Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2020
Determinants of utilization of cryopreservation of germ cells in adolescent cancer patients in four European countries.
Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating fertility preservation interventions for alignment with ASCO Guidelines for reproductive aged women undergoing cancer treatment: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Dreaming Big: Providing American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Concordant Oncofertility Care for Adolescents and Young Adults.Journal of adolescent and young adult oncology · 2026Article
- Utilization of sperm cryopreservation in patients with testicular cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- An Assessment of Cryopreserved Semen and Testicular Tissue Collected Before and After Cancer Treatment Initiation.Cancer management and research · 2024Article
- Evaluating the safety and efficacy of cryopreserved ovarian tissue transplantation in leukemia patients with different bone marrow remission status using xenotransplantation.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Sperm and testicular tissue cryopreservation and assisted reproductive technology outcomes in male cancer patients: a 15-year experience.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Health outcomes in offspring born to survivors of childhood cancers following assisted reproductive technologies.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Infertility is a relevant late-effect following cancer treatment; yet, a large proportion of survivors cannot recall having been informed of this risk. In an intervention study, we examined if and how supportive patient information material on fertility/fertility-preserving measures influences utilization of cryopreservation in adolescent cancer patients. The control group, recruited 03/2014-01/2016, received the usual patient education at initial diagnosis. The intervention group, recruited 04/2016-10/2017, received patient education supported by a fertility flyer and brochure. Patients and parents were each asked questions on utilization of cryopreservation in a questionnaire 3 and 6 months after initial diagnosis. Patient core and therapy data were obtained from medical records. Overall, cryopreservation rates showed no significant difference between the control (32.7%, n = 37/113) and intervention group (36.6%, n = 37/101). In the control group, cryopreservation was associated with gender (OR 0.100, CI 0.023-0.427), age (OR 1.559, CI 1.077-2.258) and recalling information on fertility protection (OR 33.663, CI 2.100-539.574); in the intervention group, cryopreservation was related to gender (OR 0.093, CI 0.026-0.330) and the estimated infertility risk (OR 43.665, CI 2.157-883.974).Conclusion: Cryopreservation rates did not overall increase following the intervention; however, the individual risk seemed to be brought into attention more: Those at risk, including younger patients, cryopreserved at higher rates.What is Known:•Infertility is a relevant late-effect following adolescent cancer.•Guidelines recommend to offer fertility protection before cancer treatment.•A relevant proportion of adolescents with cancer are not aware of this risk.•Fertility protection seems under-used in cancer patients at risk for infertility.What is New:•Information material on fertility and protection in adolescents did not increase overall rates of cryopreservation.•Cryopreservation rates were improved according to individual risk for infertility.•Our flyers and brochures on fertility in cancer patients are available in various languages.
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.