Assessment of hydrologic impact of extending exploratory shafts into the Calico Hills nonwelded tuff unit at Yucca Mountain, Nevada

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is performing analyses to address an objection by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to plans in the Consultation Draft of the Site Characterization Plan for direct excavation of the Calico Hills nonwelded (CHn) unit within the repository exploration block at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The excavation was planned as part of site characterization activities for the potential high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. This characterization activities for the potential high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. This characterization activity has been deferred, pending the results of a risk/benefit analysis of alternative methods for obtaining needed characterization data from CHn unit. The benefits from characterizing the CHn unit are generally related to obtaining information leading to improved confidence in predictions of site performance. The risks are generally associated with potential adverse impacts to site performance that result from excavation or other intrusion into the CHn unit. The purpose of the risk/benefit analysis is to produce a recommendation to the Director, Regulatory and Site Evaluation Division. DOE/Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project Office for a strategy for characterizing the CHn unit. The recommendation will describe characterization activities that are expected to provide the needed information while limiting adverse impacts to site performance to the extent practical. The risk/benefit analysis was supported with scoping calculations to provide a quantitative evaluation of the impacts associated with different strategies. The working group responsible for the risk/benefit analysis requested that these scoping calculations to be supported with more detailed performance assessments for evaluating impacts of different characterization activities. This report summarizes the results of these performance assessment analyses. 9 refs., 30 figs., 1 tab

Premenopausal gynecologic surgery and survival among black and white women with breast cancer

Purpose: In the United States, hysterectomies and oophorectomies are frequently performed before menopause for benign conditions. The procedures are associated with reduced breast cancer-specific mortality among White women. The relationship between premenopausal gynecologic surgery and mortality in Black women with breast cancer is unknown. Methods: This investigation used incident invasive cases of breast cancer from Phases 1 and 2 of the Carolina Breast Cancer Study a population-based study that recruited Black and White women in North Carolina between 1993 and 2001. Premenopausal gynecologic surgery was operationalized in three categories: no surgery; hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy; hysterectomy with conservation of ≥ 1 ovary. Mortality was ascertained using the National Death Index, last updated in 2016. Multivariable-adjusted Cox Proportional Hazard Models were used to estimate the effect of premenopausal surgery on breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality Results: Hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy was associated with reduced breast cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.49, 0.96). White and Black women had a similar reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality. (HR among white: 0.66; 95% CI 0.43, 1.02), (HR among Black: 0.67; 95% CI 0.37, 1.21). Conclusions: There was a similar reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality following premenopausal, pre-diagnosis hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy across both Black and White women

Trends in surgical treatment of early-stage breast cancer reveal decreasing mastectomy use between 2003 and 2016 by age, race, and rurality

Purpose: To examine trends in the surgical treatment of breast cancer by age, rurality, and among Black women in a populous, racially diverse, state in the Southeastern United States of America. Methods: We identified women diagnosed with localized or regional breast cancer between 2003 and 2016 in the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (n = 86,776). Using Joinpoint regression we evaluated the average annual percentage change in proportion of women treated with mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery overall, by age group, among Black women, and for women residing in rural areas. Results: Overall, the rate of mastectomy usage in the population declined 2.5% per year between 2003 and 2016 (95% CI − 3.2, − 1.7). Over this same time interval, breast-conserving surgery increased by 1.6% per year (95% CI 0.9, 2.2). These temporal trends in surgery were also observed among Black women and rural residing women. Trends in surgery type varied by age group: mastectomy declined over time among women > 50 years, but not among women aged 18–49 at diagnosis. Discussion: In contrast to national studies that reported increasing use of mastectomy, we found declining mastectomy rates in the early 2000s in a Southern US state with a racially and geographically diverse population. These decreasing trends were consistent among key subgroups affected by cancer inequities, including Black and White rural women

Validity of breast cancer surgery treatment information in a state-based cancer registry

