Adolescent and young adult (AYA) women facing gonadotoxic cancer treatments are recommended to consider fertility preservation. However, fertility clinics are scarce in number and location. We describe geographic access to fertility clinics in a statewide cancer population.
Methods:
This cross-sectional study included 5,632 AYA women from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry diagnosed with lymphoma, breast, or gynecological cancers who received gonadotoxic treatment during 2004–2015. Geographic access was defined as travel time from patient residence to the nearest fertility clinic at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate prevalence odds ratios (POR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between travel time and individual and contextual factors (neighborhood socioeconomic status and rurality).
Results:
Mean travel time was 51 ± 42 minutes, and 42% of AYAs lived <30 minutes from a clinic. Black non-Hispanic women, those living in advantaged neighborhoods, metropolitan areas, and privately insured had shorter average travel times. Black non-Hispanic women were more likely to live <30 minutes from a clinic than their white non-Hispanic counterparts (POR = 3.3; 95% CI: 2.8–3.8). Publicly insured (vs privately) AYAs and those living in the most (vs least) deprived neighborhoods were 40% less likely to live within a 30-minute drive (POR for both = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5–0.7). Compared to metropolitan areas, micropolitan (small city) residents were less likely to live <30 minutes from a clinic.
Conclusion:
The burden of travel time to fertility clinics showed important differences by race and ethnicity, neighborhood SES, insurance, and rurality. The results emphasize the need for tailored and multifaceted strategies to improve access.
DolmansMM. Recent advances in fertility preservation and counseling for female cancer patients. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther, 2018; 18(2):115–120; doi: 10.1080/14737140.2018.1415758
2.
BenedictC, ThomB, FriedmanDN, et al.Young adult female cancer survivors’ unmet information needs and reproductive concerns contribute to decisional conflict regarding posttreatment fertility preservation. Cancer, 2016; 122(13):2101–2109; doi: 10.1002/cncr.29917
BenedictC, ShukE, FordJS. Fertility issues in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2016; 5(1):48–57; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2015.0024
5.
OnegaT, Alford-TeasterJ, WangF. Population-based geographic access to parent and satellite National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Facilities. Cancer, 2017; 123(17):3305–3311; doi: 10.1002/cncr.30727
6.
CloseAG, DreyzinA, MillerKD, et al.Adolescent and young adult oncology-past, present, and future. CA Cancer J Clin, 2019; 69(6):485–496; doi: 10.3322/caac.21585
7.
LevineJM, KelvinJF, QuinnGP, et al.Infertility in reproductive-age female cancer survivors. Cancer, 2015; 121(10):1532–1539; doi: 10.1002/cncr.29181
8.
SalamaM, WoodruffTK. Anticancer treatments and female fertility: Clinical concerns and role of oncologists in oncofertility practice. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther, 2017; 17(8):687–692; doi: 10.1080/14737140.2017.1335199
9.
OktayK, HarveyBE, PartridgeAH, et al.Fertility preservation in patients with cancer: ASCO Clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol, 2018; 36(19):1994–2001; doi: 10.1200/jco.2018.78.1914
10.
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Disparities in access to effective treatment for infertility in the United States: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2021 Jul;116(1):54–63; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.02.019
11.
LawsonAK, McGuireJM, NoncentE, et al.Disparities in counseling female cancer patients for fertility preservation. J Womens Health (Larchmt), 2017; 26(8):886–891; doi: 10.1089/jwh.2016.5997
12.
HaritonE, BortolettoP, CardozoER, et al.The role of oncofertility clinics in facilitating access to reproductive specialists. J Patient Exp, 2016; 3(4):131–136; doi: 10.1177/2374373516685960
13.
PanagiotopoulouN, GhumanN, SandherR, et al.Barriers and facilitators towards fertility preservation care for cancer patients: A meta-synthesis. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 2018; 27(1); doi: 10.1111/ecc.12428
14.
HarrisJA, MenkeMN, HaefnerJK, et al.Geographic access to assisted reproductive technology health care in the United States: A population-based cross-sectional study. Fertil Steril, 2017; 107(4):1023–1027; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.02.101
15.
MeernikC, EngelSM, WardellA, et al.Disparities in fertility preservation use among adolescent and young adult women with cancer. J Cancer Surviv, 2023; 17(5):1435–1444; doi: 10.1007/s11764-022-01187-y
16.
PenchanskyR, ThomasJW. The concept of access: Definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Med Care, 1981; 19(2):127–140; doi: 10.1097/00005650-198102000-00001
17.
BissonnetteL, WilsonK, BellS, et al.Neighbourhoods and potential access to health care: The role of spatial and aspatial factors. Health Place, 2012; 18(4):841–853; doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.03.007
18.
DelamaterPL, MessinaJP, ShortridgeAM, et al.Measuring geographic access to health care: Raster and network-based methods. Int J Health Geogr, 2012; 11(1):15; doi: 10.1186/1476-072x-11-15
19.
NangiaAK, LikoskyDS, WangD. Access to assisted reproductive technology centers in the United States. Fertil Steril, 2010; 93(3):745–761; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.10.037
20.
FairfieldKM, BlackAW, ZillerEC, et al.Area deprivation index and rurality in relation to lung cancer prevalence and mortality in a Rural State. JNCI Cancer Spectr, 2020; 4(4):pkaa011; doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa011
21.
HufnagelDH, KhabeleD, YullFE, et al.Increasing area deprivation index negatively impacts ovarian cancer survival. Cancer Epidemiol, 2021; 74:102013; doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2021.102013
22.
WillisMD, OrtaOR, NcubeC, et al.Association between neighborhood disadvantage and fertility among pregnancy planners in the US. JAMA Netw Open, 2022; 5(6):e2218738; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.18738
23.
