Fertility among female hodgkin lymphoma survivors attempting pregnancy following ABVD chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine) chemotherapy is infrequently associated with premature amenorrhea, little is known about the success rate of women attempting pregnancy following ABVD. In the present study females treated for HL with ABVD chemotherapy without pelvic radiation therapy (RT) and who were alive without relapse > or =3 years after treatment were identified from a clinical database and screened for inclusion. Using a standardized questionnaire, we determined the pregnancy rate (i.e. time-to-pregnancy, TTP) among survivors who had become pregnant, tried to become pregnant, or who had been sexually active for over 2 months without using contraception at any time following ABVD. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to compare the pregnancy rate among HL survivors to that reported by friend or sibling controls. Thirty-six female HL survivors, who had attempted pregnancy after ABVD treatment, and 29 controls, completed the survey. Eighteen patients (50%) received 2-4 cycles of ABVD, 16 (44%) received 4-6 cycles, and 2 (6%) received >6 cycles. The median TTP among both HL survivors and controls was 2.0 months. The 12-month pregnancy rates were 70% and 75%, respectively. The fertility ratio (FR) for HL survivors versus controls was 0.94 (95%CI = 0.53-1.66; p = 0.84) after adjusting for age and frequency of intercourse (where FR < 1 indicates subfertility). Age at treatment and the number of cycles of chemotherapy were not associated with pregnancy rate among HL survivors. Female HL patients who had survived without recurrence > or =3 years and who had attempted pregnancy after ABVD did not experience significant sub-fertility.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".