ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Evaluating Trends in Fertility Counseling among Reproductive-Age Patients with Breast Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. 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.
- Counseling and use of surrogacy among cancer survivors (CUSACS).Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Access to Fertility Preservation Counselling for Young Women with Haematological Malignancies: Incidence-Adjusted Trends from the Italian PreFerIta Network (2015-2023).Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Increasing awareness of and referral to support services in advanced breast cancer: a global expert review and call-to-action for 2025-2035 (Goal 7).Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTreatment-related infertility remains a paramount concern for young breast cancer patients. While emphasis on oncofertility is increasing, provision of fertility preservation remains suboptimal. This study evaluated oncofertility counseling (OC) and referral patterns to identify barriers to fertility preservation in this population.
methodsA single-institution retrospective analysis was performed of women aged 40 years and younger with breast cancer from 2014 to 2024. Patient demographics, tumor and treatment characteristics, OC, referral to a reproductive endocrinologist (REI), and childbearing were evaluated.
resultsOf 145 patients, 80 (55.2%) received OC, while 65 (44.8%) did not. Of those who received OC, 98.7% were counseled by their oncologist, compared with 23.4% who were counseled by their breast surgeon. Twenty-five women (31.7%) who received OC were referred to an REI, and 7 (29.2%) achieved childbearing. Patients who received OC were younger (35 vs. 38 years; p < 0.001) and nulliparous (45.0% vs. 18.5%; p = 0.001). Patients with advanced disease and who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to receive OC (both p < 0.05). There was no difference in disease recurrence or survival between patients who received OC or referral to REI (p > 0.05).
conclusionOC is disproportionately provided to younger, nulliparous patients with advanced disease; however, all young breast cancer patients can benefit from OC, given the impact of cytotoxic and endocrine therapies on reproductive health. Breast surgeons' early role in the care of breast cancer patients offers an underutilized opportunity for OC. All providers should be prepared to discuss the impact of patients' diagnoses on fertility to maximize patient education and access to fertility preservation.
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.