Banking sperm is only the first of many decisions for men: What healthcare professionals and men need to know

Abstract

Sperm banking is recommended for all males prior to cancer treatment where there are risks of infertility. Subsequent decisions about monitoring fertility, use of banked sperm or disposal are less well understood, with adverse consequences for men and cost implications. We review the literature around key decision points: Diagnosis of cancer, monitoring fertility, use of banked sperm and sperm disposal. The results suggest that decisions about banking are compromised by concerns to initiate treatment quickly; subsequent decisions about monitoring fertility, use of banked sperm or disposal are coloured by the views of family members, men’s failure to understand the longer-term implications and their reluctance to avail themselves of health care generally. Methodological limitations of current research include low response rates, increased focus on germ cell cancers and a lack of research outside North America. There is evidence that men and oncologists could use sperm banks more “wisely”. Lack of longitudinal work means it is not possible to determine the long-term consequences of banking for men’s general health and well-being, or identify barriers to fertility monitoring or disposal. We argue that sperm banking should be considered as a series of decisions, all involving implications for fertility, contraception and social and psychological adjustment to cancer.

Keywords::

• cancer
• cryopreservation
• male fertility
• sperm banks

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Sarah Danson, Mathew Tomlinson and James Lawford Davies for comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Declaration of interest: This paper was supported by funding from Cancer Research-UK to C Eiser and A Pacey (C481/A8141).