ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2023
Contraception in breast cancer survivors from the FEERIC case-control study (performed on behalf of the Seintinelles research network).
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- French national survey on breast cancer care: caregiver and patient views.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- Contraception Use in Cancer Survivors, Clinical Practice and Patients' Preferences.Open access journal of contraception · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the prevalence of contraception in breast cancer (BC) patients at risk of unintentional pregnancy (i.e. not currently pregnant or trying to get pregnant) and matched controls. STUDY
designThe FEERIC study (Fertility, Pregnancy, Contraception after BC in France) is a prospective, multicenter case-control study, including localized BC patients aged 18-43 years, matched for age and parity to cancer-free volunteer controls in a 1:2 ratio. Data were collected through online questionnaires completed on the Seintinelles research platform.
resultsIn a population of 1278 women at risk of unintentional pregnancy, the prevalence of contraception at study inclusion did not differ significantly between cases (340/431, 78.9%) and controls (666/847, 78.6%, p = 0.97). Contrarily, the contraceptive methods used were significantly different, with a higher proportion of copper IUD use in BC survivors (59.5% versus 25.0% in controls p < 0.001). For patients at risk of unintentional pregnancy, receiving information about chemotherapy-induced ovary damage at BC diagnosis (OR = 2.47 95%CI [ 1.39-4.37] and anti-HER2 treatment (OR = 2.46, 95% CI [ 1.14-6.16]) were significantly associated with the use of a contraception in multivariate analysis.
conclusionIn this large French study, BC survivors had a prevalence of contraception use similar to that for matched controls, though almost one in five women at risk of unintentional pregnancy did not use contraception. Dedicated consultations at cancer care centers could further improve access to information and contraception counseling.
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.