Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Cancer Survivorship
Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship 5/2016

01-10-2016

A comparison of heterosexual and LGBTQ cancer survivors’ outlooks on relationships, family building, possible infertility, and patient-doctor fertility risk communication

Authors: Andrea M. Russell, Kathleen M. Galvin, Maya M. Harper, Marla L. Clayman

Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship | Issue 5/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Little research about cancer-related infertility has examined the experiences and needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ) cancer survivors. This research seeks to understand how LGBTQ survivors are similar to or different from heterosexual survivors with respect to cancer treatments’ effects on relationships, plans for parenthood, and fertility preservation decision making.

Methods

Semi-structured telephone interviews conducted with adolescent or young adult (AYA) cancer survivors (n = 56) were coded for themes. Interviews consisted of questions about pre- and post-diagnosis thoughts about relationships, parenthood, possible infertility, and how information about fertility risks was received.

Results

While LGBTQ (n = 22) and heterosexual (n = 34) survivors reported similar challenges when dating post-diagnosis, heterosexual survivors were more likely to report fertility concerns as affecting romantic relationships (p < .05). LGBTQ survivors seemed more open to raising non-biological children or not becoming a parent than heterosexual survivors. LGBTQ survivors generally reported being satisfied with or indifferent to the information that they were given regarding fertility loss, despite reporting receiving similar amounts of information as compared to heterosexual patients (p < .10).

Conclusions

LGBTQ patients’ views on relationships, parenthood, and family building seemed to result in less distress when faced with infertility. However, interventions facilitating information exchange about dating, fertility risks, and family building options may be valuable to LGBTQ and heterosexual cancer survivors.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

