Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on Chinese assisted reproductive technology institutions and human sperm banks: reflections in the post-pandemic era.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has been the most serious public health emergency encountered in modern assisted reproductive technology (ART) development. In order to identify lessons learned, this study reviews the effect of the pandemic on ART institutions and human sperm banks in China, and summarizes the experiences and reflections of Chinese scholars post-pandemic era. METHODS: This review is based on multiple consensus statements on the COVID-19 pandemic issued by Chinese experts as well as current national regulations and principles in ART institutions and human sperm banks to document the current situation of ART services in China, describe the impact of the pandemic on these services, and offer Chinese reflections on worrying issues in the post-pandemic era. RESULTS: China reached one million ART cycles in 2016, and there are currently 540 ART medical institutions and 27 human sperm banks, with 540 licensed for AIH, 91 for AID, 415 for conventional IVF and ICSI and 85 for PGT. Of these, only 4 institutions carry out 10,000 cycles or more annually, and the proportion of institutions with less than 1,000 cycles has reached 66%, which means that a considerable number of ART institutions are still not saturated. As a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, 63.6% of ART providers and 95.5% of human sperm banks suspended operations. By the end of May 2020, China, as an early country affected by the pandemic achieved a national resumption rate of ART medical services of 99.2% and that of human sperm banks of 100.0%. Reports from the first and largest human sperm bank in China showed that qualification, semen concentration and sperm viability rates measured at primary screening have significantly decreased post-pandemic. Much like in other countries, Chinese experts developed a consensus on prevention and control measures during the pandemic. In principle, all ART activities should be suspended during acute phases of infection spread. Chinese scholars highlight that attention should be paid to young patients with fertility requirements during and after COVID-19, and emphasize the importance of fertility evaluation and clinical intervention. In addition, couples should be reminded that during ART treatment, disinfectants should not be used excessively to minimize risks of damaging the reproductive system, gametes and zygotes. At the same time, timely and reasonable guidance for tackling negative emotions from stress response is needed to provide reassurance and to avoid irrational fear and excessive stress. Seminal parameters should be re-examined 2 months after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, and ART treatments recommenced if no abnormalities are detected. CONCLUSIONS: Given the growing frequency of outbreaks of global infectious diseases in recent years, ART institutions and human sperm banks should pay attention to improving their prevention and control capabilities. To a certain extent, decisions and measures adopted in China during COVID-19 pandemic are worthy of recognition and acceptance. Chinese scholars have discussed, proactively responded to and understand the key issues surrounding ART development during the pandemic with the aim of contributing to the substantial progress and healthy development of ART services in the world.

Sperm banking before gonadotoxic treatment: is it worth the effort?

We aimed to compare the sperm quality in different cancer types and benign diseases before gonadotoxic treatment, and assess the usage rate of cryopreserved sperm for assisted reproductive treatment (ART). This retrospective study was conducted at two university clinics between January 2008 and July 2018. A total of 545 patients suffering from cancer or benign diseases were included in the study. The pretreatment sperm analyses were based on the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Patients with testicular malignancy (TM) showed a significantly lower sperm count (median [interquartile range]: 18.7 × 106 [5.3 × 106-43.0 × 106] ml-1; P = 0.03) as well as total sperm count (42.4 × 106 [13.3 × 106-108.5 × 106] per ejaculate; P = 0.007) compared to other malignant and benign diseases. In addition, patients with nonseminomatous TM showed the lowest sperm count (14.3 × 106 [6.0 × 106-29.9 × 106] ml-1, vs seminomas: 16.5 × 106 [4.6 × 106-20.3 × 106] ml-1; P = 0.001). With reference to the WHO 2010 guidelines, approximately 48.0% of the patients with TM and 23.0% with hematological malignancies (HM) had oligozoospermia. During the observation period, only 29 patients (5.3%) used their frozen sperms for 48 ART cycles, resulting in 15 clinical pregnancies and 10 live births. The sperm quality varies with the type of underlying disease, with TM and HM patients showing the lowest sperm counts. Due to the observed low usage rate of cryopreserved sperm, further patient interviews and sperm analyses should be included in the routine oncologic protocols to avoid unnecessary storage expenses. However, sperm banking is worth the effort as it provides hope for men who cannot reproduce naturally after gonadotoxic treatment.

