Sperm DNA damage: How relevant is it clinically?

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 172-179

  Beshay, Victor E ^a   Bukulmez, Orhan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS   (United States)

Author keywords

assisted reproductive technologies; comet; DNA integrity; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; IVF; sperm chromatin structure assay, sperm DNA fragmentation, TUNEL

Indexed keywords

ALPHA TOCOPHEROL; ASCORBIC ACID; POVIDONE;

AZOOSPERMIA; DENSITY GRADIENT CENTRIFUGATION; DNA FRAGMENTATION; DNA METHYLATION; DNA STRAND BREAKAGE; EJACULATION; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION; MALE INFERTILITY; NICK END LABELING; NIDATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SPERM; SPERMATOGENESIS; SPERMATOZOON MOTILITY; VITAMIN SUPPLEMENTATION;

CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; DNA FRAGMENTATION; FEMALE; GENETIC TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; INFERTILITY; MALE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED; SPERMATOZOA; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84861064817     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: 1473656X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e32835211b5     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. WHO. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
2. Guzick DS, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvak P, et al. Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1388-1393.
3. Haidl G. New WHO-reference limits-revolution or storm in a teapot? Asian J Androl 2011;13:208-211.
4. Niederberger CS. Semen and the curse of cutoffs. J Urol 2011;185:381-382.
5. Avendano C, Oehninger S. DNA fragmentation in morphologically normal spermatozoa: how much should we be concerned in the ICSI era? J Androl 2011;32:356-363. This article suggested that the presence of morphologically normal sperm with fragmented DNA does not correlate with other sperm parameters. The authors suggested that, in order to have any prognostic value, DNA fragmentation testing should be performed in morphologically normal sperm population rather than in total sperm population in infertile men. The article includes a detailed review on the topic as well.
6. Saleh RA, Agarwal A, Nelson DR, et al. Increased sperm nuclear DNA damage in normozoospermic infertile men: a prospective study. Fertil Steril 2002;78:313-318.
7. Erenpreiss J, Spano M, Erenpreisa J, et al. Sperm chromatin structure and male fertility: biological and clinical aspects. Asian J Androl 2006;8:11-29.
8. Carrell DT, Liu L. Altered protamine 2 expression is uncommon in donors of known fertility, but common among men with poor fertilizing capacity, and may reflect other abnormalities of spermiogenesis. J Androl 2001;22:604-610.
9. Saleh RA, Agarwal A, Sharma RK, et al. Evaluation of nuclear DNA damage in spermatozoa from infertile men with varicocele. Fertil Steril 2003;80:1431-1436.
10. Zini A, Libman J. Sperm DNA damage: clinical significance in the era of assisted reproduction. CMAJ 2006;175:495-500.
11. Sun JG, Jurisicova A, Casper RF. Detection of deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation in human sperm: correlation with fertilization in vitro. Biol Reprod 1997;56:602-607.
12. Bungum M, Bungum L, Giwercman A. Sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA): a tool in diagnosis and treatment of infertility. Asian J Androl 2011;13:69-75. This article reviews the merits of SCSA while discussing its intra-individual variation and addressing some of the controversies about sperm DNA fragmentation in the literature.
13. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. On the possible origins of DNA damage in human spermatozoa. Mol Hum Reprod 2010;16:3-13.
14. Oehninger S, Morshedi M, Weng SL, et al. Presence and significance of somatic cell apoptosis markers in human ejaculated spermatozoa. Reprod Biomed Online 2003;7:469-476.
15. Liu CH, Tsao HM, Cheng TC, et al. DNA fragmentation, mitochondrial dysfunction and chromosomal aneuploidy in the spermatozoa of oligoasthenoteratozoospermic males. J Assist Reprod Genet 2004;21:119-126.
16. Fernandez JL, Muriel L, Rivero MT, et al. The sperm chromatin dispersion test: a simple method for the determination of sperm DNA fragmentation. J Androl 2003;24:59-66.
17. Sakkas D, Mariethoz E, Manicardi G, et al. Origin of DNA damage in ejaculated human spermatozoa. Rev Reprod 1999;4:31-37.
18. Hughes CM, Lewis SE, McKelvey-Martin VJ, Thompson W. A comparison of baseline and induced DNA damage in human spermatozoa from fertile and infertile men, using a modified comet assay. Mol Hum Reprod 1996;2:613-619.
