ArticleReproductive medicine and biology
The possible effects of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017 on the practice of fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Japan.
Article in Reproductive medicine and biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nationwide Survey of Institutional Factors Related to the Use of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogs for Ovarian Protection in Women Receiving Chemotherapy in Japan.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2026Article
- Trends in fertility preservation treatments in Japan until 2023: analysis of the Japan Oncofertility Registry.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Fertility preservation after gonadotoxic treatments for cancer and autoimmune diseases.Journal of ovarian research · 2023Article
- The possible effects of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017 on the practice of fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Japan.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
- Reproductive outcomes of embryo cryopreservation and transfer at the start-up phase of fertility preservation in Japan.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
- Follicle development and its prediction in patients with primary ovarian insufficiency: Possible treatments and markers to maximize the ability to conceive with residual follicles.Reproductive medicine and biologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: In 2017, the first guidelines for fertility preservation in cancer patients were published in Japan. However, the impact of the guidelines remains unknown. Therefore, the authors conducted a nationwide survey on cryopreservation procedures in the period from shortly before to after publication of the guidelines (2016-2019) and compared the results with our previous survey (2011-2015). The authors also surveyed reproductive specialists' awareness of the guidelines and implementation problems. Methods: The authors sent a questionnaire to 618 assisted reproductive technology facilities certified by the Japanese Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Results: The authors received responses from 395 institutions (63.8%). Among them, 144 institutions conducted cryopreservation for cancer patients (vs. 126 in 2011-2015) and performed 2537 embryo or oocyte and 178 ovarian tissue cryopreservation procedures (vs. 1085 and 122, respectively). Compared with the previous period, indications were more varied and protocols for controlled ovarian stimulation were more standardized. Reproductive specialists' interest in oncofertility was high, but many reported three main difficulties: selecting a treatment method, storing samples in the long term, and securing the necessary human resources. Conclusions: The practice of fertility preservation in cancer patients in Japan has been considerably affected by the first Japanese guidelines.
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.