Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39926120›Full record

ReviewRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2025

Menopause in gynecologic cancer survivors: evidence for decision-making.

Agnaldo Lopes da Silva, Mariana Seabra Leite Praça, Rívia Mara Lamaita, Eduardo Batista Cândido, Lucia Helena Simões da Costa Paiva, José Maria Soares, Renato Moretti Marques, Maria Celeste Osório Wender

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Menopausal hormone therapy and comprehensive postmenopausal care in gynecologic cancer survivors: A position paper from the FIGO Committee on Women at Menopausal Age.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Review
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.

Agnaldo Lopes da SilvaUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8486-7861
Mariana Seabra Leite PraçaUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4424-0543
Rívia Mara LamaitaUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9389-3316
Eduardo Batista CândidoUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo HorizonteMG Brazil Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6496-6654
Lucia Helena Simões da Costa PaivaUniversidade Estadual de Campinas CampinasSP Brazil Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4796-2429
José Maria SoaresFaculdade de Medicina Universidade de São Paulo São PauloSP Brazil Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4233-1775
Renato Moretti MarquesHospital Israelita Albert Einstein São PauloSP Brazil Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9997-6668
Maria Celeste Osório WenderUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9085-4605

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

• Although advances in the treatment of gynecological cancer have improved survival rates, they may also increase the effects of induced menopause, especially in young women. • Cancer treatments such as oophorectomy, gonadotoxic chemotherapy, and pelvic radiotherapy can induce menopause. • Gonadotoxic chemotherapy, especially alkylating-containing regimens, often damages ovarian function and may result in permanent menopause. • Pelvic radiotherapy usually results in permanent loss of ovarian function unless ovarian transposition is performed. • Diagnosing menopause after cancer is challenging, and common diagnostic criteria such as 12 months or more of amenorrhea and elevated follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels are not entirely reliable, since ovarian function may return years after treatment. • A multidisciplinary approach to post-cancer menopause is essential and should include an appropriate line of care, since hormone replacement therapy after treatment of gynecologic malignancy is controversial.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsClinical Decision-MakingGenital Neoplasms, FemaleMenopauseFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID39926120
PMCPMC11805534

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.