19. Sakkas D, Alvarez JG. Sperm DNA fragmentation: mechanisms of origin, impact on reproductive outcome, and analysis. Fertil Steril 2010;93:1027-1036. This is a detailed update on both basic science and clinical aspects of sperm DNA fragmentation.
20. Phillips KP, Baltz JM. Intracellular pH change does not accompany egg activation in the mouse. Mol Reprod Dev 1996;45:52-60.
21. Phillips KP, Leveille MC, Claman P, Baltz JM. Intracellular pH regulation in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod 2000;15:896-904.
22. Aitken RJ, Koppers AJ. Apoptosis and DNA damage in human spermatozoa. Asian J Androl 2011;13:36-42. This is a recent scientific review about the current understanding of sperm apoptosis and DNA damage addressing the basic aspects.
23. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN, McLachlan RI. Biological and clinical significance of DNA damage in the male germ line. Int J Androl 2009;32:46-56.
24. Spano M, Bonde JP, Hjollund HI, et al. Sperm chromatin damage impairs human fertility. The Danish first pregnancy planner study team. Fertil Steril 2000;73:43-50.
25. Evenson D, Wixon R. Meta-analysis of sperm DNA fragmentation using the sperm chromatin structure assay. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;12:466-472.
26. Oleszczuk K, Giwercman A, Bungum M. Intra-individual variation of the sperm chromatin structure assay DNA fragmentation index in men from infertile couples. Hum Reprod 2011;26:3244-3248. This study investigated the intraindividual variation of SCSA that was about 30%. However, 85% of the patients still belonged to the same group defined by the sperm DFI cut-off level of more than 30 or 30% or less, whereas the 90% of the study population showing DFI of 30% or less.
27. Bungum M, Humaidan P, Axmon A, et al. Sperm DNA integrity assessment in prediction of assisted reproduction technology outcome. Hum Reprod 2007;22:174-179.
28. Thomson LK, Zieschang JA, Clark AM. Oxidative deoxyribonucleic acid damage in sperm has a negative impact on clinical pregnancy rate in intrauterine insemination but not intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril 2011;96:843-847. This prospective clinical study reported that by using TUNEL assay, it was not possible to show any sperm DNA fragmentation threshold value for predicting success after IUI or ICSI. The suggested biomarker for sperm oxidative damage 8OHdG positivity showed significant but modest correlation with sperm DNA fragmentation results by TUNEL assay with the correlation coefficient of 0.55.
29. Aitken RJ, Gordon E, Harkiss D, et al. Relative impact of oxidative stress on the functional competence and genomic integrity of human spermatozoa. Biol Reprod 1998;59:1037-1046.
30. Twigg JP, Irvine DS, Aitken RJ. Oxidative damage to DNA in human spermatozoa does not preclude pronucleus formation at intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1998;13:1864-1871.
31. Chohan KR, Griffin JT, Lafromboise M, et al. Comparison of chromatin assays for DNA fragmentation evaluation in human sperm. J Androl 2006;27:53-59.
32. Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. The clinical utility of sperm DNA integrity testing. Fertil Steril 2008;90:S178-S180.
33. Fernandez-Gonzalez R, Moreira PN, Perez-Crespo M, et al. Long-term effects of mouse intracytoplasmic sperm injection with DNA-fragmented sperm on health and behavior of adult offspring. Biol Reprod 2008;78:761-772.
34. Ahmadi A, Ng SC. Fertilizing ability of DNA-damaged spermatozoa. J Exp Zool 1999;284:696-704.
35. Ajduk A, Yamauchi Y, Ward MA. Sperm chromatin remodeling after intracytoplasmic sperm injection differs from that of in vitro fertilization. Biol Reprod 2006;75:442-451.
36. Bukulmez O. Does assisted reproductive technology cause birth defects? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2009;21:260-264.
37. Giwercman A, Lindstedt L, Larsson M, et al. Sperm chromatin structure assay as an independent predictor of fertility in vivo: a case-control study. Int J Androl 2010;33:e221-e227.
38. Host E, Lindenberg S, Smidt-Jensen S. The role of DNA strand breaks in human spermatozoa used for IVF and ICSI. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000;79:559-563.
39. Host E, Lindenberg S, Smidt-Jensen S. DNA strand breaks in human spermatozoa: correlation with fertilization in vitro in oligozoospermic men and in men with unexplained infertility. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000;79:189-193.
40. Simon L, Brunborg G, Stevenson M, et al. Clinical significance of sperm DNA damage in assisted reproduction outcome. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1594-1608.
