ReviewCureus2026
The Impact of Assisted Reproduction Technology on Breast Cancer Risk for Women With Infertility: Current Insights and Future Perspectives.
Review in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy among women worldwide. Because assisted reproduction technology (ART) commonly involves controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and temporary increases in circulating estradiol and progesterone, its possible effect on long-term breast cancer risk remains an important clinical question. This narrative review, supported by a structured literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from January 2003 to March 2026, summarizes 31 primary observational studies with a cumulative reported sample exceeding 7.1 million participants, with follow-up extending beyond three decades in some cohorts. Most studies found no significant association between ART and breast cancer incidence. Signals of increased risk were reported in selected subgroups, including women undergoing multiple stimulation cycles, women starting treatment at younger or older ages, and some women with prolonged clomiphene citrate (CC) exposure. The review also considers evidence concerning letrozole, postpartum breast cancer risk, tumor subtype, and fertility preservation in women with breast cancer. Overall, the available evidence does not demonstrate a meaningful increase in breast cancer risk attributable to ART itself. However, substantial heterogeneity, the predominance of older treatment protocols, and the lack of long-term incidence data for contemporary letrozole-based treatment limit definitive conclusions. Prospective studies using current ART protocols and long-term, subtype-specific follow-up are needed.
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.