ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Fertility Preservation Pathways in Young Women With Breast Cancer: A Single-Center Analysis in a Publicly Funded System.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFertility concerns are central to the care of young women with breast cancer. Cancer treatments and chemotherapeutic regimens may adversely affect reproductive potential. Despite extensive attention to fertility preservation (FP), reported uptake remains low. It remains unclear how patients progress through the fertility preservation process within publicly funded health care systems that reduce financial and access barriers.
methodsKey time points in the patient care sequence were assessed, beginning with the initial oncology or surgical consultation, at which fertility discussion (FD), defined as counseling by an oncologist or breast surgeon, could occur, followed by fertility consultation (FC), defined as consultation with a fertility specialist, and uptake of FP, including oocyte, embryo, or ovarian tissue cryopreservation, but not hormonal ovarian protection.
resultsAmong 248 women, 77.8% had FD, 40.7% underwent FC, and 27.4% proceeded to FP. The largest reduction occurred between the FD and the FC, whereas progression from consultation to preservation remained high. Although women aged 40 years or older and those with two or more children were less likely to proceed to FC and FP, they still represented a measurable proportion of those undergoing preservation.
conclusionFertility discussions were documented for most patients, and progression from FC to FP was high. The overall proportion of women undergoing FP was higher than previously reported in earlier studies. These findings suggest that previously reported low utilization rates may not fully capture patients' interest in FP and may, in part, be attributable to differences in patterns of care delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42649443What 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.