Paradoxical risk of reduced fertility after exposure of prepubertal mice to vincristine or cyclophosphamide at low gonadotoxic doses in humans

Summary of the ISFP congress, Brussels, 10-12 November, 2022

The 7th International Congress of the ISFP was held in Brussels in November 2022. Hundreds of attendees from all over the world had the rare opportunity to hear the most distinguished leaders discuss and debate the latest advances in the field. Participants were also able to attend workshops under the guidance of skilled practitioners. Numerous topics were considered, including a recap on fertility preservation approaches in cancer and benign pathologies and a section on male factor infertility. Other aspects covered were in vitro maturation and poor responders, the impact of chemotherapy on the ovary, and future perspectives. Participants had the chance to listen to a symposium on fertility preservation techniques, and finally, a keynote lecture on fertility preservation in gynecological cancers brought this prominent and highly influential event to a close.

The impact of vincristine on testicular development and function in childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

Increasing childhood cancer survival rates in recent decades have led to an increased focus on fertility as a long-term complication of cancer treatment. Male childhood cancer survivors often face compromised testicular function as a late effect of chemotherapy exposure, with no well-established options to prevent such damage and subsequent infertility. Despite vincristine being considered to be associated with low-gonadotoxic potential, in prepubertal rodents, it was recently shown to result in morphological alterations of the testis and in severely impaired fertility.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of vincristine-containing regimens on human prepubertal testis with reference to testicular function and fertility in adulthood.

SEARCH METHODS

The systematic search of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, and the study was registered with PROSPERO. PubMed and Scopus were searched for articles published in English between 01 January 1900 and 05 March 2021, with the search including 'chemotherapy', 'vincristine', 'prepubertal', 'testis', 'spermatogenesis' and related terms. Abstracts and full-text articles were screened and selected for, providing they met the inclusion criteria (≤12 years at treatment, exposure to vincristine-containing regimens and long-term fertility outcomes). Additional studies were identified via bibliography screening. Bias evaluation across included studies was conducted using the ROBINS-I tool, subdivided into assessment for confounding, participant selection, intervention classification, missing data, outcome measurements and selection of reported results.

OUTCOMES

Our initial search identified 288 articles of which 24 (8%; n = 7134 males) met all inclusion criteria. Control groups were included for 9/24 (38%) studies and 4/24 (17%) studies provided sub-analysis of the relative gonadotoxicity of vincristine-based agents. Primary outcome measures were: fertility and parenthood; semen analysis (World Health Organization criteria); and hormonal function and testicular volume. For the studies that performed vincristine sub-analysis, none reported negative associations with vincristine for the potential of siring a pregnancy, including the largest (n = 6224; hazard ratio = 0.56) controlled study. For semen analysis, no significant difference versus healthy controls was illustrated for mitotic inhibitors (including vincristine) following sub-analysis in one study (n = 143). For hormone analysis, a single study did not find significant impacts on spermatogenesis attributed to vincristine based on levels of FSH and semen analysis, which meant that its administration was unlikely to be responsible for the diminished testicular reserve; however, most of the studies were based on low numbers of patients receiving vincristine-containing chemotherapy. Analysis of bias demonstrated that studies which included vincristine exposure sub-analysis had a lower risk of bias when compared with cohorts which did not.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

In contrast to recent findings in rodent studies, the limited number of clinical studies do not indicate gonadotoxic effects of vincristine following prepubertal exposure. However, given the relative lack of data from studies with vincristine sub-analysis, experimental studies involving vincristine exposure using human testicular tissues are warranted. Results from such studies could better inform paediatric cancer patients about their future fertility and eligibility for fertility preservation before initiation of treatment.

Achievement of complete in vitro spermatogenesis in testicular tissues from prepubertal mice exposed to mono- or polychemotherapy

The assessment of the impact of chemotherapies on in vitro spermatogenesis in experimental models is required before considering the application of this fertility restoration strategy to prepubertal boys who received these treatments before testicular tissue cryopreservation. The present work investigated the effects of exposure of prepubertal mice to mono- (vincristine or cyclophosphamide) and polychemotherapy (a combination of vincristine and cyclophosphamide) on the first wave of in vitro spermatogenesis. When testicular tissue exposed to monochemotherapy was preserved, polychemotherapy led to severe alterations of the seminiferous epithelium and increased apoptosis in prepubertal testes prior in vitro maturation, suggesting a potential additive gonadotoxic effect. These alterations were also found in the testicular tissues of polychemotherapy-treated mice after 30 days of organotypic culture and were associated with a reduction in the germ cell/Sertoli cell ratio. The different treatments neither altered the ability of spermatogonia to differentiate in vitro into spermatozoa nor the yield of in vitro spermatogenesis. However, more spermatozoa with morphological abnormalities and fragmented DNA were produced after administration of polychemotherapy. This work therefore shows for the first time the possibility to achieve a complete in vitro spermatogenesis after an in vivo exposure of mice to a mono- or polychemotherapy before meiotic entry.

Testicular Tissue Banking for Fertility Preservation in Young Boys: Which Patients Should Be Included?

Due to the growing number of young patients at risk of germ cell loss, there is a need to preserve spermatogonial stem cells for patients who are not able to bank spermatozoa. Worldwide, more and more clinics are implementing testicular tissue (TT) banking programs, making it a novel, yet indispensable, discipline in the field of fertility preservation. Previously, TT cryopreservation was predominantly offered to young cancer patients before starting gonadotoxic chemo- or radiotherapy. Nowadays, most centers also bank TT from patients with non-malignant conditions who need gonadotoxic conditioning therapy prior to hematopoietic stem cell (HSCT) or bone marrow transplantation (BMT). Additionally, some centers include patients who suffer from genetic or developmental disorders associated with prepubertal germ cell loss or patients who already had a previous round of chemo- or radiotherapy. It is important to note that the surgical removal of TT is an invasive procedure. Moreover, TT cryopreservation is still considered experimental as restoration methods are not yet clinically available. For this reason, TT banking should preferably only be offered to patients who are at significant risk of becoming infertile. In our view, TT cryopreservation is recommended for young cancer patients in need of high-risk chemo- and/or radiotherapy, regardless of previous low-risk treatment. Likewise, TT banking is advised for patients with non-malignant disorders such as sickle cell disease, beta-thalassemia, and bone marrow failure, who need high-risk conditioning therapy before HSCT/BMT. TT retrieval during orchidopexy is also proposed for patients with bilateral cryptorchidism. Since patients with a medium- to low-risk treatment generally maintain their fertility, TT banking is not advised for this group. Also for Klinefelter patients, TT banking is not recommended as it does not give better outcomes than a testicular sperm extraction later in life.