A comparison of ejaculated and testicular spermatozoa aneuploidy rates in patients with high sperm DNA damage
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testicular spermatozoa are utilized to achieve pregnancy in couples with severe male factor infertility. Several studies suggest that aneuploidy rates in spermatozoa are elevated at the testicular level in infertile patients compared to ejaculates of normal controls. However, essential data regarding aneuploidy rates between ejaculated and testicular spermatozoa in the same individuals is lacking. The purpose of our study was to compare aneuploidy rates at the testicular and post-testicular level from the same patients with persistently high sperm DNA damage. Ejaculates and testicular biopsies were obtained from eight patients with persistently high DNA damage (>30%). Both ejaculated and testicular samples were analyzed for sperm DNA damage and sperm aneuploidy for chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X, and Y. In addition, semen samples from ten normozoospermic men presenting for fertility evaluation served as a control group. A strong correlation between the alteration of spermatogenesis and chromatin deterioration was observed in our study. In the same individuals, testicular samples showed a significantly lower DNA damage compared to ejaculated spermatozoa (14.9% ± 5.0 vs. 40.6% ± 14.8, P<0.05), but significantly higher aneuploidy rates for the five analyzed chromosomes (12.41% ± 3.7 vs. 5.77% ± 1.2, P<0.05). While testicular spermatozoa appear favourable for ICSI in terms of lower DNA damage, this potential advantage could be offset by the higher aneuploidy rates in testicular spermatozoa.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it