P-074 Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid integrity decreases with age and exhibits a rapid decline beyond the age of 35: a retrospective evaluation of 3446 semen samples
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Study question Does advancing paternal age correlate with sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) and is there a cut-off age beyond which sperm DFI increases significantly? Summary answer In infertile men, DFI correlate with advancing paternal age and should be routinely screened starting 35 years of age. What is known already In recent decades, birth rates have substantially increased for men older than 30 years because of advanced age of marriage, rising life expectancy at birth, modern societal norms, and accessibility to assisted reproductive technology (ART). Advanced paternal age has been associated with a decline in conventional semen parameters (volume, concentration, motility, DFI), as well as, reduced fertility, increased risk of miscarriage, structural chromosomal aberrations and complex epigenetic disorders. Several studies have recommended testing sperm DFI in infertile men with advanced age (≥40 years) as it may provide prognostic information for couple attempting natural and assisted reproduction. Study design, size, duration This is a retrospective study of 3446 semen samples from patients under investigation for infertility between April 2016 and January 2022. Semen samples were obtained after 2-3 days of sexual abstinence. Patients were stratified into seven groups based on their age: patients ≤ 29 years (n = 127; 3.7%), 30-35 years (n = 868; 25.2%), 36-39 years (n = 863; 25.0%), 40-45 years (n = 1017, 29.5%), 46-49 years (n = 321; 9.3%), 50-55 years (n = 179, 5.2%) and ≥ 56 years (n = 71, 2.1%). Participants/materials, setting, methods Conventional semen parameters were assessed according to the WHO criteria and DFI was evaluated by TUNEL assay using the APODirect Kit run on BDAccuriC6 flow cytometer. Pearson’s r was used for correlation analysis between sperm concentration, DFI and paternal age. DFI results for each stratified patient group were evaluated by one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey pos-hoc multiple comparison test. Results are presented as the mean±standard error and a P-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Main results and the role of chance In this cohort of men with a mean age of 39.5 years ± 0.1 (range 23-76 years), sperm deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragmentation (21.1% ± 0.2) was positively correlated with age (r = 0.23, p˂0.001). In contrast, the correlation between sperm concentration and age was non-significant (r = 0.03, p = 0.07). Mean DFI in patients segregated into seven age groups were: ≤29 years (15.7% ± 0.8), 30-35 years (17.7% ± 0.4), 36-39 years (19.7% ± 0.4), 40-45 years (22.6% ± 0.4), 46-49 years (26.2% ± 0.9), 50-55 years (26.7% ± 1.2) and ≥ 56 years (31.1% ± 2.0). Mean %DFI level in the 26-29 and 30-35 age groups were non-significantly different (p = 0.65). However, mean %DFI level in the 36-39 age group was significantly higher than in the 26-29 and 30-35 age groups (p = 0.02 and p = 0.03, respectively). Mean %DFI level in the older age groups (40-45, 46-49, 50-55 and ≥ 56 years) were all significantly higher than in the 26-29 or 30-35 age groups (p˂0.001). Using a %DFI threshold level of 16.9%, 46.0% of patients ˂36, 52.2% of men aged 36-39, 60.2% of men aged 40-45, 67.3% of men aged 46-49, 72.6% of men aged 50-55 and 74.7% of men aged ≥56 years had an elevated DFI. Limitations, reasons for caution This is a retrospective analysis that did not account for confounding variables (e.g., clinical diagnosis, gonadotoxin exposure, febrile illness) that may affect conventional sperm parameters and DFI. Wider implications of the findings Our results underline the relationship between paternal age and sperm DFI and demonstrate a significant decline in sperm DNA fragmentation in men over the age of 35 years. The data suggest that we may want to reconsider the age cut-off we traditionally use to define advanced paternal age. Trial registration number No trial registration
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».