Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort

Progress in oncological treatment has led to an improved long-term survival of young male cancer patients over the last decades. However, standard cancer treatments frequently implicate fertility-damaging potential. Cryopreservation of sperm is the current standard option to preserve patient’s ferti...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Nadine Lackamp, Ina Wilkemeyer, Ivan Jelas, Ulrich Keller, Lars Bullinger, Sebastian Stintzing, Philipp le Coutre
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:	sperm cryopreservation cancer fertility preservation assisted reproduction techniques (ART) chemotherapy natural fertility Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/83cf22e890bc4526981cd6064cef9428
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:83cf22e890bc4526981cd6064cef9428
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:83cf22e890bc4526981cd6064cef94282021-11-05T08:23:01ZSurvey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort2234-943X10.3389/fonc.2021.772809https://doaj.org/article/83cf22e890bc4526981cd6064cef94282021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2021.772809/fullhttps://doaj.org/toc/2234-943XProgress in oncological treatment has led to an improved long-term survival of young male cancer patients over the last decades. However, standard cancer treatments frequently implicate fertility-damaging potential. Cryopreservation of sperm is the current standard option to preserve patient’s fertility after treatment, yet long-term data on usage and reproductive experiences is still limited. Natural fertility after treatment and especially in relation to the type of treatment has been poorly analyzed so far. Therefore, we performed a retrospective survey including male patients with an indication for gonadotoxic treatment who cryopreserved reproductive material at our institution between 1994 and 2017. Study questionnaires regarding treatment, material usage, and reproductive outcomes were sent to eligible patients. Additionally, semen analyses of study participants from the time of cryopreservation were evaluated. A total of 99 patients were included in the study. Respondents’ median age was 38.0 years. Most frequent diagnoses were testicular cancer (29.3%) and lymphoma (26.3%). A further 8.1% suffered from autoimmune diseases. Testicular cancer patients had a significantly lower pre-treatment median sperm concentration (18.0 million/ml) compared to non-testicular cancer patients (54.2 million/ml). Until November 2020, the determined sperm usage and cumulative live-birth rate per couple were 17.2% and 58.8%, respectively. Most sperm users received treatments with high (40.0%) or intermediate (33.3%) gonadotoxic potential. 20.7% of all patients reported to had fathered at least one naturally conceived child after treatment, this being the case especially if they had been treated with less or potentially gonadotoxic therapies. In conclusion, our findings emphasize the importance of sperm cryopreservation in the context of male fertility preservation. Furthermore, they indicate that the gonadotoxic potential of patients’ treatments could represent a predictive factor for sperm usage.Nadine LackampIna WilkemeyerIvan JelasUlrich KellerLars BullingerSebastian StintzingPhilipp le CoutreFrontiers Media S.A.articlesperm cryopreservationcancerfertility preservationassisted reproduction techniques (ART)chemotherapynatural fertilityNeoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogensRC254-282ENFrontiers in Oncology, Vol 11 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	sperm cryopreservation cancer fertility preservation assisted reproduction techniques (ART) chemotherapy natural fertility Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282
spellingShingle	sperm cryopreservation cancer fertility preservation assisted reproduction techniques (ART) chemotherapy natural fertility Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282 Nadine Lackamp Ina Wilkemeyer Ivan Jelas Ulrich Keller Lars Bullinger Sebastian Stintzing Philipp le Coutre Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort
description	Progress in oncological treatment has led to an improved long-term survival of young male cancer patients over the last decades. However, standard cancer treatments frequently implicate fertility-damaging potential. Cryopreservation of sperm is the current standard option to preserve patient’s fertility after treatment, yet long-term data on usage and reproductive experiences is still limited. Natural fertility after treatment and especially in relation to the type of treatment has been poorly analyzed so far. Therefore, we performed a retrospective survey including male patients with an indication for gonadotoxic treatment who cryopreserved reproductive material at our institution between 1994 and 2017. Study questionnaires regarding treatment, material usage, and reproductive outcomes were sent to eligible patients. Additionally, semen analyses of study participants from the time of cryopreservation were evaluated. A total of 99 patients were included in the study. Respondents’ median age was 38.0 years. Most frequent diagnoses were testicular cancer (29.3%) and lymphoma (26.3%). A further 8.1% suffered from autoimmune diseases. Testicular cancer patients had a significantly lower pre-treatment median sperm concentration (18.0 million/ml) compared to non-testicular cancer patients (54.2 million/ml). Until November 2020, the determined sperm usage and cumulative live-birth rate per couple were 17.2% and 58.8%, respectively. Most sperm users received treatments with high (40.0%) or intermediate (33.3%) gonadotoxic potential. 20.7% of all patients reported to had fathered at least one naturally conceived child after treatment, this being the case especially if they had been treated with less or potentially gonadotoxic therapies. In conclusion, our findings emphasize the importance of sperm cryopreservation in the context of male fertility preservation. Furthermore, they indicate that the gonadotoxic potential of patients’ treatments could represent a predictive factor for sperm usage.
format	article
author	Nadine Lackamp Ina Wilkemeyer Ivan Jelas Ulrich Keller Lars Bullinger Sebastian Stintzing Philipp le Coutre
author_facet	Nadine Lackamp Ina Wilkemeyer Ivan Jelas Ulrich Keller Lars Bullinger Sebastian Stintzing Philipp le Coutre
author_sort	Nadine Lackamp
title	Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort
title_short	Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort
title_full	Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort
title_fullStr	Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort
title_full_unstemmed	Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort
title_sort	survey of long-term experiences of sperm cryopreservation in oncological and non-oncological patients: usage and reproductive outcomes of a large monocentric cohort
publisher	Frontiers Media S.A.
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/83cf22e890bc4526981cd6064cef9428
work_keys_str_mv	AT nadinelackamp surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort AT inawilkemeyer surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort AT ivanjelas surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort AT ulrichkeller surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort AT larsbullinger surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort AT sebastianstintzing surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort AT philipplecoutre surveyoflongtermexperiencesofspermcryopreservationinoncologicalandnononcologicalpatientsusageandreproductiveoutcomesofalargemonocentriccohort
_version_	1718444479731466240

Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort

Ejemplares similares