ABSTRACT
Introducción: Los riesgos de infertilidad en cáncer infantil, en función de la radioterapia, quimioterapia y/o cirugía son bien conocidos. La implicación de los profesionales y los avances en los métodos de preservación son cada vez mayores. Sin embargo, muchos pacientes no reciben información ni realizan ningún método de preservación. Material: Se realiza una encuesta nacional de 22 preguntas a especialistas en hematología y/o oncología infantil para valorar sus conocimientos, la posibilidad de realizar preservación en sus centros y la práctica habitual. Resultados: Respondieron 50 miembros de la Sociedad Española de Hematología y Oncología Pediátrica, que representan 24 de 43 centros. Están representados el 82% de los centros que tratan un mayor número de pacientes. El 78% de los encuestados refiere conocer los efectos sobre la fertilidad de los tratamientos. El 76% admite no conocer ninguna guía sobre fertilidad en niños y adolescentes. En cuanto al momento para informar al paciente y/o su familia solo un 14% opina que debe hacerse en la entrevista del diagnóstico del cáncer. En su práctica clínica el 12% de los encuestados nunca deriva pacientes a las unidades de reproducción humana. Otro 12% solo lo hace si los afectados demuestran interés. El 38% deriva solo a pacientes púberes. El 34% remite a aquellos que vayan a recibir tratamiento altamente gonadotóxico. Conclusiones: Un gran porcentaje de especialistas manifiestan su falta de conocimientos y el valor de guías clínicas al respecto. Existen claras diferencias en preservación entre pacientes púberes y prepúberes. La frecuencia de preservación es baja (AU)
Introduction: The estimated risks of infertility in childhood cancer due to radiation, chemotherapy and surgery are well known. The involvement of professionals and advances in the different methods of preservation are increasing. However, many patients do not receive information or perform any method of preservation. Material: Questionnaires to paediatric onco-haematology institutions throughout Spain. The questionnaire consisted of 22 questions assessing their usual practices and knowledge about fertility preservation. Results: Fifty members of the Spanish Society of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, representing 24 of 43 centres, responded. These represented 82% of centres that treated higher numbers of patients. The effect of treatment on fertility was known by 78% of those who responded, with 76% admitting not knowing any guideline on fertility in children or adolescents. As for the ideal time and place to inform the patient and/or family, only 14% thought it should be done in the same cancer diagnosis interview. In clinical practice, 12% of those surveyed never referred patients to Human Reproduction Units, another 12% only did so if the patients showed interest, and 38% only refer patients in puberty. Just over one-third (34%) of those referrals were going to receive highly gonadotoxic treatment. Conclusions: There are clear differences between pre-puberty and puberty patients. The frequency with which some method of fertility preservation is performed in patients is low. All respondents believe that the existence of national guidelines on the matter would be of interest (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Neoplasms/complications , Infertility/prevention & control , Radiotherapy/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Fertility Preservation/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , Practice Patterns, Physicians'ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The estimated risks of infertility in childhood cancer due to radiation, chemotherapy and surgery are well known. The involvement of professionals and advances in the different methods of preservation are increasing. However, many patients do not receive information or perform any method of preservation. MATERIAL: Questionnaires to paediatric onco-haematology institutions throughout Spain. The questionnaire consisted of 22 questions assessing their usual practices and knowledge about fertility preservation. RESULTS: Fifty members of the Spanish Society of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, representing 24 of 43 centres, responded. These represented 82% of centres that treated higher numbers of patients. The effect of treatment on fertility was known by 78% of those who responded, with 76% admitting not knowing any guideline on fertility in children or adolescents. As for the ideal time and place to inform the patient and/or family, only 14% thought it should be done in the same cancer diagnosis interview. In clinical practice, 12% of those surveyed never referred patients to Human Reproduction Units, another 12% only did so if the patients showed interest, and 38% only refer patients in puberty. Just over one-third (34%) of those referrals were going to receive highly gonadotoxic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There are clear differences between pre-puberty and puberty patients. The frequency with which some method of fertility preservation is performed in patients is low. All respondents believe that the existence of national guidelines on the matter would be of interest.
