ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2024
Analysis of assisted reproductive outcomes for gynecologic cancer survivors: a retrospective study.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 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.
- The impact of previous history of malignant tumors/precancerous lesions on IVF/ICSI outcomes: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Assisted Reproductive Technology in Breast and Gynecologic Malignancies: Cancer Risk, Fertility Preservation, and Post-Treatment Reproductive Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Joint effects of IVF and cancer history on birth outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the reproductive outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART) in gynecologic cancer patients and to assess maternal and neonatal complications.
methodsWomen diagnosed with gynecologic cancer who underwent their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) treatment between 2013 and 2021 at Shanghai Ji Ai Genetics and IVF Institute were included in this study. Infertile women without any history of cancer were matched to the cancer group. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate. Baseline and follow-up data were compared between groups using Student's t-tests for normally distributed variables and with Chi-square test for categorical variables. A propensity score-based patient-matching approach was adopted to ensure comparability between individuals with and without specific cancer type.
resultsA total of 136 patients with a history of gynecologic cancer and 241 healthy infertile controls were included in this study. Endometrial cancer constituted 50.70% of the cases and cervical cancer constituted 34.60% of the cases. The cancer group exhibited significantly shorter duration of stimulation, lower levels of estradiol, lower number of retrieved oocytes, day-3 embryos, and blastocysts compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The cumulative live birth rate of the gynecologic cancer group was significantly lower than that of the control group (36.10% vs. 60.50%, P < 0.001). Maternal and neonatal complications did not significantly differ between the groups (P > 0.05). The endometrial cancer and cervical cancer groups showed significantly lower cumulative live birth rates than their matched controls (38.60% vs. 64.50%, P = 0.011 and 24.20% vs. 68.60%, P < 0.001, respectively).
conclusionsThese findings highlight the decreased occurrence of pregnancy and live birth in female gynecologic cancer patients undergoing ART, particularly in endometrial cancers and cervical cancers. These findings have important implications for counseling and managing gynecologic cancer patients undergoing ART.
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.