ArticleJournal of fertility preservation2023
Semen Cryopreservation in Men with Cancer: Identifying Patterns and Challenges.
Article in Journal of fertility preservation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Propolis mitigates busulfan-induced testicular dysfunction in rats: insights into redox stabilization, PCNA modulation, and caspase-3 inhibition.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the proportion of male cancer patients who undergo semen cryopreservation before chemotherapy after referral was placed, identify factors associated with completing the procedure, and explore reasons for not moving forward with it.
methodsThe electronic medical records of men with cancer who were referred to a reproductive urologist identified with an ICD-10 code for a fertility preservation procedure (Z31.62, Z31.84) between November 2021 and February 2023 were reviewed. Cancer type, semen cryopreservation rates, and reasons for opting out of the procedure were recorded.
resultsOf the 128 men diagnosed with cancer who were referred for cryopreservation during the study period, n:67 (52%) underwent semen cryopreservation. Those who did not undergo the procedure tended to be older, with a median age of 38 years compared to those that did it (33 years) (p: 0.10). The most common reasons for non-compliance included financial burden, and lack of interest.
conclusionWhile it is recommended that patients consider fertility preservation prior to chemotherapy, our findings suggest that only half of male cancer patients completed the procedure despite referral. Further work is needed to determine barriers to access and increase awareness of fertility preservation prior to chemotherapy.
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.