Variables affecting long-term usage rate of sperm samples cryopreserved for fertility preservation in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous 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. OBJECTIVES: To shed more light on the potential benefits of cryopreservation programmes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men 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. RESULTS: The 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. CONCLUSION: The usage rate of frozen sperm in cancer patient is low, even extending the duration of follow-up.

[Efficiency of sperm donation: An analysis of 440 qualified sperm donors in Chongqing Human Sperm Bank].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficiency of sperm donation by qualified donors and provide some experience for improving the success rate of sperm donation in human sperm banks. METHODS: This study included 440 qualified sperm donors in Chongqing Human Sperm Bank from April 2015 to June 2019. We analyzed the general information about the donors, the causes of failed sperm donation and the results of semen bacterial culture. RESULTS: Among the 440 qualified donors, 11 (2.50%) did not donate sperm, 28 (6.36%) were excluded because of frequent failures to donate, 397 (90.2%) completed all the procedures of sperm donation, and 4 (0.91%) failed to undergo HIV test six months after the last donation. The 397 donors that fulfilled the procedures donated sperm for 2 965 person-times, of which 2 159 (72.8%) were qualified and 806 (27.2%) unqualified for substandard semen quality (n = 684 ï¼»23.1%ï¼½), semen volume <2 ml (n = 33 ï¼»1.11%ï¼½), abnormal seminal liquefaction (n = 14 ï¼»0.47%ï¼½), or positive semen bacterial culture (n = 75 ï¼»2.53%ï¼½). CONCLUSIONS: Substandard semen quality is the main factor affecting the efficiency of sperm donation. The staff of the human sperm bank should pay adequate attention to the first reception of and communication with the donors, dispel their worries, enhance health care guidance, prevent pollution and improve the success rate of sperm donation.

Parent recommendation to bank sperm among at-risk adolescent and young adult males with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) males newly diagnosed with cancer are often faced with making quick decisions about whether to cryopreserve ("bank") sperm prior to treatment initiation. Given that parental influence is crucial among young patients, the present study examines the prevalence of and factors associated with parent recommendation to bank sperm. PROCEDURE: Parents of 13- to 21-year-old males newly diagnosed with cancer and at risk for infertility secondary to impending gonadotoxic treatment completed questionnaires typically within one week of treatment initiation. Medical and sociodemographic data, communication factors, and psychological factors were considered in a logistic regression model of parent report of parental recommendation to bank sperm (yes/no). RESULTS: Surveys from 138 parents (70.3% female) of 117 AYA males (mean age = 16.1 years, SD = 2.0) were analyzed. Over half of parents recommended banking to their sons (N = 82; 59.4%). Parents who received a provider recommendation to bank sperm (odds ratio [OR] = 18.44, 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.20-81.01, P < 0.001) or who believed in the benefits of banking (OR = 1.22, 95% CI, 1.02-1.47, P = 0.03) were significantly more likely to recommend sperm banking. CONCLUSIONS: Given parents' role in influencing sperm banking outcomes, provider recommendation and promotion of banking benefits may influence parents and empower initiation of these sensitive discussions with their sons. Utilization of this approach should yield beneficial outcomes regardless of the banking decision.

Fertility counseling and sperm banking among adolescents and adults treated for cancer with curative intent in a developing country.

