No Sperm Production=Increased Cancer Risk

[jimmyinkedup]

This info is compliments of DR Scally so I cant take any credit but I wanted to pass it along. Its very interesting esp for long term trt patients I would think. It also possibly lends to hcg use being even more prudent, for more important reasosns than we thought. Perhaps even some HMG on occasion wouldnt be a bad idea. Anyay here is relevant study showing low or no sperm production increases cancer risks:

Increased Risk Of Cancer Among Azoospermic Men
http://www.aua2013.org/abstracts/arc...ts.cfm?id=2289

Introduction and Objectives - Infertile men may have a higher risk of cancer than the general population. Given the heterogeneous etiologies of male infertility, it would be useful to define the specific groups of infertile men who are at an increased risk of cancer. This study sought to determine the association between azoospermia and the development of cancer in infertile men.

Methods - A total of 2,238 men were evaluated for infertility at a single andrology clinic in Texas from 1989 to 2009 with complete records. Men were stratified based on azoospermia status. Cancer incidence was determined by data linkage to the Texas Cancer Registry. The incidence of cancer was compared to the incidence in an age-matched sample from men in the general Texas population. We also analyzed the risk of cancer in infertile men with and without azoospermia using a Cox regression model.

Results - Compared to the general Texas population, infertile men had a higher risk of cancer with 29 cases observed compared with 16.7 expected (SIR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.5). When stratifying by azoospermia status, only azoospermic men had a significantly elevated risk of cancer (SIR 2.9, 95% CI 1.4-5.4). Infertile men without azoospermia had a trend toward a higher rate of cancer to the general Texas population (SIR 1.4, 95% CI 0.9-2.2). The Cox regression model revealed that azoospermic men had 2.2 fold higher risk compared to non azoospermic men (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.8) after adjusting for age and year of evaluation.

Conclusions - Men with azoospermia have an increased risk of subsequently developing cancer, suggesting a possible common etiology between azoospermia and cancer development.


------------------------------------------------------------------


Eisenberg ML, Betts P, Herder D, Lamb DJ, Lipshultz LI. Increased risk of cancer among azoospermic men. Fertility and Sterility. Increased risk of cancer among azoospermic men

Objective - To determine whether men with azoospermia are at an elevated risk of developing cancer in the years following an infertility evaluation.

Design - Cohort study.

Setting - United States andrology clinic.

Patient(s) - A total of 2,238 men with complete records were evaluated for infertility at a single andrology clinic in Texas from 1989 to 2009.

Intervention(s) - None.

Main Outcome Measure(s) - Cancer incidence was determined by linkage to the Texas Cancer Registry.

Result(s) - In all, 451 men had azoospermia, and 1,787 were not azoospermic, with a mean age at infertility evaluation of 35.7 years. Compared with the general population, infertile men had a higher risk of cancer, with 29 cases observed compared with 16.7 expected (standardized incidence rate [SIR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2–2.5). When stratifying by azoospermia status, azoospermic men had an elevated risk of cancer (SIR 2.9, 95% CI 1.4–5.4). Infertile men without azoospermia had a trend toward a higher rate of cancer (SIR 1.4, 95% CI 0.9–2.2). The Cox regression model revealed that azoospermic men had 2.2-fold higher cancer risk compared with nonazoospermic men (hazard ratio 2.2, 95% CI 1.0–4.8).

Conclusion(s) - Men with azoospermia have an increased risk of subsequently developing cancer, suggesting a possible common etiology between azoospermia and cancer development. Additional follow-up of azoospermic men after reproductive efforts end may be warranted.

[austinite]

Thank you, Jimmy. Interesting. I'd love to go through the entire study. I'll see if I can find it.

[jimmyinkedup]

Thank you, Jimmy. Interesting. I'd love to go through the entire study. I'll see if I can find it.

That would be grea,t thats all he had and when I couldn't quickly find it I wanted to share what he had so far. Knowing him there will be more studies added. Ill add them here as he does.

[roxer]

Wow, want to show that study to my doc. He knows Dr. Lipshultz and thinks he's the bomb. He saw Dr. Lipshultz's name on the hCG study from the sticky here and is why I got the prescription. This would help ensure I can keep getting it.

[jimmyinkedup]

Wow, want to show that study to my doc. He knows Dr. Lipshultz and thinks he's the bomb. He saw Dr. Lipshultz's name on the hCG study from the sticky here and is why I got the prescription. This would help ensure I can keep getting it.

Nice! Hope it helps you out!

[roxer]

Now if I could only find one that he did supporting hMG. That would complete the cycle.

[jimmyinkedup]

Now if I could only find one that he did supporting hMG. That would complete the cycle.

You could support that. As I said in my post hmg is more effective at raising fsh and increasing spermatogenisis SO you could gather that data and present it to your doc. He should already know it and based on this study see the potential benefit of its use.

[Juced_porkchop]

Interesting. I would wonder what the diet of the men where like that had the sperm/hormonal issues in this study.

interesting though

[HRTstudent]

the link in the original post is broken... it has an ellipsis in the URL.

[Times Roman]

so for us old bulls with vasectomies, we are more at risk for cancer than those without the vasectomy?

[austinite]

the link in the original post is broken... it has an ellipsis in the URL.

Just the same that was posted here... http://www.aua2013.org/abstracts/arc...ts.cfm?id=2289