Purpose: Surgery is an important part of early stage breast cancer treatment that affects overall survival. Many studies of surgical treatment of breast cancer rely on data sources that condition on continuous insurance coverage or treatment at specified facilities and thus under-sample populations especially affected by cancer care inequities including the uninsured and rural populations. Statewide cancer registries contain data on first course of cancer treatment for all patients diagnosed with cancer but the accuracy of these data are uncertain. Methods: Patients diagnosed with stage I–III breast cancer between 2003 and 2016 were identified using the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and linked to Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance claims. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and Kappa statistics for receipt of surgery and type of surgery (breast conserving surgery or mastectomy) using the insurance claims as the presumed gold standard. Analyses were stratified by race, insurance type, and rurality. Results: Of 26,819 patients who met eligibility criteria, 23,125 were identified as having surgery in both the claims and registry for a sensitivity of 97.9% (95% CI 97.8%, 98.1%). There was also strong agreement for surgery type between the cancer registry and the insurance claims (Kappa: 0.91). Registry treatment data validity was lower for Medicaid insured patients than for Medicare and commercially insured patients. Conclusions: Cancer registry treatment data reliably identified receipt and type of breast cancer surgery. Cancer registries are an important source of data for understanding cancer care in underrepresented populations

Pregnancy attempts among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors

Objective: To examine whether demographic and cancer-related characteristics and factors such as fertility discussion with a medical provider and fertility preservation use are associated with attempting pregnancy after adolescent and young adult cancer. Design: Cross-sectional online survey. Setting: Not applicable. Patient(s): Women with lymphoma, breast cancer, thyroid cancer, or gynecologic cancer diagnosed at 15–39 years from 2004 to 2016 were identified from the North Carolina Cancer Registry and the Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California health care systems and responded to an online survey addressing survivorship concerns, including fertility and reproductive outcomes. Exposures: Demographic characteristics, cancer characteristics, fertility discussion with a medical provider or fertility specialist between cancer diagnosis and starting cancer treatment, use of fertility preservation strategies (freezing embryos or oocytes) after cancer diagnosis. Main Outcome Measure(s): Pregnancy attempt after cancer diagnosis, defined by either a pregnancy or 12 months of trying to become pregnant without pregnancy. Result(s): Among 801 participants who had not reached their desired family size at diagnosis, 77% had a fertility discussion with any medical provider between cancer diagnosis and treatment initiation, and 8% used fertility preservation after cancer diagnosis. At survey (median =7 years after diagnosis; interquartile range, 4–10), 32% had attempted pregnancy. Neither fertility discussion with any medical provider nor fertility counseling with a fertility specialist was significantly associated with pregnancy attempts. However, the use of fertility preservation was significantly associated with attempting pregnancy (prevalence ratios = 1.74; 95% confidence interval: 1.31–2.32). Other characteristics positively associated with pregnancy attempts included younger age at diagnosis, longer time since diagnosis, having a partner (at diagnosis or at survey), and having a history of infertility before cancer diagnosis. Conclusion(s): Use of fertility preservation strategies was uncommon in our cohort but was associated with attempting pregnancy after cancer. Ensuring access to fertility preservation methods may help adolescent and young adult cancer survivors to plan and initiate future fertility

