ReviewGynecologic oncology research and practice2016
Fertility-sparing management in cervical cancer: balancing oncologic outcomes with reproductive success.
Review in Gynecologic oncology research and practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human Papillomavirus Across the Reproductive Lifespan: An Integrative Review of Fertility, Pregnancy Outcomes, and Fertility-Sparing Management.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Variation in outcome reporting in studies of fertility-sparing surgery for cervical cancer: A systematic review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2023Pooled it
- Outcomes of ovarian transposition in cervical cancer; an updated meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2022Pooled it
- Outcomes of Trachelectomy vs. Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Practical recommendations for fertility preservation in women by the FertiPROTEKT network. Part I: Indications for fertility preservation.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2018Guideline
- Pooled it
- Age, lifestyle, and disease affect ciliary transport in the human fallopian tube.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of reproductive and oncological outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery in cervical cancer patients with tumor > 2 cm.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Modified abdominal radical trachelectomy used to spare fertility during surgery for early-stage cervical cancer: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2024Article
- Risks of Cervical Cancer Recurrence After Fertility-Sparing Surgery and the Role of Human Papillomavirus Infection Types.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The research landscape of the quality of life or psychological impact on gynecological cancer patients: A bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Fertility-Sparing and Less Radical Surgery for Cervical Cancer.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- Determinants of sexual function among survivors of gynaecological cancers in a tertiary hospital: a cross-sectional study.Ecancermedicalscience · 2022Article
- Review
- Successful pregnancy following transmyometrial embryo transfer after robot-assisted radical trachelectomy.Clinical and experimental reproductive medicine · 2021Article
- Fertility preservation in women with early-stage gynecologic cancer: optimizing oncologic and reproductive outcomes.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2021Review
- Fertility-Sparing Treatment for Early-Stage Cervical, Ovarian, and Endometrial Malignancies.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Review
- Fertility preservation treatment of gynecological cancer patients in Spain: a national survey (GOFER study).Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2020Article
- Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Uterine-Preserving Surgery in Young Women With Stage Ib1 Cervical Cancer.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2018Article
- Less versus more radical surgery in stage IB1 cervical cancer: A population-based study of long-term survival.Gynecologic oncology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide, many of who are still within their reproductive lifespan. Advances in screening and treatment have increased the 5-year survival for early stage disease to over 90 % in developed countries. The focus is now shifting to reducing morbidity and improving fertility outcomes for cervical cancer patients. Radical trachelectomy with lymph node assessment became the standard of care for selected women with lesions <2 cm who desire fertility preservation. However, several questions still remain regarding the degree of surgical radicality required for tumors <2 cm, and fertility-sparing options for women with early-stage disesase ≥2 cm, and those with more advanced disease. Here, we compile a narrative review of the evidence for oncologic and pregnancy outcomes following radical trachelectomy, non-radical fertility-sparing surgery, and the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to surgery for larger lesions. We also review the literature for assisted reproductive technologies in women with more advanced disease.
findingsAvailable literature suggests that the crude recurrence and mortality rates after radical trachelectomy are <5 and <2 %, respectively (approx. 11 and 4 % for tumors ≥ 2 cm). Among 1238 patients who underwent fertility-sparing surgery for early cervical cancer there were 469 pregnancies with a 67 % live birth rate. Among 134 cases with lesions ≥ 2 cm, there were ten conceptions with a live birth rate of 70 %. Outcomes after non-radical surgery (simple trachelectomy or cervical conization) are similar, although only applicable among a highly selected patient population. For patients ineligible for fertility-preserving surgery or who require adjuvant radiation therapy, current options include ovarian transposition and cryopreservation of oocytes or embryos but other techniques are under investigation.
conclusionToday, many cervical cancer survivors have successful pregnancies. For those with early-stage disease, minimally invasive and fertility sparing techniques have resulted in improved obstetrical outcomes without compromising oncologic safety. Results from three ongoing trials on non-radical surgery for low-risk tumors <2 cm will further inform the need for radical surgery in such patients. For those in whom natural childbearing is unachievable, advances in assisted reproductive technologies provide reproductive options. Despite our advances, the effects of cervical cancer survivorship on quality of life are not fully elucidated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.