Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35032286›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022

Installing oncofertility programs for breast cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings: Empirical data from 39 surveyed centers in Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II.

Mahmoud Salama, M Lambertini, M S Christianson, Y Jayasinghe, A Anazodo, M De Vos, F Amant, C Stern, L Appiah, T L Woodard and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Mahmoud SalamaOncofertility Consortium, Michigan State University, 965 Wilson Road, Room A626B, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1316, USA. salamam2@msu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0282-8018
M LambertiniDepartment of Medical Oncology, UOC Clinica Di Oncologia Medica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
M S ChristiansonDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Johns Hopkins Fertility Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 10751 Falls Road, Suite 280, Lutherville, MD, 21093, USA.
Y JayasingheRoyal Children's Hospital, Flemington Rd, Parkville, Melbourne, Vic, 3054, Australia.
A AnazodoFertility Research Centre, Royal Hospital for Women, Barker Street, Sydney, Australia.
M De VosCentre for Reproductive Medicine of UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
F AmantDepartment of Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
C SternFertility Preservation Service, Reproductive Services Unit, Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, 3051, Australia.
L AppiahDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
T L WoodardDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, MD Anderson Oncofertility Program, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
R A AndersonMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
L M WestphalStanford University Hospital, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, USA.
R E LeachOncofertility Consortium, Michigan State University, 965 Wilson Road, Room A626B, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1316, USA.
K A Rodriguez-WallbergDepartment of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska University Hospital, 14186, Stockholm, Sweden.
P PatrizioYale Fertility Center and Yale Fertility Preservation Program, 200 West Campus Dr, Orange, CT, 06477, USA.
Teresa K WoodruffOncofertility Consortium, Michigan State University, 965 Wilson Road, Room A626B, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1316, USA. tkw@msu.edu.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N022556/1Medical Research Council MR/W019140/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAs a further step to elucidate the actual diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for breast cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for breast cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II.

methodsWe surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia & Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the United States, Europe, Australia and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered to young female patients with breast cancer as well as the degree of utilization.

resultsIn the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for breast cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings especially for established options, (2) frequent utilization of egg freezing, embryo freezing, ovarian tissue freezing, GnRH analogs, and fractionation of chemo- and radiotherapy, (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM), (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings, (5) recognition that technical and ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options.

conclusionsWe presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to guide oncofertility teams in optimizing care for breast cancer patients in various resource settings.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFertility PreservationNeoplasmsEmbryo, MammalianFemaleHumansIn Vitro Oocyte Maturation TechniquesSurveys and QuestionnairesBest practiceBreast cancerFertility preservationLimited resource settingsOncofertilityOptimum resource settings

Identifiers

PMID35032286
PMCPMC8760079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.