Cited by 43Reproductive Biology and FertilityEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcareEthics and bioethics in healthcare

International consensus: ovarian tissue cryopreservation in young Turner syndrome patients: outcomes of an ethical Delphi study including 55 experts from 16 different countries

Open access
Schleedoorn, M J, Mulder, B H, Braat, D D M, Beerendonk, C C M, Peek, R, Nelen, W L D M, Van Leeuwen, E, Van der Velden, A A E M +1 more·2020·Human Reproduction

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: What is the standpoint of an international expert panel on ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) in young females with Turner syndrome (TS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: The expert panel states that OTC should be offered to young females with TS, but under strict conditions only. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: OTC is already an option for preserving the fertility of young females at risk of iatrogenic primary ovarian insufficiency (POI). Offering OTC to females with a genetic cause of POI could be the next step. One of the most common genetic disorders related to POI is TS. Due to an early depletion of the ovarian reserve, most females with TS are confronted with infertility before reaching adulthood. However, before offering OTC as an experimental fertility preservation option to young females with TS, medical and ethical concerns need to be addressed. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A three-round ethical Delphi study was conducted to systematically discuss whether the expected benefits exceed the expected negative consequences of OTC in young females with TS. The aim was to reach group consensus and form an international standpoint based on selected key statements. The study took place between February and December 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Anonymous panel selection was based on expertise in TS, fertility preservation or medical ethics. A mixed panel of 12 gynaecologists, 13 (paediatric) endocrinologists, 10 medical ethicists and 20 patient representatives from 16 different countries gave consent to participate in this international Delphi study. In the first two rounds, experts were asked to rate and rank 38 statements regarding OTC in females with TS. Participants were offered the possibility to adjust their opinions after repetitive feedback. The selection of key statements was based on strict inclusion criteria. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 46 participants completed the first Delphi round (response rate 84%). Based on strict selection criteria, six key statements were selected, and 13 statements were discarded. The remaining 19 statements and two additional statements submitted by the expert panel were re-evaluated in the second round by 41 participants (response rate 75%). The analysis of the second survey resulted in the inclusion of two additional key statements. After the approval of these eight key statements, the majority of the expert panel (96%) believed that OTC should be offered to young females with TS, but in a safe and controlled research setting first, with proper counselling and informed consent procedures, before offering this procedure in routine care. The remaining participants (4%) did not object but did not respond despite several reminders. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The anonymous nature of this study may have led to lack of accountability. The selection of experts was based on their willingness to participate. The fact that not all panellists took part in all rounds may have resulted in selection bias. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This international standpoint is the first step in the global acceptance of OTC in females with TS. Future collaborative research with a focus on efficacy and safety and long-term follow-up is urgently needed. Furthermore, we recommend an international register for fertility preservation procedures in females with TS. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Unconditional funding (A16-1395) was received from Merck B.V., The Netherlands. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/humrep/deaa007

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals with TS may derive comfort from learning about fertility preservation options through consultation with knowledgeable providers and the associated sense of having explored all possible options for future fertility.

    “Individuals with TS may derive comfort from learning about fertility preservation options through consultation with knowledgeable providers and the associated sense of having explored all possible options for future fertility.572,622”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Pasquino AM, Passeri F, Pucarelli I, Segni M, Municchi G Spontaneous pubertal development in Turner's syndrome. Italian study Group for Turner’s syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1997; 82: 1810– 1813. 9177387

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schleedoorn, M. J., Mulder, B. H., Braat, D. D. M., Beerendonk, C. C. M., Peek, R., Nelen, W. L. D. M., Van Leeuwen, E., Van der Velden, A. A. E. M., & Fleischer, K.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
  • Medical Ethics, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Paediatric Endocrinology, Radboud University Medical Centre Amalia Children’s Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Corresponding author
Schleedoorn, M J
Venue
Human Reproduction
Published
2020-04-29
Volume
35
Issue
5
Pages
1061-1072
ISSN
  • 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2350
OpenAlex
W2981157356
Cited by
43
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1
FWCI
5.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Reproduction (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Repository PThU (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • 58th Annual ESPE Meeting (ESPE 2019)
Funders
Unconditional (A16-1395)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
ovarian tissue cryopreservation, Turner syndrome, fertility preservation, primary ovarian insufficiency, ethical consensus, Delphi method, expert panel, ovarian reserve depletion, informed consent, research ethics, patient representatives, medical ethics
MeSH terms
Adult, Child, Delphi Technique, Female, Humans, Netherlands, Turner Syndrome, Cryopreservation, Fertility Preservation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review