Literature DB >> 28976795

Prevalence and Predictors of Sperm Banking in Adolescents Newly Diagnosed With Cancer: Examination of Adolescent, Parent, and Provider Factors Influencing Fertility Preservation Outcomes.

James L Klosky1, Fang Wang1, Kathryn M Russell1, Hui Zhang1, Jessica S Flynn1, Lu Huang1, Karen Wasilewski-Masker1, Wendy Landier1, Marcia Leonard1, Karen H Albritton1, Abha A Gupta1, Jacqueline Casillas1, Paul Colte1, William H Kutteh1, Leslie R Schover1.   

Abstract

Purpose To estimate the prevalence of sperm banking among adolescent males newly diagnosed with cancer and to identify factors associated with banking outcomes. Patients and Methods A prospective, single-group, observational study design was used to test the contribution of sociodemographic, medical, psychological/health belief, communication, and developmental factors to fertility preservation outcomes. At-risk adolescent males (N = 146; age 13.00 to 21.99 years; Tanner stage ≥ 3), their parents, and medical providers from eight leading pediatric oncology centers across the United States and Canada completed self-report questionnaires within 1 week of treatment initiation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for specified banking outcomes (collection attempt v no attempt and successful completion of banking v no banking). Results Among adolescents (mean age, 16.49 years; standard deviation, 2.02 years), 53.4% (78 of 146) made a collection attempt, with 43.8% (64 of 146) successfully banking sperm (82.1% of attempters). The overall attempt model revealed adolescent consultation with a fertility specialist (OR, 29.96; 95% CI, 2.48 to 361.41; P = .007), parent recommendation to bank (OR, 12.30; 95% CI, 2.01 to 75.94; P = .007), and higher Tanner stage (OR, 5.42; 95% CI, 1.75 to 16.78; P = .003) were associated with an increased likelihood of a collection attempt. Adolescent history of masturbation (OR, 5.99; 95% CI, 1.25 to 28.50; P = .025), banking self-efficacy (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.45; P = .012), and parent (OR, 4.62; 95% CI, 1.46 to 14.73; P = .010) or medical team (OR, 4.26; 95% CI, 1.45 to 12.43; P = .008) recommendation to bank were associated with increased likelihood of sperm banking completion. Conclusion Although findings suggest that banking is underutilized, modifiable adolescent, parent, and provider factors associated with banking outcomes were identified and should be targeted in future intervention efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28976795      PMCID: PMC5707206          DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.4767

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  47 in total

1.  Factors affecting sperm banking for adolescent cancer patients.

Authors:  G Bahadur; H Spoudeas; M C Davies; D Ralph
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Sperm cryopreservation before cancer chemotherapy helps in the emotional battle against cancer.

Authors:  Kazuo Saito; Kotaro Suzuki; Akira Iwasaki; Yasushi Yumura; Yoshinobu Kubota
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-08-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 3.  Evidence-Based Recommendations for Fertility Preservation Options for Inclusion in Treatment Protocols for Pediatric and Adolescent Patients Diagnosed With Cancer.

Authors:  Alison Fernbach; Barbara Lockart; Cheryl L Armus; Lisa M Bashore; Jennifer Levine; Leah Kroon; Genevieve Sylvain; Cheryl Rodgers
Journal:  J Pediatr Oncol Nurs       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 1.636

4.  Having children after cancer. A pilot survey of survivors' attitudes and experiences.

Authors:  L R Schover; L A Rybicki; B A Martin; K A Bringelsen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1999-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Survivors of childhood cancer in the United States: prevalence and burden of morbidity.

Authors:  Siobhan M Phillips; Lynne S Padgett; Wendy M Leisenring; Kayla K Stratton; Ken Bishop; Kevin R Krull; Catherine M Alfano; Todd M Gibson; Janet S de Moor; Danielle Blanch Hartigan; Gregory T Armstrong; Leslie L Robison; Julia H Rowland; Kevin C Oeffinger; Angela B Mariotto
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  The efficacy of the health belief model for predicting condom usage and risky sexual practices in university students.

Authors:  C M Lollis; E H Johnson; M H Antoni
Journal:  AIDS Educ Prev       Date:  1997-12

7.  Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent.

Authors:  Jerome Friedman; Trevor Hastie; Rob Tibshirani
Journal:  J Stat Softw       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 6.440

8.  High risk of infertility and long term gonadal damage in males treated with high dose cyclophosphamide for sarcoma during childhood.

Authors:  L B Kenney; M R Laufer; F D Grant; H Grier; L Diller
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2001-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Having children after surviving cancer in childhood or adolescence - results of a Berlin survey.

Authors:  S Reinmuth; A-K Liebeskind; L Wickmann; A Bockelbrink; T Keil; G Henze; A Borgmann
Journal:  Klin Padiatr       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.349

10.  Optimizing the process of fertility preservation in pediatric female cancer patients - a multidisciplinary program.

Authors:  Irit Ben-Aharon; R Abir; G Perl; J Stein; G Gilad; H Toledano; S Elitzur; G Avrahami; A Ben-Haroush; G Oron; E Freud; D Kravarusic; M Ben-Arush; G Herzel; I Yaniv; S M Stemmer; B Fisch; S Ash
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  18 in total

1.  "We Can Always Adopt": Perspectives of Adolescent and Young Adult Males with Cancer and Their Family on Alternatives to Biological Parenthood.

Authors:  Taylor L Morgan; Braedon P Young; Keagan G Lipak; Vicky Lehmann; James Klosky; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Cynthia A Gerhardt; Leena Nahata
Journal:  J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 2.223

2.  Conducting reproductive research during a new childhood cancer diagnosis: ethical considerations and impact on participants.

Authors:  Leena Nahata; Taylor L Morgan; Keagan G Lipak; Olivia E Clark; Nicholas D Yeager; Sarah H O'Brien; Stacy Whiteside; Anthony N Audino; Cynthia A Gerhardt; Gwendolyn P Quinn
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Association of Impaired Spermatogenesis With the Use of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma.

Authors:  Jason M Scovell; Karl Benz; Iryna Samarska; Taylor P Kohn; Jody E Hooper; Andres Matoso; Amin S Herati
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 31.777

4.  The intersection of financial toxicity and family building in young adult cancer survivors.

Authors:  Bridgette Thom; Catherine Benedict; Danielle N Friedman; Joanne F Kelvin
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 6.860

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

Authors:  Jessica S Flynn; Kathryn M Russell; Vicky Lehmann; Lauren A-M Schenck; James L Klosky
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 3.167

6.  Higher reproductive concerns associated with fertility consultation: a cross-sectional study of young adult male cancer survivors.

Authors:  Julia H Drizin; Brian W Whitcomb; Tung-Chin Hsieh; Jessica R Gorman
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Perceptions of participating in family-centered fertility research among adolescent and young adult males newly diagnosed with cancer: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Leena Nahata; Taylor L Morgan; Keagan G Lipak; Olivia E Clark; Nicholas D Yeager; Sarah H O'Brien; Stacy Whiteside; Anthony Audino; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Cynthia A Gerhardt
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 3.167

8.  Accurate understanding of infertility risk among families of adolescent males newly diagnosed with cancer.

Authors:  Vicky Lehmann; Jessica S Flynn; Rebecca H Foster; Kathryn M Russell; James L Klosky
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 3.894

Review 9.  Oncofertility: Meeting the Fertility Goals of Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer.

Authors:  H Irene Su; Yuton Tony Lee; Ronald Barr
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.360

10.  Psychosocial benefits of sperm banking might outweigh costs.

Authors:  Leena Nahata; Gwendolyn P Quinn
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 14.432

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.