PURPOSE: In developing countries, a higher percentage of patients develop cancer at a younger age. Cancer survival rates have significantly improved, highlighting the importance of survivorship programs that address late complications related to cancer itself or its treatment. The purpose of this study is to estimate the prevalence of fertility counseling and sperm banking and related factors among at-risk males newly diagnosed with cancer and planning to receive a potentially curative anticancer therapy. METHODS: Medical records and hospital database of young male patients with newly diagnosed cancers and planned to start chemotherapy were reviewed for fertility counseling and sperm cryopreservation. Additionally, a self-administered questionnaire was utilized. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients, mean age 32.9 (range: 18-53) years, were included. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma 59 (31.7%), leukemia 48 (25.8%), and Hodgkin's lymphoma 26 (14.0%) were the most common tumors encountered. A total of 129 (75.0%) respondents received fertility counseling prior to their treatment, and this rate was higher among patients with early-stage disease (82.4% vs. 58.1%, p = 0.038). However, sperm banking was performed by 33.1% of the whole study group but was significantly higher among single patients (53.4% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001), those who had no children (51.8% vs. 14.3%, p < 0.001), and among highly educated patients (47.6% vs. 17.1%, p = 0.001). Patients failed to do sperm banking because they were not informed about the risk of infertility (26.2%) or service availability (25.4%). Fear of treatment delay was a reason in 20.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Fertility counseling and sperm banking among cancer patients are not optimal. Many patients failed to do sperm banking because of avoidable reasons. Better communication and patients' education will probably improve the utilization of this vital service.

Current status of sperm banking for young cancer patients in Japanese nationwide survey.

This study aimed to ascertain the current status of Japanese sperm banking for young cancer patients. During 2015, we mailed the directors of 695 institutes where sperm cryopreservation might be performed with questionnaires requesting information on the number of patients, age, precryopreservation chemotherapy, semen analyses results and diagnoses, cryopreservation success rate, and causes of unsuccessful cryopreservation. Of these 695 institutes, 92 had cryopreserved sperm before chemotherapy within the study period. In all, 820 cancer patients (237 testicular, 383 hematological, 46 bone and soft tissue, 20 brain, and 134 other malignancy) consulted the responding institutes for sperm cryopreservation. Except for testicular tumor, the number of patients whose sperm was preserved before cancer treatment was low compared to that of young cancer patients. Approximately 20% of patients with malignancies other than testicular tumor underwent chemotherapy before cryopreservation. The success rate of cryopreservation in hematological malignancy was 82.5%, significantly lower than that of both the testicular cancer (93.6%) and other malignancy groups (95.6%) (P < 0.05). The primary reasons for preservation failure were azoospermia and poor semen quality. Patients with hematological malignancies had a higher rate of unsuccessful cryopreservation compared to those in other groups, possibly due to the large number of patients requesting sperm cryopreservation after chemotherapy induction. In Japan, information regarding sperm banking prior to cancer treatment appears to be lacking. Information regarding sperm preservation before chemotherapy should be provided to all Japanese oncologists.

Decline of semen quality among Chinese sperm bank donors within 7 years (2008-2014).

Semen from 5210 sperm bank donors was analyzed and trends in semen quality were evaluated at Shandong Human Sperm Bank between 2008 and 2014. After 2-7 days of abstinence, semen samples were collected. Measurements of semen volume, sperm concentration, sperm forward motility, and total sperm count were performed. There were significant declining trends in semen volume, sperm concentration, sperm forward motility, and total sperm count. Our results indicate that the quality of semen in this cohort of sperm donors had decreased during the study period.

Review and follow-up of patients using a regional sperm cryopreservation service: ensuring that resources are targeted to those patients most in need.

Are all patients undergoing chemotherapy for long-term sperm banking at risk of permanent sterility? Male fertility is generally lower in men with cancer and all patient groups are at risk of azoospermia. Careful management is required to ensure that samples are not stored for excessively long periods should they not be required. A retrospective analysis of 1688 patient records and prospective recall of patients for semen testing were performed. Pre-therapy fertility was compared with a group of pre-vasectomy patients as a comparator. Those who fail to bank spermatozoa, rates of disposal of samples and the utilization in assisted reproduction were also examined. Sperm quality was poorest in testicular cancer (TC) patients followed by those with Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) prior to treatment. Post-therapy data were available in 376 patients (42%). Sperm number was lowest (and azoospermia highest at 77%) in patients with HL treated with regimens other than adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD). Non-HL NHL and leukaemic patients had similarly high rates of azoospermia at 46 and 55%. HL patients treated with ABVD (11%) and TC patients (9.7%) had the lowest rates of azoospermia. Azoospermia was seen in every treatment group except for TC patients receiving carboplatin. Only 45 patients used their samples in ART (4.5%) in 10 years. Little is known about the fertility status of the patients not coming forward for follow-up testing, those conceiving naturally, those with no intention of conceiving and some which may have psychological reasons for not attending. In conclusion, virtually all patients undergoing chemotherapy are potentially at risk of temporary or permanent infertility. However, as uptake and utilization of stored material remain low, sperm banks should be carefully managed to ensure that resources are targeted to the patients most in need.

