Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32529047›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction open2020

Fertility preservation in boys: recent developments and new insights

E Goossens, K Jahnukainen, R T Mitchell, Amm van Pelt, G Pennings, N Rives, J Poels, C Wyns, S Lane, K A Rodriguez-Wallberg and 14 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
23.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

98 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 193 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Metabolic transitions define spermatogonial stem cell maturation.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors at 13 institutions in 10 countries.

E GoossensBiology of the Testis, Research Laboratory for Reproduction, Genetics and Regenerative Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), 1090 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7601-9689
K JahnukainenNORDFERTIL Research Lab Stockholm, Childhood Cancer Research Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Sweden.
R T MitchellMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, The University of Edinburgh; and the Edinburgh Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, UK.
Amm van PeltCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
G PenningsBioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
N RivesNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA 4308 "Gametogenesis and Gamete Quality", Rouen University Hospital, Biology of Reproduction-CECOS Laboratory, F 76000, Rouen, France.
J PoelsDepartment of Gynecology and Andrology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
C WynsDepartment of Gynecology and Andrology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
S LaneDepartment of Paediatric Oncology and Haematology, Children's Hospital Oxford, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
K A Rodriguez-WallbergDepartment of Oncology Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
A RivesNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA 4308 "Gametogenesis and Gamete Quality", Rouen University Hospital, Biology of Reproduction-CECOS Laboratory, F 76000, Rouen, France.
H Valli-PulaskiMagee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
S SteimerMagee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
S KlieschCentre of Reproductive Medicine and Andrology, Institute of Reproductive and Regenerative Biology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
A BrayeBiology of the Testis, Research Laboratory for Reproduction, Genetics and Regenerative Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
M M AndresReproductive Medicine Unit, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
J MedranoReproductive Medicine Unit, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
L RamosDepartement of Obstetrics and Gynacology, Division Reproductive Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
S G KristensenLaboratory of Reproductive Biology, The Juliane Marie Centre for Women, Children and Reproduction, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Denmark.
C Y AndersenLaboratory of Reproductive Biology, The Juliane Marie Centre for Women, Children and Reproduction, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Denmark.
R BjarnasonChildren's Medical Center, Landspítali University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland and Faculty of Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
K E OrwigMagee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
N NeuhausCentre of Reproductive Medicine and Andrology, Institute of Reproductive and Regenerative Biology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
J B StukenborgNORDFERTIL Research Lab Stockholm, Childhood Cancer Research Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Sweden.
Karolinska University Hospital · SEUniversity of Pittsburgh · USCliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc · BEHospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe · ESNormandie Université · FRUniversity of Münster · DEVrije Universiteit Brussel · BEAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLGhent University · BEOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBRadboud University Nijmegen · NLRoyal Hospital for Children · GBUniversity of Iceland · IS

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N022556/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfertility is an important side effect of treatments used for cancer and other non-malignant conditions in males. This may be due to the loss of spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) and/or altered functionality of testicular somatic cells (e.g. Sertoli cells, Leydig cells). Whereas sperm cryopreservation is the first-line procedure to preserve fertility in post-pubertal males, this option does not exist for prepubertal boys. For patients unable to produce sperm and at high risk of losing their fertility, testicular tissue freezing is now proposed as an alternative experimental option to safeguard their fertility. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: With this review, we aim to provide an update on clinical practices and experimental methods, as well as to describe patient management inclusion strategies used to preserve and restore the fertility of prepubertal boys at high risk of fertility loss. SEARCH

methodsBased on the expertise of the participating centres and a literature search of the progress in clinical practices, patient management strategies and experimental methods used to preserve and restore the fertility of prepubertal boys at high risk of fertility loss were identified. In addition, a survey was conducted amongst European and North American centres/networks that have published papers on their testicular tissue banking activity. OUTCOMES: Since the first publication on murine SSC transplantation in 1994, remarkable progress has been made towards clinical application: cryopreservation protocols for testicular tissue have been developed in animal models and are now offered to patients in clinics as a still experimental procedure. Transplantation methods have been adapted for human testis, and the efficiency and safety of the technique are being evaluated in mouse and primate models. However, important practical, medical and ethical issues must be resolved before fertility restoration can be applied in the clinic.Since the previous survey conducted in 2012, the implementation of testicular tissue cryopreservation as a means to preserve the fertility of prepubertal boys has increased. Data have been collected from 24 co-ordinating centres worldwide, which are actively offering testis tissue cryobanking to safeguard the future fertility of boys. More than 1033 young patients (age range 3 months to 18 years) have already undergone testicular tissue retrieval and storage for fertility preservation. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: The review does not include the data of all reproductive centres worldwide. Other centres might be offering testicular tissue cryopreservation. Therefore, the numbers might be not representative for the entire field in reproductive medicine and biology worldwide. The key ethical issue regarding fertility preservation in prepubertal boys remains the experimental nature of the intervention. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: The revised procedures can be implemented by the multi-disciplinary teams offering and/or developing treatment strategies to preserve the fertility of prepubertal boys who have a high risk of fertility loss. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The work was funded by ESHRE. None of the authors has a conflict of interest.

Indexed as

cryopreservationfertility preservationfertility restorationin vitro spermatogenesisprepubertal boysspermatogonial stem celltesticular tissue freezingtestistransplantation

Identifiers

PMID32529047
PMCPMC7275639
OpenAlexW3032915037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.