Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34804976›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

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

Nadine Lackamp, Ina Wilkemeyer, Ivan Jelas, Ulrich Keller, Lars Bullinger, Sebastian Stintzing, Philipp le Coutre

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nadine LackampDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ina WilkemeyerDepartment of Urology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ivan JelasDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ulrich KellerDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Lars BullingerDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian StintzingDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Philipp le CoutreDepartment of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEFreie Universität Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

assisted reproduction techniques (ART)cancercancer treatmentchemotherapyfertility preservationnatural fertilityreproductive outcomessperm cryopreservation

Identifiers

PMID34804976
PMCPMC8602360
OpenAlexW3213423549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.