Fertility Preservation in Postpubertal Males Undergoing Cancer Treatment in a Middle-Income Country: Is it Possible Despite the Barriers?


YILDIRIM Ü. M., KEBUDİ R., Bingöl H. D., Şenol B. K., ZÜLFİKAR O. B.

Turkish Archives of Pediatrics, cilt.59, sa.6, ss.543-546, 2024 (ESCI) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 59 Sayı: 6
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.5152/turkarchpediatr.2024.24101
  • Dergi Adı: Turkish Archives of Pediatrics
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.543-546
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: cancer, Fertility preservation, males, sperm cryopreservation
  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Objective: Increased survival rates in childhood cancer have led to an emphasis on the importance of treatment-related infertility. Fertility preservation methods should be explained to every patient and their families (PaFs) before treatment. Establishing good communication with PaFs is crucial in this regard despite many barriers such as cultural and financial barriers. Routine feasibility of sperm preservation (SP) in adolescent males newly diagnosed with cancer was evaluated after the implementation of reimbursement for the procedure and storage by the national healthcare system. Materials and Methods: Males <18 years of age planned to undergo cancer treatment between 2021 and 2023 were included. Patient and their families were informed by the treating physician about the disease, treatment modality, side effects, the importance of SP, and the method. Information about the purpose and technique of SP was provided to the patient alone in a comfortable environment. Questions from PaFs were answered, and consent was obtained. The procedure and storage cost was covered by the social security institution. Results: Seventeen patients (median age 15) (15 with bone/soft tissue sarcoma, 1 brain tumor, and 1 Hodgkin lymphoma) were included. There were no refusals for SP. Eleven patients were able to provide sperm samples. Of the 6 patients who could not provide sperm, 3 stated embar-rassment, 2 anxiety, and 1 cancer-related pain. Conclusion: Increasing awareness among physicians about the importance of treatment-related infertility, allocating sufficient time to inform PaFs about fertility preservation, and providing information taking into account societal or socio-cultural factors will contribute to preventing treatment-related infertility. Establishing close communication with the Reproductive Health Center (RHC), along with the rapid and cost-free nature of the procedure, enhances success.