The risk of birth defects with conception by ART

STUDY QUESTION: What is the association between ART conception and treatment parameters and the risk of birth defects? SUMMARY ANSWER: Compared to naturally conceived singleton infants, the risk of a major nonchromosomal defect among ART singletons conceived with autologous oocytes and fresh embryos without use of ICSI was increased by 18%, with increases of 42% and 30% for use of ICSI with and without male factor diagnosis, respectively. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Prior studies have indicated that infertility and ART are associated with an increased risk of birth defects but have been limited by small sample size and inadequate statistical power, failure to differentiate results by plurality, differences in birth defect definitions and methods of ascertainment, lack of information on ART treatment parameters or study periods spanning decades resulting in a substantial historical bias as ART techniques have improved. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a population-based cohort study linking ART cycles reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2015 that resulted in live births from 1 September 2004 to 31 December 2016 in Massachusetts and North Carolina and from 1 September 2004 to 31 December 2015 for Texas and New York: These were large and ethnically diverse States, with birth defect registries utilizing the same case definitions and data collected, and with high numbers of ART births annually. A 10:1 sample of non-ART births were chosen within the same time period as the ART birth. Naturally conceived ART siblings were identified through the mother's information. Non-ART children were classified as being born to women who conceived with ovulation induction (OI)/IUI when there was an indication of infertility treatment on the birth certificate, but the woman did not link to the SART CORS; all others were classified as being naturally conceived. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The study population included 135 051 ART children (78 362 singletons and 56 689 twins), 23 647 naturally conceived ART siblings (22 301 singletons and 1346 twins) and 9396 children born to women treated with OI/IUI (6597 singletons and 2799 twins) and 1 067 922 naturally conceived children (1 037 757 singletons and 30 165 twins). All study children were linked to their respective State birth defect registries to identify major defects diagnosed within the first year of life. We classified children with major defects as either chromosomal (i.e. presence of a chromosomal defect with or without any other major defect) or nonchromosomal (i.e. presence of a major defect but having no chromosomal defect), or all major defects (chromosomal and nonchromosomal). Logistic regression models were used to generate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CI to evaluate the risk of birth defects due to conception with ART (using autologous oocytes and fresh embryos), and with and without the use of ICSI in the absence or presence of male factor infertility, with naturally conceived children as the reference. Analyses within the ART group were stratified by combinations of oocyte source (autologous, donor) and embryo state (fresh, thawed), with births from autologous oocytes and fresh embryos as the reference. Analyses limited to fresh embryos were stratified by oocyte source (autologous, donor) and the use of ICSI. Triplets and higher-order multiples were excluded. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 21 998 singleton children (1.9%) and 3037 twin children (3.3%) had a major birth defect. Compared to naturally conceived children, ART singletons (conceived from autologous oocytes, fresh embryos without the use of ICSI) had increased risks of a major nonchromosomal birth defect (AOR 1.18, 95% 1.05, 1.32), cardiovascular defects (AOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03, 1.40), and any birth defect (AOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09, 1.27). Compared to naturally conceived children, ART singletons conceived (from autologous oocytes, fresh embryos) with the use of ICSI, the risks were increased for a major nonchromosomal birth defect (AOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16, 1.45 without male factor diagnosis; AOR 1.42, 95% CI 1.28, 1.57 with male factor diagnosis); blastogenesis defects (AOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08, 2.05 without male factor; AOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.17, 2.08 with male factor); cardiovascular defects (AOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.10,1.48 without male factor; AOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.27, 1.66 with male factor); in addition, the risk for musculoskeletal defects was increased (AOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01, 1.78 without male factor) and the risk for genitourinary defects in male infants was increased (AOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08, 1.65 with male factor). Comparisons within ART singleton births conceived from autologous oocytes and fresh embryos indicated that the use of ICSI was associated with increased risks of a major nonchromosomal birth defect (AOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03, 1.35), blastogenesis defects (AOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.08, 2.51), gastrointestinal defects (AOR 2.21, 95% CI 1.28, 3.82) and any defect (AOR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01, 1.22). Compared to naturally conceived children, ART singleton siblings had increased risks of musculoskeletal defects (AOR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04, 1.67) and any defect (AOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08, 1.23). ART twins (conceived with autologous oocytes, fresh embryos, without ICSI) were at increased risk of chromosomal defects (AOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.10, 3.24) and ART twin siblings were at increased risk of any defect (AOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.01, 1.57). The 18% increased risk of a major nonchromosomal birth defect in singleton infants conceived with ART without ICSI (∼36% of ART births), the 30% increased risk with ICSI without male factor (∼33% of ART births), and the 42% increased risk with ICSI and male factor (∼31% of ART births) translates into an estimated excess of 386 major birth defects among the 68 908 singleton children born by ART in 2017. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In the SART CORS database, it was not possible to differentiate method of embryo freezing (slow freezing vs vitrification), and data on ICSI was only available in the fresh embryo ART group. In the OI/IUI group, it was not possible to differentiate type of non-ART treatment utilized, and in both the ART and OI/IUI groups, data were unavailable on duration of infertility. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The use of ART is associated with increased risks of a major nonchromosomal birth defect, cardiovascular defect and any defect in singleton children, and chromosomal defects in twins; the use of ICSI further increases this risk, the most with male factor infertility. These findings support the judicious use of ICSI only when medically indicated. The relative contribution of ART treatment parameters versus the biology of the subfertile couple to this increased risk remains unclear and warrants further study. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This project was supported by grant R01 HD084377 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, or the National Institutes of Health, nor any of the State Departments of Health which contributed data. E.W. is a contract vendor for SART; all other authors report no conflicts

Assessment of Birth Defects and Cancer Risk in Children Conceived via in Vitro Fertilization in the US