LGBTQ cancer survivors may display more adaptive coping with respect to relationships and fertility loss. Oncology professionals may want to proactively introduce positive coping strategies to reduce distress among AYA cancer survivors at risk for infertility.
Literature
1.
Shaw PH et al. Adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology in the United States: a specialty in its late adolescence. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2015;37(3):161–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Nieman CL et al. Cancer survivors and infertility: a review of a new problem and novel answers. J Support Oncol. 2006;4(4):171–8.PubMed
4.
Kim, S.S., J. Klemp, and C. Fabian, Breast cancer and fertility preservation. Fertil Steril, 2011.
5.
Ruddy KJ et al. Menopausal symptoms and fertility concerns in premenopausal breast cancer survivors: a comparison to age- and gravidity-matched controls. Menopause. 2011;18(1):105–8.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Canada, A.L. and L.R. Schover, The psychosocial impact of interrupted childbearing in long-term female cancer survivors. Psychooncology, 2010.
8.
Mosher, C.E., et al., Quality of life concerns and depression among hematopoietic stem cell transplant survivors. Support Care Cancer, 2010.
9.
Carpentier MY, Fortenberry JD. Romantic and sexual relationships, body image, and fertility in adolescent and young adult testicular cancer survivors: a review of the literature. J Adolesc Health. 2010;47(2):115–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Carter J et al. A cross-sectional study of the psychosexual impact of cancer-related infertility in women: third-party reproductive assistance. J Cancer Surviv. 2010;4(3):236–46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Dieluweit U et al. Social outcomes of long-term survivors of adolescent cancer. Psychooncology. 2010;19(12):1277–84.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Reis N, Beji NK, Coskun A. Quality of life and sexual functioning in gynecological cancer patients: results from quantitative and qualitative data. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2010;14(2):137–46.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Nakayama K et al. Receiving information on fertility- and menopause-related treatment effects among women who undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: changes in perceived importance over time. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(11):1465–74.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Dama, E., et al., Life after childhood cancer: marriage and offspring in adult long-term survivors—a population-based study in the Piedmont region, Italy. Eur J Cancer Prev, 2009.
15.
Dizon DS. Quality of life after breast cancer: survivorship and sexuality. Breast J. 2009;15(5):500–4.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Mosher CE et al. Physical, psychological, and social sequelae following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a review of the literature. Psychooncology. 2009;18(2):113–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Quinn GP et al. Cancer and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender/transsexual, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) populations. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(5):384–400.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Lee TK, Breau RH, Eapen L. Pilot study on quality of life and sexual function in men-who-have-sex-with-men treated for prostate cancer. J Sex Med. 2013;10(8):2094–100.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Kamen C et al. Disparities in psychological distress impacting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2015;24(11):1384–91.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Filiault SM, Drummond MJ, Smith JA. Gay men and prostate cancer: voicing the concerns of a hidden population. J Men’s Health. 2008;5(4):327–32.CrossRef
21.
Hart TL et al. Changes in sexual roles and quality of life for gay men after prostate cancer: challenges for sexual health providers. J Sex Med. 2014;11(9):2308–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Weeks J, Heaphy B, Donovan C. Same sex intimacies: families of choice and other life experiments. New York: Routledge; 2001.CrossRef
23.
Dewaele A et al. Families of choice? Exploring the supportive networks of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2011;41(2):312–31.CrossRef
24.
Blair KL, Pukall CF. Family matters, but sometimes chosen family matters more: perceived social network influence in the dating decisions of same- and mixed-sex couples. Can J Hum Sex. 2015;24(3):257–70.CrossRef
25.
Weeks, J., et al., Same sex intimacies: families of choice and other life experiments. 2001.
26.
Shumsky E. Transforming the ties that bind: lesbians, lovers, and chosen family. Psychoanal Psychother. 1996;13(2):187–95.
27.
Goldberg AE, Allen K. LGBT-parent families: innovations in research and implications for practice. New York: Springer; 2013.CrossRef
28.
Gorman JR et al. A diversified recruitment approach incorporating social media leads to research participation among young adult-aged female cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2014;3(2):59–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
30.
Clayman ML et al. Oncofertility resources at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2013;11(12):1504–9.
31.
Clayman ML et al. Video review: an alternative to coding transcripts of focus groups. Commun Methods Measures. 2009;3(4):216–22.CrossRef
32.
Glaser BG. The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Soc Probl. 1965;12(4):436–45.CrossRef
33.
Lee SJ et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations on fertility preservation in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(18):2917–31.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Weston K. Families we choose: lesbians, gays, kinship. Between men—between women: lesbian and gay studies. New York: Columbia University Press; 1991.
35.
Daniel CL et al. Needs and lifestyle challenges of adolescents and young adults with cancer: summary of an Institute of Medicine and Livestrong Foundation Workshop. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2015;19(6):675–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Warner, E.L., et al., Health behaviors, quality of life, and psychosocial health among survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers. J Cancer Surviv, 2015.
37.
Geue K et al. Sexuality and romantic relationships in young adult cancer survivors: satisfaction and supportive care needs. Psychooncology. 2015;24(11):1368–76.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Quinn GP et al. Quality of life in adolescent and young adult cancer patients: a systematic review of the literature. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2015;6:19–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Loren AW et al. Fertility preservation for patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(19):2500–10.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Quinn GP et al. Physician referral for fertility preservation in oncology patients: a national study of practice behaviors. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(35):5952–7.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Health Issues and Research Gaps and Opportunities, The health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people: building a foundation for better understanding. 2011: Washington DC.
42.
Cantrell MA et al. Recruitment and retention of older adolescent and young adult female survivors of childhood cancer in longitudinal research. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2012;39(5):483–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Tercyak KP et al. Identifying, recruiting, and enrolling adolescent survivors of childhood cancer into a randomized controlled trial of health promotion: preliminary experiences in the Survivor Health and Resilience Education (SHARE) Program. J Pediatr Psychol. 2006;31(3):252–61.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Ulrich CM et al. RTOG physician and research associate attitudes, beliefs and practices regarding clinical trials: implications for improving patient recruitment. Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31(3):221–8.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Burke ME, Albritton K, Marina N. Challenges in the recruitment of adolescents and young adults to cancer clinical trials. Cancer. 2007;110(11):2385–93.CrossRefPubMed
46.
47.
Metadata
Title
A comparison of heterosexual and LGBTQ cancer survivors’ outlooks on relationships, family building, possible infertility, and patient-doctor fertility risk communication
Authors
Andrea M. Russell
Kathleen M. Galvin
Maya M. Harper
Marla L. Clayman
Publication date
01-10-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Cancer Survivorship / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 1932-2259
Electronic ISSN: 1932-2267
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-016-0524-9

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Journal of Cancer Survivorship 5/2016 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Lower rate-pressure product during submaximal walking: a link to fatigue improvement following a physical activity intervention among breast cancer survivors

OriginalPaper

Gender differences in associations between cancer-related problems and relationship dissolution among cancer survivors

OriginalPaper

A person-centered intervention targeting the psychosocial needs of gynecological cancer survivors: a randomized clinical trial

Review

Ovarian cancer survivors’ quality of life: a systematic review

OriginalPaper

Complementary and alternative medicine use among US cancer survivors

OriginalPaper

Illness perceptions are associated with mortality among 1552 colorectal cancer survivors: a study from the population-based PROFILES registry
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits