(179) Incidence of Fertility Preservation Procedures in Prepubertal and Pubertal Individuals with Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Fertility Preservation (FP) for children and adolescents with cancer is underutilized. In prepubertal individuals, ovarian and testicular tissue can be frozen; however, this is still considered largely experimental. Objective Identify trends of FP in prepubertal individuals in the United States. Methods We performed a retrospective study of prepubertal children with cancer identified through the Pediatric Health Information System from 2011 to 2020. Children who underwent a testicular or ovarian biopsy were included. Any patients with testicular or ovarian malignancy, or other diagnoses which may have required a gonadal biopsy were excluded. Results A total of 418 boys under 13 and 333 girls under 12 who underwent a gonadal biopsy were identified. There was a total of 66929 new cancer diagnoses in girls and 86001 new cancer diagnoses in boys during this time. The most common cancer diagnosis was hematologic in both boys (50.96%) and girls (36.64%). A concurrent procedure at time of gonadal biopsy was performed in 84% of boys and 62% of girls, with line insertion being the most common. The only predictive variable of receiving a gonadal biopsy was increasing year. Overall, only 0.04% of children had a gonadal biopsy for FP during this time period. Conclusions Gonadal biopsy rates have increased in prepubertal children with cancer, presumably for FP. While recent international guidelines support FP in this group, our findings highlight the need to establish protocols and tracking for FP procedures in the US. Disclosure No
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".