Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24752005›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in obstetrics & gynecology2014

Use of fertility drugs and risk of ovarian cancer.

Brenda Diergaarde, Michelle L Kurta

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Metastatic Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma in the Context ofCase reports in obstetrics and gynecology · 2020
    Article
  8. Granulosa-cell tumor after ovarian stimulation: A case report.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2018
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brenda DiergaardeaDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania bThe Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Michelle L Kurta
The Ohio State University · USUPMC Hillman Cancer Center · US

Funding

VECTOR CORE FACILITYP30CA047904 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Jessie Nedrow · 1988 to 2026
$158.0M
Inflammation and Ovarian CancerR01CA095023 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BUNKER, CLAREANN H. · 2003 to 2008
$2.7M
EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN CANCER PREVENTIONR25CA057703 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI WEISSFELD, JOEL L · 1992 to 2010
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA047904NCI NIH HHS R01 CA095023NCI NIH HHS R25 CA057703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to highlight recent research and insights into the relationship between fertility drug use and ovarian cancer risk. RECENT

findingsResults from two large case-control studies provided further evidence that fertility drug use does not significantly contribute to risk of ovarian cancer among the majority of women when adjusting for known confounding factors. However, questions regarding the effect on certain subgroups, including long-term fertility drug users, women who remain nulligravid after fertility treatment, women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and borderline ovarian tumours, still remain. In addition, it may currently just be too early to determine whether there is an association between fertility drug use and ovarian cancer risk given that many of the exposed women are only now beginning to reach the ovarian cancer age range. SUMMARY: Whether use of fertility drugs increases the risk of ovarian cancer is an important question that requires further investigation, in particular given the large number of women utilizing fertility treatments. Fortunately, results from recent studies have been mainly reassuring. Large well designed studies with sufficient follow-up time are needed to further evaluate the effects of fertility treatments within subgroups defined by patient and tumour characteristics.

Indexed as

AdultCase-Control StudiesClomipheneEstrogensFemaleFertility Agents, FemaleGenes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2GonadotropinsHumansInfertility, FemaleMutationOvarian NeoplasmsOvulation InductionParityPregnancyClomipheneEstrogensFertility Agents, FemaleGonadotropins

Identifiers

PMID24752005
PMCPMC4217689
OpenAlexW2057963004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.