ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2024
Fertility Preservation in the Era of Immuno-Oncology: Lights and Shadows.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncofertility in the Age of HER2 Blockade, Immunotherapy, PARP inhibitors, CDK4/6 inhibitors and Endocrine Treatment: Unanswered Questions in Breast Cancer.Current treatment options in oncology · 2026Review
- Oncofertility in Women with Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Era: A Multidisciplinary Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- From local lesion to multisystem disease: integrated crosstalk among the gut microbiota, immune system, and host metabolism in endometriosis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- A single-institution study evaluating the fertility of young adults with malignancy treated with immunotherapy.The oncologist · 2025Article
- The dual nature of immunotherapy in female reproductive disorders: immune homeostasis and clinical challenges.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- The potential role of exercise in mitigating fertility toxicity associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in cancer patients.The journal of physiological sciences : JPS · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, immuno-oncology has revolutionized the cancer treatment field by harnessing the immune system's power to counteract cancer cells. While this innovative approach holds great promise for improving cancer outcomes, it also raises important considerations related to fertility and reproductive toxicity. In fact, most young females receiving gonadotoxic anti-cancer treatments undergo iatrogenic ovarian exhaustion, resulting in a permanent illness that precludes the vocation of motherhood as a natural female sexual identity. Although commonly used, oocyte cryopreservation for future in vitro fertilization and even ovarian cortex transplantation are considered unsafe procedures in cancer patients due to their oncogenic risks; whereas, ovarian stem cells might support neo-oogenesis, providing a novel stemness model of regenerative medicine for future fertility preservation programs in oncology. Recent scientific evidence has postulated that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) might in some way reduce fertility by inducing either primary or secondary hypogonadism, whose incidence and mechanisms are not yet known. Therefore, considering the lack of data, it is currently not possible to define the most suitable FP procedure for young patients who are candidates for ICIs. In this report, we will investigate the few available data concerning the molecular regulation of ICI therapy and their resulting gonadal toxicity, to hypothesize the most suitable fertility preservation strategy for patients receiving these drugs.
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.