ReviewEcancermedicalscience2020
Fertility sparing strategies for pre- and peripubertal male cancer patients.
Review in Ecancermedicalscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human Testicular Tissue Digestion, Testicular Cell Selection, and Downstream Characterization for Reproductive Purposes: A Scoping Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- In vivo and in vitro spermatogenesis in prepubertal mouse testes exposed to low gonadotoxic doses of cytarabine or Daunorubicin.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Testicular extracellular matrix/gelatin-based scaffold using gas foaming to support spermatogonial stem cells.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2025Article
- Pediatric oncofertility care in limited versus optimum resource settings: results from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Article
- Achievement of complete in vitro spermatogenesis in testicular tissues from prepubertal mice exposed to mono- or polychemotherapy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Installing oncofertility programs for common cancers in optimum resource settings (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II): a committee opinion.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic parenthood following cancer therapy is considered to be a major factor of quality of life. Given the rising proportion of patients surviving cancer due to improved therapeutic protocols, it is an issue of growing importance. Hence, the efforts to preserve fertility have motivated researchers to develop options for the paediatric population facing fertility-threatening cancer therapies. In prepubertal boys who do not yet produce sperm, cryo-banking of testicular tissue containing spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) is the only viable option for future fertility preservation. While proposed in a number of clinics worldwide, however, this strategy remains still experimental. Transplanting the SSCs, or testicular tissue containing SSCs, back to the cured patient appears the most promising strategy. However, experiments performed with human testicular tissue in mice models reveal spermatogonial loss after transplantation, indicating the need for further optimisation of the transplantation procedure. The approach further poses the risk of reintroducing tumour cells back to the patient. In cases of haematological and blood-metastasising malignancies,
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.