two annual incidence scans and further follow-up scans for the detected nodules. All SSNs underwent a minimum of 2 years of follow-up (unless resolved or resected). Risk of malignancy was estimated using the PanCan model; discrimination [area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC)] and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test) were assessed. The Mann-Whitney U-Wilcoxon test was used to compare estimated risk between groups. RESULTS: 70 SSNs were detected in 41 (16.0%) out of 256 total participants. Median follow-up period was 25.5 months (range 2.0-74.0 months). 29 (41.4%) SSNs were transient. Five (7.1%) SSNs were resected, all found to be Stage I lung adenocarcinoma, including one SSN stable in size for 3.0 years before growth was detected. The PanCan model had good discrimination for the 52 baseline SSNs (AUC = 0.89; 95% confidence interval 0.76-1); the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was non-significant (p = 0.27). Estimated risk was significantly higher in the baseline SSNs found to be cancer vs those not found to be cancer after 2-6 years of follow-up (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our findings support a long-term follow-up approach for screen-detected SSNs for 3 years or longer. The PanCan model appeared discriminatory and well calibrated in this cohort. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The PanCan model may have utility in identifying low-risk SSNs which could be followed with less frequent CT scans.