Skip to main content
. 2020 May 6;301(6):1579–1588. doi: 10.1007/s00404-020-05563-w

Table 2.

Characterisation of study group (n = 72) compared to group of counselled women for fertility preservation (n = 162) at the time of the questionnaire mailing and rounded data of the FertiPROTEKT network from 2007–2015 [1]

All women counselled for fertility preservation 2007–2015 Study group of women (answered questionnaire) in 2016 Statistical analysis (p value) Data of the ‘FertiPROTEKT’ network 2007–2015
Number of women 162 72 ≈ 7150
Mean age in years at counselling /diagnosis of cancer 26.7 ± 6.9 (6–40) 27.1 ± 6.3 (15–39) 0.689 28
Mean age in years at questionnaire study (8/2016) 30.6 ± 7.2 (8–48) 30.4 ± 6.4 (17–44) 0.807
Time interval between counselling and time of contact (sent and/or answered questionnaire) 3.8 ± 2.4 (1–9) 3.1 ± 2.2 (1–9) 0.064
In % (n =) In % (n =) Statistical analysis (p value) In %
Most frequent diagnoses
 Breast cancer 35.2 (57) 37.5 (27) 0.735 37
 Hodgkin lymphoma 26.5 (43) 36.1 (26) 0.154 26 (incl. NHL)
 Autoimmune diseases 9.3 (15) 1.4 (1) 0.004 7
 Non-Hodgkin lymphoma 7.4 (12) 8.3 (6) 0.807 Not determined
 Leukaemia 5.6 (9) 6.9 (5) 0.681 5
 Ewing sarcoma 3.1 (5) 4.2 (3) 0.676 Not determined
Fertility preservation methodsa
 GnRH 58.0 (94) 62.5 (45) 0.552 47
 Cryopreservation of ovarian tissue 40.1 (65) 50.0 (36) 0.161 33
 Cryopreservation of oocytes 1.9 (3) 0 0.083 17
 Transposition of ovaries 0.6 (1) 1.4 (1) 0.556 2

aMultiple treatment possible, most often GnRH agonists in combination with cryopreservation of ovarian tissue