ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2021
A Warning Call for Fertility Preservation Methods for Women Undergoing Gonadotoxic Cancer Treatment.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to and Facilitators of Shared Decision-Making Implementation in Fertility Preservation for Patients With Cancer: A Qualitative Study.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025Article
- Silk-Ovarioids: establishment and characterization of a human ovarian primary cell 3D-model system.Human reproduction open · 2025Article
- Fertility Preservation in Female Patients with Cancer. Part I: Challenges and Future Prospects in Developing Countries; A Narrative Review Study.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2024Review
- Women's Sexual Dysfunctions Following Stem Cell Transplant and the Impact on Couple Relationship.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Usage of Cryopreserved Reproductive Material in Cancer Patients Undergoing Fertility Preservation Procedures.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malignant hematological conditions have recognized an increased incidence and require aggressive treatments. Targeted chemotherapy, accompanied or not by radiotherapy, raises the chance of defeating the disease, yet cancer protocols often associate long-term gonadal consequences, for instance, diminished or damaged ovarian reserve. The negative effect is directly proportional to the types, doses, time of administration of chemotherapy, and irradiation. Additionally, follicle damage depends on characteristics of the disease and patient, such as age, concomitant diseases, previous gynecological conditions, and ovarian reserve. Patients should be adequately informed when proceeding to gonadotoxic therapies; hence, fertility preservation should be eventually regarded as a first-intention procedure. This procedure is most beneficial when performed before the onset of cancer treatment, with the recommendation for embryos or oocytes' cryopreservation. If not feasible or acceptable, several options can be available during or after the cancer treatment. Although not approved by medical practice, promising results after in vitro studies increase the chances of future patients to protect their fertility. This review aims to emphasize the mechanism of action and impact of chemotherapy, especially the one proven to be gonadotoxic, upon ovarian reserve and future fertility. Reduced fertility or infertility, as long-term consequences of chemotherapy and, particularly, following bone marrow transplantation, is often associated with a negative impact of recovery, social and personal life, as well as highly decreased quality of life.
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.