Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38765513›Full record

ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2024

Fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Brazil: perceptions and attitudes of infertility specialists.

Renata Lack Ranniger, Rívia Mara Lamaita, Bárbara Flecha D'Abreu, Mariana Rodrigues Tolentino, Eduardo Batista Cândido, Warne Pedro Andrade, Angélica Nogueira-Rodrigues, Agnaldo Lopes Silva-Filho

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Renata Lack RannigerUniversidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho" Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Department of Gynecology BotucatuSP Brazil Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Mastology, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Universidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho", Botucatu, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0813-9634
Rívia Mara LamaitaUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9389-3316
Bárbara Flecha D'AbreuUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5223-8051
Mariana Rodrigues TolentinoMater Dei Department of Assisted Reproduction Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Department of Assisted Reproduction, Mater Dei, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5770-1350
Eduardo Batista CândidoUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6496-6654
Warne Pedro AndradeUniversidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho" Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Department of Gynecology BotucatuSP Brazil Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Mastology, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Universidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho", Botucatu, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1056-6169
Angélica Nogueira-RodriguesUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Department of Internal Medicine Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Department of Internal Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3405-8310
Agnaldo Lopes Silva-FilhoUniversidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho" Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Department of Gynecology BotucatuSP Brazil Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Mastology, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Universidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho", Botucatu, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8486-7861

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Fertility preservation is a priority in oncology for female cancer patients. However, there is a lack of communication between infertility specialists and oncologists. This study aimed to evaluate infertility specialists' perceptions and experiences regarding fertility preservation. Methods: Conduct an online survey to profile infertility specialists. Participants were infertility affiliated with the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations (FEBRASGO). The specialists received an online survey, which response rate were 30.9%, most of whom were in southern and southeastern. The survey consisted on 14 questions about the infertility specialists' location, techniques in clinical practice, treatment successful rate, patients idea, etc. Results: The average experience in human reproduction were 15.5 ± 10.2 years (mean ± standard deviation, range 1-40). Among reproductive-aged female cancer patients recommended for fertility preservation, 60.3 ± 28.8% (range 10-100%) underwent preservation procedures. Main barriers were cost (41%), oncologists' knowledge or acceptance (35%) and accessibility (9%). Most infertility specialists (58%) considered 40 years the limit for fertility preservation. Leukemia, lymphoma, breast and ovarian cancers were prioritized for fertility preservation, while lung, thyroid, gastric, and brain cancers were less relevant. Conclusion: This is the first Brazilian study about infertility specialists' perceptions on oncology patients access to fertility preservation. These patients primarily receive treatment in the public health system, while infertility specialists mainly work in the private healthcare. This healthcare mode is currently fragmented, but integrating these experts is enhancing patient access to fertility preservation. Studies on this topic are still warranted.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelFertility PreservationInfertility, FemaleNeoplasmsAdultBrazilCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesattitudesFertilityFertility preservationGynecologistsHealth knowledgeNeoplasmsOncologistsOocyte retrievalpracticeReproductionSurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID38765513
PMCPMC11075391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.