Abstract 1747P
Background
Cervical cancer patients' age is relatively young (considering only 35-39 and not 60-64). At this young age, patients might consider birth planning and other sexual health considerations such as vaginal rehabilitation.
Methods
A call for answers to a survey was published and patients and verified survivors were invited to respond voluntarily and anonymously through a coded and encrypted web form.
Results
116 women responded to the survey (age 21-72, median=42, age range at diagnosis 18-65). 8% were diagnosed with CIN1-2, 43% with CIN3, 20% with stage 1, 7% with stage 2, 10% with stages 3-4, 12% did not know how to answer. Past treatments were recorded. 84% of those required to use a vaginal dilator did not do so (results were modified in accordance to guidelines). At childbearing age [67 women, ages 21-45, median=37; 55.22% CIN3, 19.4% stage 1, 5.97% stage 2, 5.97% stages 3-4, 13.43% did not know how to answer; 77.61% were sexually active with a single known partner], only 58.2% recall having a discussion with their physician regarding fertility preservation, before beginning treatments. 32.83% recall such a discussion afterwards. 11.94% give birth after illness or had a child thanks to a surrogate mother.
Conclusions
This study underscores the need for greater attention to patients’ sexual health and fertility aspects before and after completion of treatments. There is a need in coordinate patients' expectations regarding birth planning and in making the information regarding vaginal dilator accessible. Research involving a larger sample size may help to better support the information needs of survivors.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
HaBait Shel Bar – Israel’s Women’s Cancer Association (RA).
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1890P - Switch-maintenance therapy with nivolumab in TKI-sensitive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Subgroup analysis for PD-L1 status of a randomized phase II study (NIVOSWITCH)
Presenter: Christopher Darr
Session: Poster session 23
1891P - Determinants of exceptional response to immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma
Presenter: Renee Saliby
Session: Poster session 23
1892P - A pooled meta-analysis of salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (N+I) after nivolumab (N) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC)
Presenter: Rana McKay
Session: Poster session 23
1895P - Time to treatment failure (TTF) and treatment beyond progression (TBP) in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients (pts) receiving nivolumab: A survival outcome and a therapeutic strategy of clinical benefit (meet-uro 15)
Presenter: Sara Elena Rebuzzi
Session: Poster session 23
1896P - Clinical management and outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) treated with nivolumab+ipilimumab (N+I): A real-world study
Presenter: Tom Geldart
Session: Poster session 23
1897P - Geographical differences in the management of metastatic de novo renal cell carcinoma in the era of immune-combinations
Presenter: Francesco Massari
Session: Poster session 23
1899P - Comparative effectiveness of second-line (2L) treatment (Rx) with cabozantinib (cabo) in patients (pts) with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) after first-line (1L) Rx with ipilimumab + nivolumab (ipi+nivo) vs. PD-1/L1 inhibitor (PDI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)
Presenter: Georges Gebrael
Session: Poster session 23
1900P - Role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) in the era of immunotherapy (IO): An analysis of the national cancer database (2004-2020)
Presenter: ALINA BASNET
Session: Poster session 23