Utilization of sperm banking and barriers to its use in testicular cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Testicular cancer is the most common carcinoma in 20- to 40-year-old men. Eighty percent of patients with metastases achieve disease-free status with chemotherapy with or without surgical resection. Standard first-line chemotherapy is bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) for three to four courses or etoposide and cisplatin (EP) for four courses. Forty percent of patients receiving chemotherapy will have permanently reduced sperm counts impairing future fertility. Sperm banking is an effective method of maintaining fertility. This retrospective study was performed to assess utilization and results from sperm banking, as well as the barriers to its use. METHODS: Patients 18 and older who had received chemotherapy were given a five-item questionnaire on follow-up visit. This questionnaire included a mix of quantitative and qualitative questions. RESULTS: Two hundred patients enrolled in the study, and all 200 completed the questionnaire. Of the two hundred, 139 (70 %) patients chose not to bank sperm; 71 (51 %) of those were not interested, 25 (18 %) declined due to desire to start chemotherapy, 24 (17 %) were not offered, 12 (9 %) declined due to cost, and 7 (5 %) answered "other." The average age at cancer diagnosis of patients who banked sperm was 28.4 as opposed to 32.6 for patients who did not (p = 0.003). The percentage of patients that had children before their diagnosis was 21 % in the sperm banking group, and 50 % in the group that did not (p = 0.0002). Sixty-one (30 %) chose to bank sperm; 11 of 61 patients (18 %) utilized the banked sperm; 9 of 11 (82 %) patients that utilized were successful; and 3 of 9 (33 %) successes resulted in multiple gestations. CONCLUSIONS: Sperm banking provides the opportunity for paternity in testicular cancer patients with reduced sperm counts following treatment. However, the majority of these patients chose not to bank sperm or were not offered the opportunity. A range of factors such as time, emotional state, patient age, disease stage, prior children, institutional practices, and cost all influence whether banking is offered to patients and taken up. The authors provide recommendations to help clinicians overcome some of these barriers.

Trends and usage in a London National Health Service Sperm Bank for cancer patients.

Sperm cryopreservation is the only method currently available that offers men with cancer insurance against sterilising iatrogenic treatments. We carried out two cohort and cross-sectional audits to identify trends with sperm cryopreservation referral rates and sample usage rates for men diagnosed with cancer and who banked sperm at The Andrology Laboratory, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College NHS Trust. These retrospective audits revealed that a total of 4362 men with cancer successfully banked sperm between 1976 and 2013. Truncating the dataset to 2009 to allow for lag times between storage and use, the overall sample usage rate for cancer patients was 6.0% with 75 live births. Increased median age at referral influences the cancer profile of men seen at the bank, which is highlighted by a disproportionate rise in the number of men with prostate cancer. Among men who use banked sperm, a large rise in the use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection has occurred over time. The number of patients requiring the service is sharply increasing year on year as are the number of patients who go on to use their sample in assisted conception. The historical use rates of frozen sperm are likely to be significant underestimations of future use.

Semen cryopreservation for men banking for oligospermia, cancers, and other pathologies: prediction of post-thaw outcome using basal semen quality.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate post-thawing sperm parameters in a large series of men cryopreserving for different cancers and oligospermia. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Semen cryopreservation laboratory. PATIENT(S): Six hundred twenty-three patients undergoing semen cryopreservation for cancer or oligospermia who discontinued banking. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Postcryopreservation sperm motility and viability. RESULT(S): In oligospermic men, recovery of motile sperm after cryopreservation was possible in only a few out of the 219 samples cryopreserved for this problem. Similarly, independent of the reason for which cryopreservation was required, if one basal semen parameter fell below the 5th percentile of the World Health Organization reference values, recovery of motile and viable spermatozoa after thawing was low. Among samples cryopreserved for cancer, those with testicular cancer showed the lowest basal semen quality and recovery after thawing. In cases of hematological cancers or other types of cancers, motility recovery was similar to that of non-cancer-related samples. Receiver operating characteristic analyses demonstrate that basal progressive and total motility predict the recovery rate of motile sperm after thawing with high accuracy, sensibility and specificity. CONCLUSION(S): Our study demonstrates the ability of prefreeze semen parameters to predict cryosurvival in terms of sensitivity and precision. Using this information, the clinician could perform appropriate counseling about the future possibilities of fertility for the patient.

