MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4283745817 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deac107.070

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

2022· article· en· W4283745817 sur OpenAlexaff
Artak Tadevosyan, F Bissonnette, Armand Zini, Isaac Jacques Kadoch

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSperm and Testicular Function
Établissements canadiensMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSemenSpermInfertilityAssisted reproductive technologyFertilityMedicineSemen analysisGynecologyAbstinenceLive birthRetrospective cohort studyDemographyObstetricsBiologyAndrologyPregnancyPopulationInternal medicineGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,706
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,493

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,300
Écart entre enseignants0,241 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetSperm and Testicular FunctionTravaux en français237 207