ArticleJCO oncology practice2022
Infrastructure of Fertility Preservation Services for Pediatric Cancer Patients: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fertility Preservation Discussions And Decisions: Results From a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Among Adolescent Males With Cancer.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2025Trial
- Fertility preservation in 2026: current landscape in Europe and the United States for children and adolescents undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation-recommendations on behalf of the Westhafen Intercontinental Group.Bone marrow transplantation · 2026Review
- Fertility Preservation in 2026: Current Landscape in Europe and the United States for Children and Adolescents Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation - Recommendations on Behalf of the Westhafen Intercontinental Group.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2026Review
- Fertility Preservation Needs of Men Undergoing Cancer Treatment: An Explorative Qualitative Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Future to Hold: Addressing Fertility Preservation Access in Adolescents and Young Adult Cancer Care.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Fertility Preservation Services for Adolescents and Young Adults: 2022 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Landscape Assessment.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Beyond Survival: Addressing Pediatric Oncofertility Risk, Preservation Methods, and Care Disparities.Pediatric annals · 2025Review
- Fresh versus frozen micro-TESE sperm and outcomes.Asian journal of andrology · 2025Review
- Impact of a Nurse Navigator Program on Referral Rates and Use of Fertility Preservation Among Female Cancer Patients: A 14-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Disparities in access to fertility preservation among adolescents undergoing gonadotoxic therapies.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Clinical Practice Guideline-Inconsistent Management of Fertility Preservation in Pediatric Cancer Patients in Community Settings: A Children's Oncology Group Study.Journal of adolescent and young adult oncology · 2024Article
- Standardized Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Consultation for Pediatric and Adolescent Oncology Patients.Journal of adolescent and young adult oncology · 2024Article
- Assessing Attitudes and Understanding After Ovarian Tissue Cryopreservation: A Follow-Up Telephone Interview Survey.Journal of adolescent and young adult oncology · 2024Article
- Pediatric and Adolescent Hodgkin Lymphoma: Paving the Way for Standards of Care and Shared Decision Making.American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting · 2024Review
- Ethical, legal, social, and policy issues of ovarian tissue cryopreservation in prepubertal girls: a critical interpretive review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
- Knowledge and intentions to use fertility preservation among urban Chinese cancer patients: A study from Hong Kong.PloS one · 2024Article
- Clinicians' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to sperm banking in adolescent males with cancer: a mixed-methods study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Current Issues in Fertility Preservation Among Pediatric and Adolescent Cancer Patients.Current oncology reports · 2023Review
- Fertility Preservation Practices at Pediatric Oncology Institutions in the United States: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFertility preservation (FP) services are part of comprehensive care for those newly diagnosed with cancer. The capacity to offer these services to children and adolescents with cancer is unknown.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was sent to 220 Children's Oncology Group member institutions regarding institutional characteristics, structure and organization of FP services, and barriers to FP. Standard descriptive statistics were computed for all variables. The association between site-specific factors and selected outcomes was examined using multivariable logistic regression.
resultsOne hundred forty-four programs (65.5%) returned surveys. Fifty-three (36.8%) reported a designated FP individual or team. Sperm banking was offered at 135 (97.8%) institutions, and testicular tissue cryopreservation at 37 (27.0%). Oocyte and embryo cryopreservation were offered at 91 (67.9%) and 62 (46.6%) institutions, respectively; ovarian tissue cryopreservation was offered at 64 (47.8%) institutions. The presence of dedicated FP personnel was independently associated with the ability to offer oocyte or embryo cryopreservation (odds ratio [OR], 4.7; 95% CI, 1.7 to 13.5), ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 6.0), and testicular tissue cryopreservation (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.4 to 97.8). Only 26 (18.1%) participating institutions offered all current nonexperimental FP interventions. Barriers included cost (70.9%), inadequate knowledge or training (60.7%), difficulty characterizing fertility risk (50.4%), inadequate staffing (45.5%), and logistics with reproductive specialties (38%-39%).
conclusionThis study provides the most comprehensive view of the current landscape of FP infrastructure for children and adolescents with cancer and demonstrates that existing infrastructure is inadequate to offer comprehensive services to patients. We discuss modifiable factors to improve patient access to FP.
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.