ReviewJournal of gynecologic oncology2025
Navigating the future of fertility preservation: advanced predictive strategies for treatment outcomes of endometrial atypical hyperplasia and carcinoma.
Review in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the decreasing age of onset and the postponement of childbearing, there is a growing number of patients with endometrial carcinoma (EC) and endometrial atypical hyperplasia (EAH) seeking fertility-sparing treatments. Progestogen-based therapy serves as the principal conservative approach for EC. However, the variability in treatment outcomes hampers the potential for delivering more tailored therapies in clinical practice. To better guide the treatment of patients with fertility preservation needs, we conducted a comprehensive review of existing literature to explore factors related to molecular classification, biomarkers and artificial intelligence (AI) technology that may predict fertility-sparing treatment outcomes, we also looked ahead to future research directions in this field. The pathology before and after treatment is the primary basis for assessing the effectiveness of fertility-sparing treatment for EC and EAH. However, it is challenging to predict the therapeutic outcomes based on the pathological morphology of the initial diagnosis. Traditional immunohistochemical markers, such as estrogen and progesterone receptors, are also very limited in predicting therapeutic response. In recent years, the prognosis of fertility-sparing treatment has also been considered to be correlated with the molecular classification and gene mutation markers of EC. However, there are currently few direct clinical studies available, and our focus will be on reviewing these studies and assessing their applicability. In addition, there are some studies utilizing AI to predict the molecular classification, genes and therapeutic response of EC. The integration of these features will aid in the development of advanced predictive strategies for fertility-sparing treatment of EC and EAH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.