Observational studyJBRA assisted reproduction2022
Patients undergoing elective and oncofertility preservation respond similarly to controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation.
Observational study in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ovarian reserve and stimulation response before chemotherapy treatment in breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation: a historical cohort study.Journal of ovarian research · 2025Article
- Fertility Preservation Strategies in Female Cancer Patients: Current Approaches and Future Directions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOutcome data for oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation are still scarce despite the scientific and technological advances. Studies suggest that patients with cancer have worse outcomes regarding mature vitrified oocytes when compared to healthy patients. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the oocyte vitrification response in patients undergoing elective and oncofertility preservation.
methodsThe ovarian stimulation response was verified by a cross-sectional and observational study, analyzing data from 367 patients between 2009 and 2018, which were divided into elective group (EG; n=327) and oncofertility group (OFG; n=40). The number of follicles, oocytes, mature oocytes, and duration of the cycle was evaluated, which were compared with clinical and ovarian stimulus data between groups.
resultsA significant difference in women's age (31.3±5.8 vs. 37.0±2.9 years; p<0.01) and basal values of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH), (4.0 [3.3 - 6.2] vs. 9.0 [5.4 - 9.9] mIU/mL; p<0.01) were observed. When adjusting data for age, FSH and Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone protocols, no significant difference in the number of vitrified mature oocytes between the two groups were observed (6.0 [3.0-11.0] vs. 7.0 [3.0-12.0]; p=0.11).
conclusionsThus, patients undergoing elective and oncofertility preservation seem to respond similarly to controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation. Breast cancer was the most frequent in the OFG (67%).
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.