Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26341758›Full record

SynthesisThe oncologist2015

Predicting Ovarian Activity in Women Affected by Early Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis-Based Nomogram.

Agnese Barnabei, Lidia Strigari, Paolo Marchetti, Valentina Sini, Liana De Vecchis, Salvatore Maria Corsello, Francesco Torino

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The oncologist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Fertility preservation in breast cancer with case-based examples for guidance.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Antral Follicles Count and Anti-Müllerian Hormone Levels after Gonadotoxic Chemotherapy in Patients with Breast Cancer: Cohort Study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2017
    Article
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Agnese BarnabeiEndocrinology Unit, "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Lidia StrigariLaboratory of Medical Physics and Expert Systems, "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Paolo MarchettiDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Medical Oncology Division, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy Sant'Andrea Hospital, Rome, Italy IDI-IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Valentina SiniDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Medical Oncology Division, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy Oncology Unit, "Santo Spirito" Hospital - Lungotevere in Sassia, Rome, Italy.
Liana De VecchisDepartment of Systems Medicine, "Tor Vergata" University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Salvatore Maria CorselloEndocrinology Unit, Università Cattolica Roma, Rome, Italy corsello.sm@mclink.it.
Francesco TorinoDepartment of Systems Medicine, "Tor Vergata" University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
University of Rome Tor Vergata · ITExpert System (Italy) · ITOspedale di Santo Spirito · ITSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe assessment of ovarian reserve in premenopausal women requiring anticancer gonadotoxic therapy can help clinicians address some challenging issues, including the probability of future pregnancies after the end of treatment. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and age can reliably estimate ovarian reserve. A limited number of studies have evaluated AMH and age as predictors of residual ovarian reserve following cytotoxic chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsTo conduct a meta-analysis of published data on this topic, we searched the medical literature using the key MeSH terms "amenorrhea/chemically induced," "ovarian reserve," "anti-Mullerian hormone/blood," and "breast neoplasms/drug therapy." Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statements guided the search strategy. U.K. National Health Service guidelines were used in abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC/AUC) analysis was used to evaluate the predictive utility of baseline AMH and age model.

resultsThe meta-analysis of data pooled from the selected studies showed that both age and serum AMH are reliable predictors of post-treatment ovarian activity in breast cancer patients. Importantly, ROC/AUC analysis indicated AMH was a more reliable predictor of post-treatment ovarian activity in patients aged younger than 40 years (0.753; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.602-0.904) compared with those older than 40 years (0.678; 95% CI: 0.491-0.866). We generated a nomogram describing the correlations among age, pretreatment AMH serum levels, and ovarian activity at 1 year from the end of chemotherapy.

conclusionAfter the ongoing validation process, the proposed nomogram may help clinicians discern premenopausal women requiring cytotoxic chemotherapy who should be considered high priority for fertility preservation counseling and procedures.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsAmenorrheaAnti-Mullerian HormoneAntineoplastic AgentsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNomogramsOvarian ReserveOvaryROC CurveAnti-Mullerian HormoneAntineoplastic AgentsAnti-Müllerian hormoneBreast cancerOvarian reserveOvarian toxicityPredictive factors

Identifiers

PMID26341758
PMCPMC4591948
OpenAlexW1958707516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.