ArticleWorld journal of oncology2025
Patterns, Predictors, and Prognostic Implication of Treatment-Related Amenorrhea in Patients With Breast Cancer.
Article in World journal of oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Recovery of ovarian function after chemotherapy in premenopausal women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Treatment-related amenorrhea (TRA) is a common side effect of treatment in premenopausal patients with breast cancer, with important consequences for patient counseling and management. Its occurrence and potential influence on survival outcomes remain active areas of investigation. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and prognostic significance of TRA in patients with breast cancer. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Patients were interviewed during and after chemotherapy to assess their menstrual status. Sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment data of patients were also collected. TRA was classified into early amenorrhea (EA) and late amenorrhea (LA) based on the duration of amenorrhea. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify risk factors of EA and LA. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards analyses were used to investigate the impact of EA and LA on 3-year overall survival (OS). Results: There were 81 patients who were eligible for the final analysis. Of these subjects, 14 (17.3%) developed no amenorrhea, 67 (82.7%) developed EA, and 45 (55.6%) developed LA. We did not find any significant independent risk factor for EA. Age > 45 years (odds ratio (OR): 4.00; confidence interval (CI): 1.23 - 13.01; P = 0.021) and the usage of hormonal therapy (OR: 4.96; CI: 1.58 - 15.53; P = 0.006) independently significantly increase the risk of LA, whereas a metastatic disease status decreased the risk (OR: 0.20; CI: 0.04 - 0.90; P = 0.036). Both EA (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.262, CI: 0.105 - 0.653; P = 0.002) and LA (HR = 0.234, CI: 0.091 - 0.604; P = 0.001) were associated with an improved 3-year OS rate. Conclusions: Age > 45 years and the usage of hormonal therapy are risk factors for LA, while metastatic disease was associated with a decreased risk. Both EA and LA had a significant association with favorable 3-year OS. These findings enable clinicians to provide personalized guidance, tailor treatment strategies, and improve the outcomes of premenopausal patients with breast cancer. Standardization of how TRA is defined and assessed in future studies is essential to improve comparability and enhance the understanding of its clinical implications.
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.