ReviewF1000Research2020
Good news on the active management of pregnant cancer patients.
Review in F1000Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contraceptive use and contraceptive counselling interventions for women of reproductive age with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Predictors of referral for fertility preservation counseling in patients diagnosed with cancer.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Biology, care, and outcomes of gestational breast cancers: a review.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Review
- Ovarian cancer in Lebanese women: a 12-year comparative epidemiological study and trend analysis.Ecancermedicalscience · 2022Article
- Is It Possible to Personalize the Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer during Pregnancy?Journal of personalized medicine · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer occurs in approximately 1/1000 to 1/2000 pregnancies and presents complex medical and ethical dilemmas for patients and providers. The most common cancers diagnosed in the gestational period include breast, cervical, melanoma, and lymphomas. The majority of existing evidence regarding the treatment of cancer during pregnancy is derived from experiences with breast cancer. Other cancers often pose unique challenges given the location of the tumors and their traditional mode of treatment with pelvic surgery and radiation. Additionally, many emerging therapies for cancer target mechanisms that are necessary for fetal development, such as angiogenesis, and are contraindicated in pregnant women. Although limitations on the treatment of cancer during pregnancy currently exist, increasing evidence shows that many surgical and systemic therapies can be effective for a mother's oncologic outcomes without significant detriment to the developing fetus. Traditional perspectives of cancer during gestation may sway providers to encourage pregnancy termination, delays in therapy, or early delivery. However, recent studies and reviews discourage such practices. Although every cancer diagnosis in pregnancy requires an individualized approach and should use the multidisciplinary perspectives of maternal-fetal medicine specialists as well as medical and surgical oncologists, providers should feel empowered to safely employ systemic, surgical, and even reserved cases of radiation therapies for their pregnant patients with cancer. The aim of this review is to highlight some of the recent advances in cancer therapies for common cancer subtypes and encourage providers to use this growing body of evidence to employ treatments with curative intent while continuing to evaluate the long-term effects of these therapies on mothers and their children.
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.