The magic bullet? You decide.

In my daily fertility practice, while trying to help couples to conceive, I’ve noticed a trend lately. Patients are less interested in using high levels of “assisted reproduction” to have children. In particular, they would like to avoid in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), the Cadillac of all techniques. Even before they meet me, they have decided against it. Not all couples, mind you, but certainly more than before.

Briefly, IVF-ICSI is a busy month for women. It involves stimulating them with daily, injectable hormones during the first half of the menstrual cycle to generate more eggs than normal within the ovary. Ovulation of eggs is induced by injection of a second hormone, which is closely followed by egg retrieval using needle aspiration under anesthesia. Retrieved eggs are then stripped of their cell coats in a dish and a single sperm is individually injected into each egg by an embryologist. The criteria for choosing sperm are: good looking and hopefully moving. Eggs then become embryos in a Petri dish and are transferred back to the female reproductive tract three to five days later, depending on how they develop. Extra embryos can be frozen for future use. A pregnancy test is obtained two weeks later.

As a male fertility specialist whose practice mantra has been “treat the male, cure the disease,” I find this trend very interesting. Assisted reproduction is almost always an option for couples, but I have spent a good deal of time publishing research showing that classic male infertility treatments such as varicocele repair and vasectomy reversal are very cost-effective ways to conceive compared to more expensive techniques like IVF-ICSI. On the other hand, these techniques are the only option for many men with azoospermia, or the absence of ejaculated sperm, and I am glad that it exists for this.

I wrote down what patients said when I asked them why IVF-ICSI is not an option on the table for them and here are some of the responses:

• “It seems pretty invasive and unnatural.”
• “Isn’t it relatively new?” (IVF is 32 years old, ICSI is 18 years old)
• “Who selects the sperm?” (Since it is not God or Darwin)
• “Wasn’t ICSI developed as an experimental mistake?” (Yes)
• “How do we know that those are our eggs and our sperm? (Rare)
• “It’s only a single try at having children.” (Maybe two)
• “Isn’t there an issue with higher birth defects and syndromes in babies” (Very likely)
• “Are our children going to be infertile?” (Unknown)
• “We’d prefer to have the hope of trying every month at home.”
• “IVF-ICSI is too expensive”

What I think is happening is that as IVF-ICSI is being offered to consumers more often than ever (currently 1-2% of U.S. babies are born from these techniques), patients are becoming better educated about the technology and are making more informed, personal choices. My gut also says that good, old-fashioned sex has a strong following among infertile couples as a way to conceive. In the words of Woody Allen in Annie, “that was the most fun I’ve ever had without laughing.”

Heirlooms for the species.

As a living, breathing being on this good earth, we tend to take things for granted. The ability to have offspring can be one of them. That is, until the day that a serious medical condition like cancer rears it ugly head and puts childbearing at risk. In addition to the sterilizing effect of cancer treatments, the mad rush to treat the disease often marginalizes efforts to preserve fertility. Fire all the canons and check for collateral damage later.

Fertility preservation seeks to protect men, adolescents and children from a common, serious and impactful side effect of cancer treatment: infertility. The goal of fertility restoration is to empower patients who are cured and potentially infertile to bear children. These related fields have burgeoned recently because medical care is now shifting from curing cancer to improving the quality of life among survivors. And without a doubt, for many, fertility is a key quality of life issue at some point. Thankfully, exciting new methods of restoring fertility have already been developed and even newer technologies are under study.

Classic techniques for fertility preservation in men include gonadal shielding and sperm banking. Gonadal shielding uses lead-based devices to protect the testicles from being struck directly by sterilizing radiation treatment. Sperm banking is the process of freezing healthy sperm before cancer treatment begins for later use to conceive. But there is more. For patients who are too young to bank sperm, for those who have precious little time to bank sperm, or for those who have no ejaculated sperm to bank, testis sperm retrieval by biopsy (TESE) or needle aspiration (TESA) for banking is now possible before cancer treatment. In fact, in some cases of testis cancer, it is possible to remove only the cancerous nodule instead of the whole testis, or to freeze sperm from the testicle after it is surgically removed. These are now routine ways to preserve fertility in men.

Fertility restoration for men has also seen real advances lately. Sperm “mapping” is an innovation that I developed for men who survive cancer treatment but have no sperm in the ejaculate. It non-invasively and non-surgically deciphers whether there are small numbers of mature sperm in the testis, too few to get into the ejaculate, but usable nonetheless. In men who sustain nerve injury from cancer surgery and who are unable to ejaculate, a special medical instrument can produce an ejaculate for fertility purposes in a process termed electroejaculation. Techniques such as these are valuable tools to help men deemed “sterile” after cancer treatment to become fathers.

One of the most exciting areas of fertility restoration involves stem cell technology. Yes, the “promise” that we have all heard about stem cells curing disease will likely find its way into the fertility field as well. In pre-pubertal boys with cancer, ejaculated sperm is not present. Despite this, it may be possible to freeze the early stem cells from the testicles of boys before sterilizing treatment. After thawing, these “adult” stem cells may later be used to create sperm after further growth in a Petri dish or after transplantation back into the same individual. Also on the horizon is our ability to take skin cells from a sterile man, convert them into an embryonic-like stem cells and then “drive” these cells to become mature sperm in a dish–a true “artificial testicle.” So, with the belief that hope can cure misery, the world of science has taken fertility research from science fiction to reality. Not convinced? Stay tuned!