Importance: Children with birth defects have a greater risk of developing cancer, but this association has not yet been evaluated in children conceived with in vitro fertilization (IVF). Objective: To assess whether the association between birth defects and cancer is greater in children conceived via IVF compared with children conceived naturally. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of live births, birth defects, and cancer from Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, and Texas included 1000639 children born to fertile women and 52776 children conceived via IVF (using autologous oocytes and fresh embryos) during 2004-2016 in Massachusetts and North Carolina, 2004-2015 in New York, and 2004-2013 in Texas. Children were followed up for an average of 5.7 years (6008985 total person-years of exposure). Data analysis was conducted from April 1 to August 31, 2020. Exposures: Conception by IVF for state residents who gave birth to liveborn singletons during the study period. Birth defect diagnoses recorded by statewide registries. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cancer diagnosis as recorded by state cancer registries. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for birth defect-cancer associations separately in fertile and IVF groups. Results: A total of 1000639 children (51.3% boys; 69.7% White; and 38.3% born between 2009-2012) were in the fertile group and 52776 were in the IVF group (51.3% boys; 81.3% White; and 39.6% born between 2009-2012). Compared with children without birth defects, cancer risks were higher among children with a major birth defect in the fertile group (hazard ratio [HR], 3.15; 95% CI, 2.40-4.14) and IVF group (HR, 6.90; 95% CI, 3.73-12.74). The HR of cancer among children with a major nonchromosomal defect was 2.07 (95% CI, 1.47-2.91) among children in the fertile group and 4.04 (95% CI, 1.86-8.77) among children in the IVF group. The HR of cancer among children with a chromosomal defect was 15.45 (95% CI, 10.00-23.86) in the fertile group and 38.91 (95% CI, 15.56-97.33) in the IVF group. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that among children with birth defects, those conceived via IVF were at greater risk of developing cancer compared with children conceived naturally

The risks of birth defects and childhood cancer with conception by assisted reproductive technology

