ArticleAndrology2021
Variables affecting long-term usage rate of sperm samples cryopreserved for fertility preservation in cancer patients.
Article in Andrology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of immunotherapy and small molecule cancer therapy on fertility: a narrative review of current evidence, mechanisms and future directions.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
- Decreasing barriers to the utilization of cryopreserved sperm in male cancer survivors: an expert review and guide.The oncologist · 2025Review
- Pre-treatment fertility preservation and post-treatment reproduction in long-term survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
- Does a specific age group impact sperm cryobanking efficiency among adolescent and young adult cancer patients?Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2025Article
- Sleeping Spermatozoa: The Symbolism of Gamete Cryopreservation in the Context of Cancer in AYAs.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Fertility Preservation in More than 7000 Male Patients: A Single-Center, Tertiary Care Registry Study over 30 Years.Cancers · 2025Article
- Non-used cryopreserved sperm among oncological patients: extra-long-term follow-up and analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Cryopreserved testicular spermatozoa among patients with azoospermia.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Parenthood in a Swedish prospective cohort of 1,378 adolescents and young adults banking semen for fertility preservation at time of cancer diagnosis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Observational
- Fertility preservation in adult male patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Human reproduction open · 2024Review
- Cryopreservation of Human Spermatozoa: Functional, Molecular and Clinical Aspects.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- An evaluation of the population characteristics, semen quality, and utilization status of autologous sperm cryopreservation and fertility preservation in for 662 patients: a 6-year monocentric retrospective study.Basic and clinical andrology · 2022Article
- Natural and assisted conceptions in male cancer recipients of hematopoietic cell transplantation who stored their semen for fertility preservation.Bone marrow transplantation · 2022Article
- Impact of cancer on cryopreserved sperm quality and fertility: A cohort study.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Impact of a novel family-centered values clarification tool on adolescent sperm banking attempts at the time of a new cancer diagnosis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Fifteen Year Regional Center Experience in Sperm Banking for Cancer Patients: Use and Reproductive Outcomes in Survivors.Cancers · 2021Article
- Survey of Long-Term Experiences of Sperm Cryopreservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Patients: Usage and Reproductive Outcomes of a Large Monocentric Cohort.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Psychosocial benefits of sperm banking might outweigh costs.Nature reviews. Urology · 2020Article
- Update and new advances in fertility preservation and cancer.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansReview
- Are we Only Doing Good? Long-term Psychosocial Effects of Fertility Preservation (or Lack Thereof) on Survivors of Cancer During Adolescence and Young Adulthood.Cancer journal (Sudbury, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious evidence highlighted that only a minority of men who banked their semen before cancer therapies subsequently used their frozen samples. This may question the economical validity of sperm cryopreservation programmes. However, in most contributions, the duration of follow-up was insufficient to draw robust information on the real rate of use.
objectivesTo shed more light on the potential benefits of cryopreservation programmes. MATERIALS AND
methodsMen who cryopreserved their semen in a public hospital for a diagnosis of cancer between 1986 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. The rate of use as well as the possible determinants was investigated.
resultsThe median time of follow-up was 12 [IQR: 7-16] years. One hundred forty-four patients out of 1,524 (9.4%, 95%CI: 8.1%-11.0%) used their frozen samples of whom 64% were azoospermic. The rate of men achieving parenthood with frozen semen was 46%. Predictive factors of use were older age at the time of storage, lower sperm count at the time of storage and a diagnosis of testicular cancer. The impact of this latter factor was also supported by the lower frequency of azoospermia after cancer treatment in these patients. DISCUSSION: Cost-beneficial studies are warranted to assess and possibly improve the economical validity of sperm banking.
conclusionThe usage rate of frozen sperm in cancer patient is low, even extending the duration of follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32814364What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.