Assisted reproductive technology in young BRCA carriers with a pregnancy after breast cancer: An international cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Very limited data exist on assisted reproductive technology (ART) use in BRCA1/2 carriers conceiving after breast cancer. This study aimed to investigate the safety of ART to achieve a pregnancy after breast cancer in BRCA1/2 carriers. METHODS: This is an international, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study including BRCA1/2 carriers with a pregnancy after prior breast cancer diagnosis at ≤ 40 years of age between 2000 and 2020. Outcomes were compared between young BRCA1/2 carriers who conceived using ART and those who conceived spontaneously. RESULTS: Among 543 BRCA1/2 carriers with a pregnancy after breast cancer, 436 conceived spontaneously and 107 using ART. Of 107 pregnancies achieved with ART, 45 (42.1 %) were obtained using oocytes/embryo cryopreserved at diagnosis, 33 (30.8 %) after controlled ovarian stimulation for in-vitro-fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection or ovulation induction for intrauterine insemination or planned intercourse after anticancer treatments, 21 (19.6 %) after oocyte donation, while for 8 (7.5 %) patients type of ART was missing. Compared to patients in the no-ART group, those in the ART group were older at the time of conception, had more frequently hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and a longer median time from cancer diagnosis to conception. At a median follow-up of 5.2 years after conception, no apparent detrimental effect of ART on disease-free survival was observed (adjusted HR=0.72, 95 % CI 0.39-1.34). CONCLUSION: In young BRCA1/2 carriers with a pregnancy after breast cancer, ART use did not appear to be associated with increased risk of DFS events.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".