Archive for February, 2010

Good Job Government!

Sunday, February 28th, 2010
The best medicine for man is man...and good government

The best medicine for man is man...and good government

A couple sees a reproductive specialist for infertility. She gets a complete evaluation and he gets a semen analysis checked. It looks like his semen quality is low and they are recommended to pursue in vitro fertilization  (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) to conceive, the highest level of what is termed “assisted reproduction.” They try this at significant expense and it fails. They try again and it fails again. At this point, the man sees a urologist and, after a proper physical examination, he is told that he has a testis mass and is diagnosed with testis cancer.

The point: Male infertility can be a symptom of another medical condition.

The question: What would have happened to this man if they had successfully conceived with IVF-ICSI?

This scenario is not all that uncommon in our field. And it is why I gladly accepted the invitation to go Washington D.C. and consult with the National Institute of Health (NIH) last fall regarding where government research monies should be spent in the future in the field of male reproductive health. At that meeting, I suggested that we start calling infertility a medical disease, just like any other, and get men the medical care that they deserve. I expect several great grant initiatives to stem from this gathering and was honored to have participated in it.

This scenario is also why I am excited to have been more recently invited to join the Medical Advisory Board of the Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Network at the National Institute for Child Health and Diseases (NICHD) at the NIH. The RMN, established in 1989, is a cooperative effort of seven universities and the government and is charged with conducting and publishing high quality clinical research studies in reproductive medicine.  Thankfully, one of the areas of focus is on male infertility. So, I will be taking my “infertility as a disease” mantra to Washington quite a bit this year as I believe scenarios like the case outlined above should never happen in modern medicine.

Your DNA Barcode

Sunday, February 21st, 2010
Can we be DNA barcoded like a soup can in a grocery store?

Can we be DNA barcoded like a soup can in a grocery store?

How many of you would take a blood test to learn exactly how long you will live? How about whether or not you will become demented? Since the Human Genome Project ended, the genes and mutations associated with a vast array of diseases are being discovered daily and it is pretty easy to just put them on “chip” and make them available to the public.

Don’t get me wrong; gene testing already has already improved our lives. Such tests can clarify a diagnosis and better direct care, while others allow families to avoid having children with life-threatening or disabling conditions. They can be used to prevent disease before it happens, as with monitoring and removal of colon growths among those who have a gene for familial polyposis, and can diagnose common iron-storage diseases early enough to treat them and prevent them from becoming fatal. They can also help to positively identify murderers two decades after the crime.

One real problem is that many commercialized gene tests are targeted to healthy people who might be at high risk because of a strong family medical history for a disorder. Unfortunately, because of how complex we are as biological organisms, the tests give only a “probability” for developing the disorder. That means that some people who carry a mutation may never develop the disease. Another limitation is the possibility of laboratory errors. What this means is that the tests are not perfect and could be wrong.

And what happens to your job prospects and health (or life) insurance rates when it is learned through genetic testing that you might develop a significant disease? Well…nothing. Because of the federal GINA Law (Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act) passed in May 2008, insurance companies and employers cannot discriminate on the basis of information derived from genetic tests. So, genetics has now been added to the list of characteristics first embodied by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that states that U.S. employers cannot discriminate according to race, color, national origin, sex, or religion. And this is good.

So, go ahead and take the “23 and Me” “DeCode” or “Navigenics” genomic screens if you so desire. Get to know your DNA barcode. Maybe you will get an idea of what may be around the corner for you. And maybe, just maybe, you will take better care of yourself knowing more about your genes. Just understand that many in the medical community feel that uncertainties surrounding test results, the current lack of available treatment options, the tests’ potential for provoking anxiety and social stigmatization could outweigh the benefits of testing. You know the saying: “Too much information…”

Metabolomics: The Picture of Fatherhood

Sunday, February 7th, 2010
Cellular metabolites: woven together like a rug

Cellular metabolites: woven together like a rug

Call me a nerd, but I have to admit that I am pretty excited about metabolomic technology. Uh, what? Metabolomics is the study of the chemical fingerprints that cells leave behind. It does not look at genes, DNA, RNA or proteins, but is a peek into the products or metabolites that result from all this genetic orchestration. It is a “physiological snapshot” of a living cell.

This past week, we published a study that applies metabolomics to male infertility. If you have been reading this column, you are well aware of my interest in helping sterile men become fathers. Over the last decade, it has become clear that many men with azoospermia (no ejaculated sperm) may have small pockets of sperm in the testicle. The question is how to safely find that sperm without causing undo harm to the testicle. Current methods for evaluating whether sperm are present include somewhat invasive techniques such as testicular biopsy and microdissection and less invasive ones such as FNA Sperm Mapping that I invented 13 years ago. However, as I always say, there is always room for improvement.

Wouldn’t it be nice to find the “pockets” of sperm in the testis through a simple scan and avoid a biopsy? Maybe even a scan that involves no radiation exposure, like an MRI? Well, that is precisely what we have developed in this study.

We showed that magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy can measure metabolic activity in the testis. And given that most metabolic activity in the testis is concentrated on building sperm (remember, normally men produce 1200 sperm/heartbeat!), metabolic measurements in the testis generally reflect sperm production. The study showed that the metabolomic scanning is as accurate as a more invasive testis biopsy in reading several abnormal patterns of sperm production typically associated with infertility. It also showed that testes that contain sperm carry a distinct chemical “signature” that can be distinguished by MR Spectroscopy.

How does it work? Essentially, the scan looks for chemicals in the testis that are the building blocks for sperm production. The theory is if you see a pile of bricks in the yard, then there is a good chance that a house is being built. In the study, phosphocholine was observed as one of the building-block chemicals in the testis. The more there is, the more likely sperm are being made.

Not only that, MR Spectroscopy can evaluate for sperm in as many as 100-200 areas within the testis, significantly increasing the ability to sample for sperm well beyond any of the more invasive techniques commonly used today.

Are we ready to replace a testis biopsy with an MRI scan? Not yet, but give me some time to tweak the system a bit and perform clinical trials comparing it to current approaches. My motivation runs deep, as I know that men would rather have their picture taken than have a surgical procedure to understand whether they can be fathers.