ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Oncologic Safety of Preoperative Controlled Ovarian Stimulation for Fertility Preservation Among Women with Estrogen Receptor Positive Breast Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- ASO Author Reflections: Can We Preserve Fertility without Compromising Oncologic Outcomes?: Preoperative Oncofertility for ER-Positive Breast Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe oncologic safety of preoperative controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation in women with an in situ estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer is unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes of women with ER+ breast cancer undergoing preoperative COS versus (1) postoperative COS or (2) matched controls not undergoing COS. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a single-institution retrospective cohort study of women with ER+ breast cancer receiving oncofertility counseling who pursued COS from 2014-2024. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). A subcohort of patients who received neoadjuvant systemic therapy was compared with a matched cohort of similar patients with ER+ breast cancer who did not undergo COS. Propensity score matching criteria were age, HER2 receptor status, and clinical stage.
resultsAmong 51 women with ER+ breast cancer undergoing COS, the median follow-up was 5.5 years. 5-year PFS was similar for preoperative COS (n = 32) versus postoperative COS (n = 19): 94.1% (95% CI 65.0-99.2%) versus 93.3% (95% CI 61.3-99.0%), p = 0.73. Patients undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) and preoperative COS (n = 30) experienced a significantly longer time from diagnosis to NST initiation than propensity-score matches who did not undergo COS (48 versus 29.5 days, p < 0.0001), but disease-free survival was similar: 94.1% (95% CI 65.0-99.2%) versus 93.3% (95% CI 75.9-98.3%), p = 0.15.
conclusionsIn this study of women with ER+ breast cancers, preoperative COS was not associated with increased risks of disease progression or death. While COS was associated with a modest delay in NST initiation, PFS was similar to propensity-score matched patients who did not undergo COS. Results support the oncologic safety of COS in the setting of an in situ ER+ tumor and provide much-needed evidence for young women with breast cancer receiving gonadotoxic NST who desire future childbearing during survivorship.
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.