STUDY QUESTION: Is there an association between fertility status, method of conception and the risks of birth defects and childhood cancer? SUMMARY ANSWER: The risk of childhood cancer had two independent components: (i) method of conception and (ii) presence, type and number of birth defects. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The rarity of the co-occurrence of birth defects, cancer and ART makes studying their association challenging. Prior studies have indicated that infertility and ART are associated with an increased risk of birth defects or cancer but have been limited by small sample size and inadequate statistical power, failure to adjust for or include plurality, differences in definitions and/or methods of ascertainment, lack of information on ART treatment parameters or study periods spanning decades resulting in a substantial historical bias as ART techniques have improved. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a population-based cohort study linking ART cycles reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2017 that resulted in live births in 2004–2018 in Massachusetts and North Carolina and live births in 2004–2017 in Texas and New York. A 10:1 sample of non-ART births were chosen within the same time period as the ART birth. Non-ART siblings were identified through the ART mother’s information. Children from non-ART births were classified as being born to women who conceived with ovulation induction or IUI (OI/IUI) when there was an indication of infertility treatment on the birth certificate, and the woman did not link to the SART CORS; all others were classified as being naturally conceived. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The study population included 165 125 ART children, 31 524 non-ART siblings, 12 451 children born to OI/IUI-treated women and 1 353 440 naturally conceived children. All study children were linked to their respective State birth defect registries to identify major defects diagnosed within the first year of life. We classified children with major defects as either chromosomal (i.e. presence of a chromosomal defect with or without any other major defect) or nonchromosomal (i.e. presence of a major defect but having no chromosomal defect), or all major defects (chromosomal and nonchromosomal), and calculated rates per 1000 children. Logistic regression models were used to generate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CIs of the risk of birth defects by conception group (OI/IUI, non-ART sibling and ART by oocyte source and embryo state) with naturally conceived children as the reference, adjusted for paternal and maternal ages; maternal race and ethnicity, education, BMI, parity, diabetes, hypertension; and for plurality, infant sex and State and year of birth. All study children were also linked to their respective State cancer registries. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of cancer by birth defect status (including presence of a defect, type and number of defects), and conception group. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 29 571 singleton children (2.0%) and 3753 twin children (3.5%) had a major birth defect (chromosomal or nonchromosomal). Children conceived with ART from autologous oocytes had increased risks for nonchromosomal defects, including blastogenesis, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and, for males only, genitourinary defects, with AORs ranging from 1.22 to 1.85; children in the autologous-fresh group also had increased risks for musculoskeletal (AOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.13, 1.45) and orofacial defects (AOR 1.40, 95% CI 1.17, 1.68). Within the donor oocyte group, the children conceived from fresh embryos did not have increased risks in any birth defect category, whereas children conceived from thawed embryos had increased risks for nonchromosomal defects (AOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03, 1.40) and blastogenesis defects (AOR 1.74, 95% CI 1.14, 2.65). The risk of cancer was increased among ART children in the autologous-fresh group (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.08, 1.59) and non-ART siblings (1.34, 95% CI 1.02, 1.76). The risk of leukemia was increased among children in the OI/IUI group (HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.04, 4.47) and non-ART siblings (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.02, 2.61). The risk of central nervous system tumors was increased among ART children in the autologous-fresh group (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.14, 2.48), donor-fresh group (HR 2.57, 95% CI 1.04, 6.32) and non-ART siblings (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.12, 3.03). ART children in the autologous-fresh group were also at increased risk for solid tumors (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09, 1.77). A total of 127 children had both major birth defects and cancer, of which 53 children (42%) had leukemia. The risk of cancer had two independent components: (i) method of conception (described above) and (ii) presence, type and number of birth defects. The presence of nonchromosomal defects increased the cancer risk, greater for two or more defects versus one defect, for all cancers and each type evaluated. The presence of chromosomal defects was strongly associated with cancer risk (HR 8.70 for all cancers and HR 21.90 for leukemia), further elevated in the presence of both chromosomal and nonchromosomal defects (HR 21.29 for all cancers, HR 64.83 for leukemia and HR 4.71 for embryonal tumors). Among the 83 946 children born from ART in the USA in 2019 compared to their naturally conceived counterparts, these risks translate into an estimated excess of 761 children with major birth defects, 31 children with cancer and 11 children with both major birth defects and cancer. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In the SART CORS database, it was not possible to differentiate method of embryo freezing (slow freezing versus vitrification), and data on ICSI were only available in the fresh embryo ART group. In the OI/IUI group, it was not possible to differentiate type of non-ART treatment utilized, and in both the ART and OI/IUI groups, data were unavailable on duration of infertility. Since OI/IUI is underreported on the birth certificate, some OI/IUI children were likely included among the naturally conceived children, which will decrease the difference between all the groups and the naturally conceived children. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The use of ART is associated with increased risks of major nonchromosomal birth defects. The presence of birth defects is associated with greater risks for cancer, which adds to the baseline risk in the ART group. Although this study does not show causality, these findings indicate that children conceived with ART, non-ART siblings, and all children with birth defects should be monitored more closely for the subsequent development of cancer. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This project was supported by grant R01 HD084377 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, or the National Institutes of Health, nor any of the State Departments of Health which contributed data. M.L.E. reports consultancy for Ro, Hannah, Dadi, Sandstone and Underdog; presidency of SSMR; and SMRU board member. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest

The adolescent and young adult (AYA) horizon study: An AYA cancer survivorship cohort

Background: In the United States, >45,000 adolescent and young adult (AYA) women are diagnosed with cancer annually. Reproductive issues are critically important to AYA cancer survivors, but insufficient information is available to address their concerns. The AYA Horizon Study was initiated to contribute high-quality, contemporary evidence on reproductive outcomes for female cancer survivors in the United States. Methods: The study cohort includes women diagnosed with lymphoma, breast, melanoma, thyroid, or gynecologic cancer (the five most common cancers among women ages 15–39 years) at three study sites: the state of North Carolina and the Kaiser Permanente health systems in Northern and Southern California. Detailed information on cancer treatment, fertility procedures, and pregnancy (e.g., miscarriage, live birth) and birth (e.g., birth weight, gestational length) outcomes are leveraged from state cancer registries, health system databases and administrative insurance claims, national data on assisted reproductive technology procedures, vital records, and survey data. Results: We identified a cohort of 11,072 female AYA cancer survivors that includes >1,200 African American women, >1,400 Asian women, >1,600 Medicaid enrollees, and >2,500 Hispanic women using existing data sources. Active response to the survey component was low overall (N ¼ 1,679), and notably lower among minority groups compared with non-Hispanic white women. Conclusions: Passive data collection through linkage reduces participant burden and prevents systematic cohort attrition or potential selection biases that can occur with active participation requirements. Impact: The AYA Horizon study will inform survivorship planning as fertility and parenthood gain increasing recognition as key aspects of high-quality cancer care