How do men in the United Kingdom decide to dispose of banked sperm following cancer treatment?

Current policy in the UK recommends that men bank sperm prior to cancer treatment, but very few return to use it for reproductive purposes or agree to elective disposal even when their fertility recovers and their families are complete. We assessed the demographic, medical and psychological variables that influence the decision to dispose by contacting men (n = 499) who banked sperm more than five years previously, and asked them to complete questionnaires about their views on sperm banking, fertility and disposal. From 193 responses (38.7% response rate), 19 men (9.8%) requested disposal within four months of completing the questionnaire. Compared with men who wanted their sperm to remain in storage, they were significantly more confident that their fertility had recovered (OR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.05-3.03, p = 0.034), saw fertility monitoring (semen analysis) as less important (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.39-0.94, p = 0.026), held more positive attitudes to disposal (OR = 5.71, 95% CI = 2.89-11.27, p < 0.001), were more likely to have experienced adverse treatment side-effects (OR = 4.37, CI = 1.61-11.85, p = 0.004) and had less desire for children in the future (OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.26-0.64, p < 0.001). Information about men's reasons to dispose of banked sperm may be helpful in devising new strategies to encourage men to engage with sperm banking clinics and make timely decisions about the fate of their samples.

Why don't some men with banked sperm respond to letters about their stored samples?

Abstract Long-term storage of banked sperm, especially when it is not needed, for reproductive purposes, is costly and poses practical problems for sperm banks. For sperm banks to function efficiently, men must understand the implications of unnecessary storage, and make timely decisions about disposal of their own samples. Men who bank sperm prior to cancer treatment are routinely offered follow-up consultations to test their fertility, update consent and, where necessary, expedite referral for Assisted Conception. Yet sperm banks report that men do not respond to letters, suggesting samples are stored needlessly. We conducted semi-structured interviews with six men with a history of not responding to letters, to document reasons for non-response. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis. Men's reasons for not responding are a complex interplay between past, present and future perspectives. In terms of their past, information is important on diagnosis, because men must understand that fertility can change after treatment. Present and future concerns focus on fears of being told fertility has not recovered and being pressured to dispose of banked sperm. The challenge is to devise invitation letters that address men's concerns while offering them tangible benefits and peace of mind.

Identification of a novel Bcl-2-interacting mediator of cell death (Bim) E3 ligase, tripartite motif-containing protein 2 (TRIM2), and its role in rapid ischemic tolerance-induced neuroprotection.

We have previously shown that the cell death-promoting protein Bcl-2-interacting mediator of cell death (Bim) is ubiquitinated and degraded following a neuroprotection-conferring episode of brief ischemia (preconditioning). Here, we identify the E3 ligase that ubiquitinates Bim in this model, using a proteomics approach. Using phosphorylated GST-Bim as bait, we precipitated and identified by mass spectrometry tripartite motif protein 2 (TRIM2), a RING (really interesting new gene) domain-containing protein. The reaction between TRIM2 and Bim was confirmed using co-immunoprecipitation followed by immunoblotting. We show that TRIM2 binds to Bim when it is phosphorylated by p42/p44 MAPK but does not interact with a nonphosphorylatable Bim mutant (3ABim). 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate activation of p42/p44 MAPK drives Bim ubiquitination in mouse embryonic fibroblast cells and is associated with an increased interaction between TRIM2 and Bim. One hour following preconditioning ischemia, the binding of Bim to TRIM2 increased, consistent with the time window of enhanced Bim degradation. Blocking p42/p44 MAPK activation following preconditioning ischemia with U0126 or using the nonphosphorylatable 3ABim reduced the binding between Bim and TRIM2. Immunodepletion of TRIM2 from cell lysates prepared from preconditioned cells reduced Bim ubiquitination. Finally, suppression of TRIM2 expression, using lentivirus transduction of shRNAmir, stabilized Bim protein levels and blocked neuroprotection observed in rapid ischemic tolerance. Taken together, these data support a role for TRIM2 in mediating the p42/p44 MAPK-dependent ubiquitination of Bim in rapid ischemic tolerance.