GoodmanLR, BalthazarU, KimJ, et al.Trends of socioeconomic disparities in referral patterns for fertility preservation consultation. Hum Reprod, 2012; 27(7):2076–2081; doi: 10.1093/humrep/des133
24.
KimJ, MersereauJE. Early referral makes the decision-making about fertility preservation easier: A pilot survey study of young female cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer, 2015; 23(6):1663–1667; doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2526-3
25.
KimJ, OktayK, GraciaC, et al.Which patients pursue fertility preservation treatments? A multicenter analysis of the predictors of fertility preservation in women with breast cancer. Fertil Steril, 2012; 97(3):671–676; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.12.008
26.
LeeS, HeytensE, MoyF, et al.Determinants of access to fertility preservation in women with breast cancer. Fertil Steril, 2011; 95(6):1932–1936; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.169
27.
LetourneauJM, SmithJF, EbbelEE, et al.Racial, socioeconomic, and demographic disparities in access to fertility preservation in young women diagnosed with cancer. Cancer, 2012; 118(18):4579–4588; doi: 10.1002/cncr.26649
28.
ChinHB, HowardsPP, KramerMR, et al.Which female cancer patients fail to receive fertility counseling before treatment in the state of Georgia? Fertil Steril, 2016; 106(7):1763–1771.e1; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.034
29.
North Carolina State Center for Health Statistics: Central Cancer Registry. Available from: https://schs.dph.ncdhhs.gov/units/ccr/ [Last accessed: January27, 2019].
30.
NicholsHB, BaggettCD, EngelSM, et al.The Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Horizon Study: An AYA cancer survivorship cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2021; 30(5):857–866; doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.Epi-20-1315
31.
National Cancer Institute: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. AYA Site Recode/WHO 2008 Definition. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/ayarecode/aya-who2008.html [Last accessed: February27, 2019].
KindAJH, BuckinghamWR. Making neighborhood-disadvantage metrics accessible - the neighborhood atlas. N Engl J Med, 2018; 378(26):2456–2458; doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1802313
34.
University of Wisconsin School of Medicine Public Health. 2015 Area Deprivation Index (ADI) v3.0. Available from: https://www.neighborhoodatlas.medicine.wisc.edu [Last accessed: May24, 2021].
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Archived ART Reports and Spreadsheets. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/art/reports/archive.html [Last accessed: February15, 2022].
37.
Environmental Research System Institute (ESRI). Streets. 2012. StreetMap Premium for ArcGIS.
TaplinSH, Anhang PriceR, EdwardsHM, et al.Introduction: Understanding and influencing multilevel factors across the cancer care continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 2012; 2012(44):2–10; doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs008
40.
RickettsTC, GoldsmithLJ. Access in health services research: The battle of the frameworks. Nurs Outlook, 2005; 53(6):274–280; doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2005.06.007
41.
OnegaT, DuellEJ, ShiX, et al.Geographic access to cancer care in the U.S. Cancer, 2008; 112(4):909–918; doi: 10.1002/cncr.23229
42.
XuY, FuC, OnegaT, et al.Disparities in geographic accessibility of national cancer institute cancer centers in the United States. J Med Syst, 2017; 41(12):203; doi: 10.1007/s10916-017-0850-0
43.
HungP, DengS, ZahndWE, et al.Geographic disparities in residential proximity to colorectal and cervical cancer care providers. Cancer, 2020; 126(5):1068–1076; doi: 10.1002/cncr.32594
44.
Health Affairs. On Racism: A New Standard For Publishing On Racial Health Inequities, 2020; doi: 10.1377/hblog20200630.939347
45.
FlanaginA, FreyT, ChristiansenSL, AMA Manual of Style Committee. Updated guidance on the reporting of race and ethnicity in medical and science journals. JAMA, 2021; 326(7):621–627; doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.13304
CarrBG, BranasCC, MetlayJP, et al.Access to emergency care in the United States. Ann Emerg Med, 2009; 54(2):261–269; doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.11.016
48.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril, 2019 Dec;112(6):1022–1033; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.09.013
49.
Rodriguez-OrmazaN, AndersonC, BaggettCD, et al.Geographic access to fertility counseling among adolescent and young adult women with cancer in North Carolina. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2024; 33(9):1194–1202; doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0482
50.
OnegaT, DuellEJ, ShiX, et al.Influence of place of residence in access to specialized cancer care for African Americans. J Rural Health, 2010; 26(1):12–19; doi: 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2009.00260.x
51.
SegelJE, LengerichEJ. Rural-urban differences in the association between individual, facility, and clinical characteristics and travel time for cancer treatment. BMC Public Health, 2020; 20(1):196–196; doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-8282-z
52.
Lòpez-De FedeA, StewartJE, HardinJW, et al.Comparison of small-area deprivation measures as predictors of chronic disease burden in a low-income population. Int J Equity Health, 2016; 15:89–89; doi: 10.1186/s12939-016-0378-9
53.
KomorowskiAS, JainT. A review of disparities in access to infertility care and treatment outcomes among Hispanic women. Reprod Biol Endocrinol, 2022; 20(1):1–1; doi: 10.1186/s12958-021-00875-1
54.
ChandraA, CopenCE, StephenEH. Infertility service use in the United States: Data from the National Survey of Family Growth, 1982-2010. Natl Health Stat Report, 2014; 73(73):1–21.
55.
AndersonC, BaggettCD, RaoC, et al.Validity of state cancer registry treatment information for adolescent and young adult women. Cancer Epidemiol, 2020; 64:101652; doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2019.101652
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
