Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

The Oncofertility Consortium—addressing fertility in young people with cancer

Abstract

The number of young cancer survivors is increasing owing to advances in cancer therapeutics, but many face infertility as a result of their treatment. Technologies that already exist for cancer patients concerned about their future fertility include sperm banking for men and hormonal intervention followed by in vitro fertilization and embryo cryopreservation for women. However, logistical barriers to timely patient referral and coordination of care between specialties can limit patient access to all the available options. Moreover, there are few alternatives for young women and girls who cannot delay their cancer treatment, or who are unable to undergo hormonal intervention. The Oncofertility Consortium is a network of researchers, physicians and scholars who are advancing fertility preservation options for young cancer patients. Research into the societal, ethical, and legal implications is also an important part of the work performed by the Oncofertility Consortium, which is providing new perspectives on patient decision-making about how to access these emerging reproductive technologies. Experts in the fields of oncology, reproductive medicine, the social sciences, law, education, and the humanities are working together to develop next-generation reproductive interventions and promote communication between scholars, clinicians, patients, and the public to ensure that young cancer patients are equipped with the most appropriate information and options for having a family in the future.

Key Points

  • Advances in cancer diagnostics and therapeutics have increased the number of young cancer survivors; however, some life-preserving cancer treatments can pose a threat to a patient's fertility

  • The Oncofertility Consortium is a confederation of partners funded by an NIH Roadmap grant that is advancing fertility preservation options for young cancer patients

  • The NIH Roadmap Grant program provides a unique structure that supports the work of multidisciplinary teams to solve large, intractable problems in health care

  • The development of a National Physicians Cooperative brings together the specialties of oncology and reproductive medicine to more-efficiently guide patients after a cancer diagnosis

  • Collaborations between biomaterials scientists, reproductive endocrinologists, and clinical researchers have led to breakthroughs that may improve and expand fertility preservation options for women

  • Cooperation with the social sciences, humanities, law, and education allows a comprehensive means of understanding and fulfilling the needs of patients wishing to preserve fertility after a cancer diagnosis

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Structure of the Oncofertility Consortium.
Figure 2: The National Physicians Cooperative.
Figure 3: In vitro follicle maturation.

Similar content being viewed by others

Michael L. Eisenberg, Sandro C. Esteves, … Yu-Sheng Cheng

References

  1. Jemal, A. et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J. Clin. 59, 225–249 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jeruss, J. S. & Woodruff, T. K. Preservation of fertility in patients with cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 902–911 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Quinn, G. P. et al. Discussion of fertility preservation with newly diagnosed patients: oncologists views. J. Cancer Surviv. 1, 146–155 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Agarwal, S. K. & Chang, R. J. Fertility management for women with cancer. Cancer Treat. Res. 138, 15–27 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Snyder, K. A. Oncofertility and the social sciences. Cancer Treat. Res. 138, 137–148 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dolin, G., Roberts, D., Rodriguez, L. & Woodruff, T. Medical hope, legal pitfalls: potential legal issues in the emerging field of oncofertility. Santa Clara Law Rev. 49, 673–716 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Backhus, L. E. & Zoloth, L. Today's research, tomorrows cures: the ethical implications of oncofertlity. Cancer Treat. Res. 138, 163–179 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pauli, S. A., Berga, S. L., Shang, W. & Session, D. R. Current status of the approach to assisted reproduction. Pediatr. Clin. North Am. 56, 467–488 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kelly, S. M., Buckett, W. M., Abdul-Jalil, A. K. & Tan, S. L. The cryobiology of assisted reproduction. Minerva Ginecol. 55, 389–398 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chian, R. C. et al. Obstetric and perinatal outcome in 200 infants conceived from vitrified oocytes. Reprod. Biomed. Online 16, 608–610 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Noyes, N., Porcu, E. & Borini, A. Over 900 oocyte cryopreservation babies born with no apparent increase in congenital anomalies. Reprod. Biomed. Online 18, 769–776 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Chian, R. C. et al. Obstetric outcomes following vitrification of in vitro and in vivo matured oocytes. Fertil. Steril. 91, 2391–2398 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Antinori, M. et al. Cryotop vitrification of human oocytes results in high survival rate and healthy deliveries. Reprod. Biomed. Online 14, 72–79 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cobo, A. et al. Comparison of concomitant outcome achieved with fresh and cryopreserved donor oocytes vitrified by the Cryotop method. Fertil. Steril. 89, 1657–1664 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology; American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 2000 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry. Fertil. Steril. 81, 1207–1220 (2004).

  16. Gunby, J., Bissonnette, F., Librach, C. & Cowan, L. IVF Directors Group of the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society. Assisted reproductive technologies in Canada: 2005 results from the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register. Fertil. Steril. 91, 1721–1730 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Castilla, J. A. et al. Assisted reproductive technologies in public and private clinics. Reprod. Biomed. Online 19, 872–878 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Yli-Kuha, A. N., Gissler, M., Luoto, R. & Hemminki, E. Success of infertility treatments in Finland in the period 1992–2005. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 144, 54–58 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Marks, A. R. Rescuing the NIH before it is too late. J. Clin. Invest. 116, 844 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Crowley, W. et al. The Clinical Research Forum and Association of American Physicians disagree with criticism of the NIH Roadmap. J. Clin. Invest. 116, 2058–2059 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. National Institutes of Health. The NIH Common Fund: About the NIH Roadmap [online], (2009).

  22. DelVecchio, R. Panel looks at control of emissions. San Francisco Chronicle (22 Mar 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Woodruff, T. K. The emergence of a new interdiscipline: oncofertility. Cancer Treat. Res. 138, 3–11 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Klock, S. C., Zhang, J. X. & Kazer, R. R. Fertility preservation of female cancer patients: early clinical experience. Fertil. Steril. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.03.028.

  25. West, E. R. et al. Preserving female fertility following cancer treatment: current options and future possibilities. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 53, 289–295 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Clayman, M. L., Galvin, K. M. & Arntson, P. Shared decision making: fertility and pediatric cancers. Cancer Treat. Res. 138, 149–160 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee, S. J. et al. American Society of Clinical Oncoloy recommendations on fertility preservation in cancer patients. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 2917–2931 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertility preservation and reproduction in cancer patients. Fertil. Steril. 83, 1622–1628 (2005).

  29. Agarwal, R. Semen banking in patients with cancer: 20-year-experience. Int. J. Androl. 23 (Suppl. 2), 16–19 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schover, L. R., Agarwal, A. & Thomas, A. J. Jr. Cryopreservation of gametes in young patients with cancer. J. Pediatr. Hematol. Oncol. 20, 426–428 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kohler, T. S. et al. Gender disparity in delivery of fertility preservation message to adolescents with cancer. Cancer (in press).

  32. Fertile Hope. Sperm banking—Sharing Hope program for men [online], (2009).

  33. Schlatt, S., Ehmcke, J. & Jahnukainen, K. Testicular stem cells for fertility preservation: preclinical studies on male germ cell transplantation and testicular grafting. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 53, 274–280 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nayernia, K. et al. RETRACTION—In vivo derivation of human sperm from embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells Dev. doi: 10.1089/scd.2009.0063.

  35. Oktay, K. et al. Fertility preservation in breast cancer patients: IVF and embryo cryopreservation after ovarian stimulation with tamoxifen. Hum. Reprod. 18, 90–95 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Oktay, K., Buyuk, E., Libertella, N., Akar, M. & Rosenwaks, Z. Fertility preservation in breast cancer patients: a prospective controlled comparison of ovarian stimulation with tamoxifen and letrozole for embryo cryopreservation. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 4347–4353 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Huang, J. Y. J., Buckett, W. M., Gilbert, L., Tan, S. L. & Chian, R. C. Retrieval of immature oocytes followed by in vitro maturation and vitrification: a case report on a new strategy of fertility preservation in women with borderline ovarian malignancy. Gynecol. Oncol. 105, 542–544 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Rao, G. D., Chian, R. C., Son, W. S., Gilbert, L. & Tan, S. L. Fertility preservation in women undergoing cancer treatment. Lancet 363, 1829–1830 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gosden, R. G. Prospects for oocyte banking and in vitro maturation. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 34, 60–63 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gosden, R. Gonadal tissue cryopreservation and transplantation. Reprod. Biomed. Online 4 (Suppl. 1), 64–67 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Demeestere, I., Simon, P., Emiliani, S., Delbaere, A. & Englert, Y. Fertility preservation: successful transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue in a young patient previously treated for Hodgkin's disease. Oncologist 12, 1437–1442 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Donnez, J. et al. Livebirth after orthotopic transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue. Lancet 364, 1405–1410 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Meirow, D. et al. Pregnancy after transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue in a patient with ovarian failure after chemotherapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 318–321 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Silber, S. J. et al. A series of monozygotic twins discordant for ovarian failure: ovary transplantation (cortical versus microvascular) and cryopreservation. Hum. Reprod. 23, 1531–1537 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Silber, S. J. & Gosden, R. G. Ovarian transplantation in a series of monozygotic twins discordant for ovarian failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1382–1384 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Silber, S. J. et al. Ovarian transplantation between monozygotic twins discordant for premature ovarian failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 58–63 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Silber, S. J., Grudzinskas, G. & Gosden, R. G. Successful pregnancy after microsurgical transplantation of an intact ovary. N. Engl. J. Med. 359, 2617–2618 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Andersen, Y. et al. Two successful pregnancies following autotransplantation of frozen/thawed ovarian tissue. Hum. Reprod. 23, 2266–2272 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Cortvrindt, R., Smitz, J. & Van Steirteghem, A. C. In vitro maturation, fertilization and embryo development of immature oocytes from early preantral follicles from prepubertal mice in a simplified culture system. Hum. Reprod. 11, 2656–2666 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Eppig, J. J. & O'Brien, M. J. Development in vitro of mice oocytes from primordial follicles. Biol. Reprod. 54, 197–207 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. O'Brien, M. J., Pendola, J. K. & Eppig, J. J. A revised protocol for in vitro development of mouse oocytes from primordial follicles dramatically improves their developmental competence. Biol. Reprod. 68, 1682–1686 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Pangas, S. A., Saudye, H., Shea, L. D. & Woodruff, T. K. Novel approach for the three-dimensional culture of granulosa cell-oocyte complexes. Tissue Eng. 9, 1013–1021 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Spears, N., Boland, N. I., Murray, A. A. & Gosden, R. G. Mouse oocytes derived from in vitro grown primary ovarian follicles are fertile. Hum. Reprod. 9, 527–532 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Telfer, E. E., McLaughlin, M., Ding, C. & Thong, K. J. A two-step serum-free culture system supports development of human oocytes from primordial follicles in the presence of activin. Hum. Reprod. 23, 1151–1158 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Xu, M. et al. In vitro grown human ovarian follicles from cancer patients support oocyte growth. Hum. Reprod. 24, 2531–2540 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Xu, M., Kreeger, P. K., Shea, L. D. & Woodruff, T. K. Tissue-engineered follicles provide live, fertile offspring. Tissue Eng. 12, 2739–2746 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Xu, M. et al. Encapsulated three-dimensional culture supports development of nonhuman primate secondary follicles. Biol. Reprod. 81, 587–594 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Huang, J. Y. J., Tulandi, T., Holzer, H., Tan, S. L. & Chian, R. C. Combining ovarian tissue cryobanking with retrieval of immature oocytes followed by in vitro maturation and vitrification: an additional strategy of fertility preservation. Fertil. Steril. 89, 567–572 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Oktay, K. et al. Embryo development after heterotopic transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue. Lancet 363, 837–840 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Silber, S., Kagawa, N., Kuwayama, M. & Gosden, R. Duration of fertility after fresh and frozen ovary transplantation. Fertil. Steril. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.12.073.

