Sexual function and fertility preservation in testicular cancer survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testicular cancer is a common cancer among reproductive age men, with the necessary treatment options having varying impacts on fertility and sexual function. Treatment begins with orchiectomy and is often followed by a combination of chemotherapy, radiation, and/or retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, which have different effects on spermatogenesis, gonadotropin levels, and ejaculation. Alkylating agents such as cisplatin are commonly used for testicular cancer and are amongst the most spermatotoxic chemotherapeutic agents. Radiation poses gonadotoxic effects despite gonadal shielding due to a scatter effect. Suprahilar and bilateral retroperitoneal lymph node dissections can cause ejaculatory dysfunction. Options to preserve fertility vary by pubertal status. While the standard recommendation for post pubertal patients is cryopreservation, prepubertal patients rely on experimental protocols for cryopreservation of germ cells with stem cell capabilities, with the hope that these cells will one day be stimulated to produce sperm. These topics are reviewed to give insight into current literature around fertility in testicular cancer survivorship and determine best possible practices in fertility preservation among patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".