ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2019
Fertility preservation in women with malignancies: the accuracy of antral follicle count collected randomly during the menstrual cycle in predicting the number of oocytes retrieved.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does the Type of Cancer Influence Anti-Müllerian Hormone Levels in Women of Reproductive Age? A Cross-Sectional Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Clinical practice guideline for female fertility preservation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical Outcomes ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- The Clinical Value and Interpretation of Anti-Müllerian Hormone in Women With Cancer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the capacity of random antral follicle count (AFC), i.e., AFC recorded at any time during the menstrual cycle, to predict the number of retrieved mature oocytes in women with malignancies undergoing random start ovarian hyperstimulation
methodsA consecutive series of 72 women with malignancies who underwent ovarian hyperstimulation aimed at egg freezing between July 2014 and December 2016 was retrospectively reviewed. A standardized random start protocol was used for all women. AFC and serum AMH were systematically assessed prior to initiating ovarian hyperstimulation. The main outcome was the retrieval of ≥ 10 mature oocytes. The accuracy of random AFC was tested with the c-statistics (area under the ROC curve).
resultsFor the whole cohort, the c-statistics for the prediction of ≥ 10 mature oocytes using AFC and serum AMH were similar. Specifically, the areas under the curve were 0.76 (95%CI 0.66-0.87) and 0.82 (95%CI 0.72-0.92), respectively (p = ns). Moreover, when considering the subgroup of women recruited after day 5 of the cycle (proper random start, n = 52), the areas under the curve did not also differ. Specifically, they resulted in 0.77 (95%CI 0.64-0.89) and 0.83 (95%CI 0.72-0.95), respectively (p = ns).
conclusionsAFC collected at any time during the menstrual cycle can provide valuable information for the counseling of women with malignancies scheduled for oocyte cryopreservation. Its reliability appears to be non-inferior to that of serum AMH.
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.