The sperm donor programme over 11 years at Newcastle Fertility Centre.

The UK national sperm donor shortage is well known. We aimed to analyse the trends in various aspects of the sperm donor programme at Newcastle Fertility Centre (NFC) between 2000 and 2010. A retrospective review of the assisted conception treatments with donor sperm was performed. A decline in the numbers of donors recruited alongside a declining trend in the number of patients treated with donor sperm and donor insemination (DI) treatment cycles carried out was apparent. There was an accompanying rising trend in donor IVF cycles and in same-sex couples and single women coming for treatment. The transfer of sperm to local peripheral centres ceased during this time and an increasing number of patients imported sperm from overseas commercial sperm banks. A waiting list for treatment was set up in 2007 with a gradual increase in waiting time to 18 months in 2010. Overall, there was a significant change in the sperm donor programme at NFC with fewer donors recruited, fewer patients receiving treatment, increasing sperm import and longer waiting times for treatment over the study period.

Sperm banking for fertility preservation: a 20-year experience.

OBJECTIVE: Sperm banking is an effective method to preserve fertility, but is not universally offered to males facing gonadotoxic treatment in the United States. We compared the disposition and semen parameters of cryopreserved sperm from individuals referred for sperm banking secondary to a cancer diagnosis to those of sperm from men banking for infertility reasons. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study that reviewed 1118 records from males who presented to bank sperm at Washington University between 1991 and 2010. We collected and analyzed demographics, semen parameters, and disposition of banked sperm. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-three men with cancer and 348 banking for infertility reasons attempted sperm cryopreservation in our unit during the specified time period. The most prevalent cancers in our cohort were testicular (32%), lymphoma (25%), and leukemia (11%). Patients with leukemia had the lowest pre-thaw counts and motility. Most cancer patients (57%) who banked elected to use, transfer to another facility, or keep their specimens in storage. The remaining samples were discarded electively (34%) or following death (8%). Overall semen parameters were similar between the cancer and infertility groups, but demographics, ability to bank a sample, azoospermia rates, length of storage, current banking status, and use of banked sperm differed significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of cancer patients who banked survived their cancer and chose to continue storage of banked samples. Cancer patients were more likely than infertility patients to use or continue storage of banked samples. Our study provides evidence that sperm banking is a utilized modality of fertility preservation in patients with a myriad of cancer diagnoses and should be offered to all men facing gonadotoxic therapies. Further work is needed to determine where disparities in access to sperm banking exist to improve the potential for future fertility in these males.

A national study of the provision of oncology sperm banking services among Canadian fertility clinics.

The purpose of this study was to survey the current state of oncology sperm banking services provided by fertility clinics across Canada. A total of 78 Canadian fertility facilities were invited to complete a questionnaire related to the availability, accessibility, affordability and utilisation of sperm banking services for cancer patients. The total response rate was 59%, with 20 (69%) in vitro fertilisation clinics and 26 (53%) other fertility centres returning the survey. A total of 24 responding facilities accepted oncology sperm banking referrals. The time frame to book the first banking appointment for 19 (79%) facilities was within 2 days. Inconsistent practice was found regarding the consent process for cancer patients who are of minority age. Eight (33%) facilities did not provide any subsidy and charged a standard banking fee regardless of patients' financial situations. Overall, the utilisation of oncology sperm banking services was low despite its availability and established efficacy, suggesting that Canadian cancer patients are notably underserved. The study has highlighted some important issues for further consideration in improving access to sperm banking services for cancer patients, especially for adolescents. Better collaboration between oncology and reproductive medicine to target healthcare providers would help to improve sperm banking rates.