  61. Amorim, C. A., Van Langendonckt, A., David, A., Dolmans, M. M. & Donnez, J. Survival of human pre-antral follicles after cryopreservation of ovarian tissue, follicular isolation and in vitro culture in a calcium alginate matrix. Hum. Reprod. 24, 92–99 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Azim, A. A., Costantini-Ferrando, M. & Oktay, K. Safety of fertility preservation by ovarian stimulation with letrozole and gonadotropins in patients with breast cancer: a prospective controlled study. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 2630–2635 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Miller, J. D., Pardo, R. & Niwa, F. Public Perceptions of Science and Technology: a Comparative Study of the European Union, the United States, Japan, and Canada (BBV Foundation Press, Madrid, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  64. MyOncofertility.org. A patient education resource provided by the Oncofertility Consortium [online], (2009).

  65. Woodruff, T. K., Campo-Engelstein, L., Rodriguez, S. & Zoloth, L. (Eds) Oncofertility: Perspectives from the Humanities and Social Sciences (Springer, New York, 2010).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  66. Zoloth, L., Backhus, L. & Woodruff, T. K. Waiting to be born: the ethical implications of the generation “NUBorn” and “NUAge” mice from pre-pubertal ovarian tissue. Am. J. Bioeth. 8, 21–29 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Campo-Engelstein, L. Consistency in insurance coverage for iatrogenic conditions resulting from cancer treatment including fertility preservation. J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 1284–1286 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Oncofertility Consortium is funded by a number of NIH Interdisciplinary Research Consortium grants: NIDCR 8UL1DE019587, NICHD 1RL1HD058293, NICHD 1RL1HD058294, NICHD 5RL1HD058295, NICHD 5RL1HD058296, NIBIB 5PL1EB008542, NCI 1PL1CA133835, NCI 5RL5CA133836, NCI 5TL1CA133837/5RL9CA133838, NCI 1KL1CA133839. The original in vitro follicle maturation studies were funded by a Specialized Cooperative Centers Program in Infertility Research (SCCPIR) NIH/NICHD U54HD041857. The author is grateful for the comments of an interdisciplinary team of readers (listed alphabetically: Lisa Campo-Engelstein, Marla Clayman, Francesca Duncan, Shauna Gardino, Marybeth Gerrity, Sarah Rodriguez, Lonnie Shea, Candace Tingen and Min Xu). The author also thanks Stacey Tobin for assistance with language editing.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woodruff, T. The Oncofertility Consortium—addressing fertility in young people with cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7, 466–475 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.81

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.81

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer