ArticleCancer medicine2024
Outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery of early-stage ovarian cancer: A nationwide population-based study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Clinical case: successful birth as a result of the transfer of an embryo at the blastocyst stage from an oocyte obtained from a tumoral ovary using the OTO-IVM method.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery of early-stage ovarian cancer: A nationwide population-based study.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFertility-sparing surgery (FSS) is an alternative choice of young patients who have not completed their family planning and still have fertility needs. The aims of this study were to compare the outcomes of early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients undergoing FSS and radical comprehensive staging surgery (RCS), and the suitability of FSS.
methodsA total of 1297 patients aged between 20 and 44 years with newly diagnosed early-stage EOC were recruited from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database between 2009 and 2017. Site-specific surgery codes were used to distinguish patients in FSS group or RCS group. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test and Cox regression model.
resultsThere were 401 and 896 patients in FSS and RCS group. Patients in FSS group were with younger age and mostly had Stage I disease. In contrast, patients in RCS group were older. There were more Stage II, high-grade (Grade 3) disease, and adjuvant chemotherapy in RCS group. Stage and tumor grade were two independent factors correlating with CSS and the type of surgery showed no effect on CSS (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.66-1.77, p = 0.73) in multivariable analysis. In multivariable analysis, the clear cell carcinoma group who underwent FSS demonstrated better CSS compared to those in the RCS group (HR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.06-0.82, p = 0.04). A total of 17 women who underwent FSS developed second malignancies of the uterine corpus or contralateral ovary.
conclusionFSS can be a safe alternative procedure in selected young patients of Stage I EOC who have fertility desire. Endometrial biopsy before or during FSS and regular surveillance to detect recurrence are mandatory for ovarian cancer patients undergoing FSS.
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.