PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 8, 2025Obstetrics and Gynecology3 citations

Fertility-Sparing Treatments in Patient With Gynecologic Cancers

View Full Paper
COChien OhRKRosanne M. Kho

Key Points

  • To analyze clinical guidelines on fertility-sparing treatments for reproductive-aged patients with gynecologic cancers.
  • Compared 28 clinical guidelines on fertility-sparing management of various cancers.
  • Reviewed diagnostic workup, eligibility thresholds, and surgical approaches.
  • Searched for consensus and discrepancies in recommendations among guidelines.
  • Broad agreement for fertility-sparing treatments in low-stage, low-risk gynecologic cancers.
  • High guideline quality often relied on limited evidence or expert opinion.
  • Inconsistency in recommendations for higher-stage diseases and rare tumor types.

Abstract

Fertility preservation is a critical consideration in the care of reproductive-aged patients with gynecologic cancers, yet referral to reproductive specialists remains low, indicating a gap between guidance and practice. We compared 28 clinical guidelines that addressed fertility-sparing management of endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancers, and reviewed diagnostic workup, eligibility thresholds, surgical approaches, and surveillance protocols. Recommendations were synthesized into stage-specific pathways to delineate areas of consensus, highlight discrepancies, and map evidence gaps. There is broad agreement across multiple independent guidelines to support fertility-sparing treatment for carefully selected patients with: grade 1, stage IA endometrioid endometrial carcinoma; stage IA1–IB1 cervical tumors measuring less than 2 cm without high-risk features; and borderline ovarian tumors and most malignant germ cell tumors. Recommendations for higher stage disease and uncommon histologies, however, diverge and remain inconsistent. Overall guideline quality was moderate to high but frequently relied on limited evidence or expert opinion outside early-stage, low-risk conditions. Synthesizing current guidance clarifies areas where practice can be standardized and prospective data are needed. Embedding routine fertility counseling and referral into standardized pathways is an important step to improve uptake while maintaining oncologic safety and preserving fertility potential.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Oh et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69362f7f4fa91c937236e581https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000006141
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Window of Opportunity: Rate of Referral to Infertility Providers among Reproductive-Age Women with Newly Diagnosed Gynecologic Cancers2024 · 7 citations
  2. 2SEOM–GEICO clinical guideline on epithelial ovarian cancer (2023)2024 · 15 citations
  3. 3Ovarian Aging and Fertility2025 · 6 citations
  4. 4Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology 2022 guidelines for uterine cervical neoplasm treatment2023 · 41 citations
  5. 5Practice Bulletin No. 1492015 · 237 citations