Evaluation of Anti-Mullerian Hormone Levels, Antral Follicle Counts, and Mean Ovarian Volumes in Chemotherapy-Induced Amenorrhea among Breast Cancer Patients: A Prospective Clinical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estradiol (E2), a follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), AMH, and inhibin B levels, along with AFC and MOV, are used to determine ovarian reserve in pre-menopausal women. Studies have shown that AMH levels are more sensitive than those of E2, FSH, and inhibin B and that AFC and MOV can be used to evaluate ovarian reserve. AMH, AFC, and MOV measurements were performed before and after adjuvant SC in 3-month periods for one year. Patients were classified as experiencing chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea (CIA) if they did not have menstrual cycles for a period of six months or longer following the conclusion of their chemotherapy treatment. We aimed to evaluate the factors affecting chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and the performance of baseline measurements of AMH, AFC, and MOV to predict chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea. The effects of different chemotherapy regimens on the AMH level, AFC, and MOV in CIA patients were investigated. Seventy-one patients were eligible for this study, and the median age was 38 years (range: 23–45). The median follow-up was 37 months (range: 20–51), and CIA developed in 62% of the patients. The AMH level and AFC were significantly decreased one year after SC (p < 0.0001), whereas MOV was not (p = 0.507). AMH levels before chemotherapy (median: 1.520 vs. 0.755, p = 0.001) and at the end of the first year (median: 0.073 vs. 0.010, p = 0.030) and pre-treatment AFC (median: 12 vs. 4.50, p = 0.026) were lower in patients with CIA compared to those without CIA. The AMH levels before SC were the most valuable and earliest factor for predicting CIA development. In addition, there was no difference between the chemotherapy regimens (including or not including taxane) in terms of CIA development.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".