A cross Canada survey of sperm banking practices in pediatric oncology centers.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors have identified fertility preservation as a major concern. Sperm banking is an established fertility preservation option in pubertal males. We sought to describe current practices in Canadian pediatric oncology programs, and to identify perceived barriers to sperm banking for male adolescents. PROCEDURE: A questionnaire was developed to (1) describe current sperm banking practices and facilities; (2) report on the utilization of sperm banking; and (3) identify barriers to sperm banking and possible solutions to improve current practices. A healthcare professional with an interest in fertility preservation within each institution was approached to participate in the study. RESULTS: Fifteen of 16 institutions participated, 2 have fertility preservation teams. Only one has written guidelines or adolescent focused educational material. Over 2 years, 50/262 (19%) adolescents in 12 institutions successfully banked a specimen. In 11 of these, additional information was available: of 85/172 (49%) adolescents offered the option to bank, 38/85 (45%) subsequently attempted. Reported barriers to sperm banking included the pressure to start therapy and restricted banking hours. Formal education of healthcare providers in fertility preservation practices, provision of financial support for families, and an adolescent focused approach were identified as important initiatives to improve sperm banking. CONCLUSIONS: There is a disparity in current sperm banking practices in Canada and at present, <25% of eligible male adolescents attempt to bank sperm. The development of a fertility preservation team, adolescent-specific guidelines, adolescent friendly sperm banking units, financial support, and improving knowledge translation among professionals and patients may improve the rates of banking.

Sperm banking for male reproductive preservation: a 6-year retrospective multi-centre study in China.

Sperm banking can preserve male fertility effectively, but the current conditions of sperm cryopreservation in China have not been investigated. This retrospective investigation was based on data collected at multiple centres in China from January 2003 to December 2008. The collected data included urogenital history, indication for cryopreservation, semen parameters, use rate, type of assisted reproductive technique (ART) treatment and pregnancy outcome. The study population included 1 548 males who had banked their semen during the study period at one of the clinics indicated above. Approximately 1.9% (30/1 548) of the cryopreserved semen samples were collected from cancer patients; about 88.8% (1 374/1 548) of the patients had banked their semen for ART and 8.6% (134/1 548) had a male infertility disease (such as anejaculation, severe oligozoospermia and obstructive azoospermia). The total use rate of cryopreserved semen was 22.7% (352/1 548), with 119 live births. The cancer group use rate was 6.7% (2/30), with one live birth by intracytoplasmic single sperm injection (ICSI). The ART group use rate was 23.2% (319/1 374), with 106 live births. The reproductive disease group use rate was 23.1% (31/134), with 12 live births. The semen parameters in each category varied; the cancer patient and infertility disease groups had poor semen quality. In vitro fertilization (IVF) and ICSI were the most common ART treatments for cryopreserved sperm. Semen cryopreservation as a salvage method is effective, but in many conditions it is underutilized, especially in cancer patients. Lack of awareness, urgency of cancer treatment and financial constraints are the main causes of the low access rate. The concept of fertility preservation should be popularized to make better use of this medical service in China.

Sperm banking for male cancer patients: social and semen profiles.

PURPOSE: Report the characteristics of cryopreserved semen from a cohort of male cancer patients, attitudes towards cryopreservation and outcomes of semen samples based on a 12-year cryopreservation program. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from 98 male cancer patients whose sperm samples were banked were evaluated. Demographic parameters, semen characteristics, destination of sperm banked samples and questionnaires answered by the patients regarding cryopreservation time were evaluated. RESULTS: The cancer diagnoses were testicle (56.1%), prostate (15.3%), Hodgkin's lymphomas (9.2%), non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (7.1%), leukemia (3.1%) and other malignancies (9.2%). The patients with testicular cancer presented lower sperm concentration (p < 0.001); however, there were no differences with the percentage of normozoospermic patients among cancer type groups (p = 0.185). A shorter time between cancer diagnosis and sperm banking was observed for testicular and prostate cancer patients (p < 0.001). Most of the patients (89.5%) favored sperm banking as a fertility preservation method. CONCLUSIONS: Although less than 20% of banked sperm samples were disposed of, the majority of patients related sperm banking with safe for fertility preservation. Our results show that all male cancer patients of reproductive age facing cancer treatment could be offered sperm banking.