Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30138451›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Perinatal risks in female cancer survivors: A population-based analysis.

Anne-Lotte L F van der Kooi, David H Brewster, Rachael Wood, Sian Nowell, Colin Fischbacher, Marry M van den Heuvel-Eibrink, Joop S E Laven, W Hamish B Wallace, Richard A Anderson

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Joint effects of IVF and cancer history on birth outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Anne-Lotte L F van der KooiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0497-3814
David H BrewsterScottish Cancer Registry, Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0002-5346-5608
Rachael WoodInformation Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Sian NowelleData Research & Innovation Service (eDRIS), Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland and Farr Institute Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Colin FischbacherScottish Cancer Registry, Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Marry M van den Heuvel-EibrinkPrincess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Joop S E LavenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
W Hamish B WallaceDepartment of Oncology and Haematology, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Sciennes Road, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Richard A AndersonMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
National Health Service Scotland · GBPrincess Máxima Center · NLErasmus MC - Sophia Children’s Hospital · NLMRC Centre for Reproductive Health · GBRoyal Hospital for Children · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G1100357Medical Research Council MR/N022556/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesAdvances in cancer management have resulted in improved survival rates, particularly in children and young adults. However, treatment may adversely affect reproductive outcomes among female cancer survivors. The objective of this study was to investigate their risk of adverse perinatal outcomes compared to the general population. DESIGN/

methodsWe performed a population-based analysis, including all female cancer survivors diagnosed before the age of 40 years between 1981 and 2012. Pregnancy and perinatal complications were identified through linkage of the Scottish Cancer Registry with hospital discharge records based on the Community Health Index (CHI) database. We compared 1,629 female cancer survivors with a first ever singleton pregnancy after diagnosis, with controls matched on age, deprivation quintile, and year of cancer diagnosis selected from the general population (n = 8,899). Relative risks and 95%-confidence intervals of perinatal risks were calculated using log-binomial regression.

resultsSurvivors were more likely to give birth before 37 weeks of gestation (relative risk (RR]) 1.32, 95%-CI 1.10-1.59), but did not show an increased risk of low birth weight (<2.5kg: RR 1.15, 95%-CI 0.94-1.39), and were less likely to give birth to offspring small for gestational age (RR 0.81, 95%-CI 0.68-0.98). Operative delivery and postpartum haemorrhage were more common but approached rates in controls with more recent diagnosis. The risk of congenital abnormalities was not increased (RR 1.01, 95%-CI 0.85-1.20).

conclusionCancer survivors have an increased risk of premature delivery and postpartum haemorrhage, but their offspring are not at increased risk for low birth weight or congenital abnormalities. In recent decades there has been a normalisation of delivery method in cancer survivors, nevertheless careful management remains appropriate particularly for those diagnosed in childhood.

Indexed as

AdultCancer SurvivorsCesarean SectionFemaleHumansInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, Small for Gestational AgePerinatal CarePostpartum HemorrhagePregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPremature Birth

Identifiers

PMID30138451
PMCPMC6107257
OpenAlexW2888496357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.