41. Payne JF, Raburn DJ, Couchman GM, et al. Redefining the relationship between sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation as measured by the sperm chromatin structure assay and outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques. Fertil Steril 2005;84:356-364.
42. Collins JA, Barnhart KT, Schlegel PN. Do sperm DNA integrity tests predict pregnancy with in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril 2008;89:823-831.
43. Zini A, Boman JM, Belzile E, Ciampi A. Sperm DNA damage is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss after IVF and ICSI: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2663-2668.
44. Brahem S, Mehdi M, Landolsi H, et al. Semen parameters and sperm DNA fragmentation as causes of recurrent pregnancy loss. Urology 2011;78:792-796. This is a prospective cohort study that failed to find any predictive value of sperm DNA fragmentation by TUNEL assay for recurrent miscarriage in 31 couples with history of two or more consecutive first or second trimester unexplained loss as compared with 20 fertile men with normal karyotype and semen parameters.
45. Bellver J, Meseguer M, Muriel L, et al. Y chromosome microdeletions, sperm DNA fragmentation and sperm oxidative stress as causes of recurrent spontaneous abortion of unknown etiology. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1713-1721.
46. Gil-Villa AM, Cardona-Maya W, Agarwal A, et al. Assessment of sperm factors possibly involved in early recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril 2010;94:1465-1472.
47. Bungum M, Bungum L, Lynch KF, et al. Spermatozoa DNA damage measured by sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) and birth characteristics in children conceived by IVF and ICSI. Int J Androl 2011. [Epub ahead of print] This study investigated whether high SCSA DFI affected birthweight and gestational duration outcome of 131 singleton IVF or ICSI pregnancies. This is one of the first human studies investigating a potential association between sperm DNA damage and offspring health.
48. Gandini L, Lombardo F, Paoli D, et al. Full-term pregnancies achieved with ICSI despite high levels of sperm chromatin damage. Hum Reprod 2004;19:1409-1417.
49. Benchaib M, Braun V, Lornage J, et al. Sperm DNA fragmentation decreases the pregnancy rate in an assisted reproductive technique. Hum Reprod 2003;18:1023-1028.
50. Morris ID, Ilott S, Dixon L, Brison DR. The spectrum of DNA damage in human sperm assessed by single cell gel electrophoresis (Comet assay) and its relationship to fertilization and embryo development. Hum Reprod 2002;17:990-998.
51. Virro MR, Larson-Cook KL, Evenson DP. Sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) parameters are related to fertilization, blastocyst development, and ongoing pregnancy in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1289-1295.
52. Seli E, Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB, et al. Extent of nuclear DNA damage in ejaculated spermatozoa impacts on blastocyst development after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2004;82:378-383.
53. Kefer JC, Agarwal A, Sabanegh E. Role of antioxidants in the treatment of male infertility. Int J Urol 2009;16:449-457.
54. Greco E, Iacobelli M, Rienzi L, et al. Reduction of the incidence of sperm DNA fragmentation by oral antioxidant treatment. J Androl 2005;26:349-353.
55. Menezo YJ, Hazout A, Panteix G, et al. Antioxidants to reduce sperm DNA fragmentation: an unexpected adverse effect. Reprod Biomed Online 2007;14:418-421.
56. Zini A, de Lamirande E, Gagnon C. Reactive oxygen species in semen of infertile patients: levels of superoxide dismutase-and catalase-like activities in seminal plasma and spermatozoa. Int J Androl 1993;16:183-188.
57. Zini A, San Gabriel M, Baazeem A. Antioxidants and sperm DNA damage: a clinical perspective. J Assist Reprod Genet 2009;26:427-432.
58. Zini A, Al-Hathal N. Antioxidant therapy in male infertility: fact or fiction? Asian J Androl 2011;13:374-381. This is a detailed and recent review on published studies on antioxidants and their effects on semen parameters, sperm DNA fragmentation and outcomes.
59. Tawadrous GA, Aziz AA, Mostafa T. Effect of smoking status on seminal parameters and apoptotic markers in infertile men. J Urol 2011;186:1986-1990.
60. Ramlau-Hansen CH, Thulstrup AM, Aggerholm AS, et al. Is smoking a risk factor for decreased semen quality? A cross-sectional analysis. Hum Reprod 2007;22:188-196.
61. Ji BT, Shu XO, Linet MS, et al. Paternal cigarette smoking and the risk of childhood cancer among offspring of nonsmoking mothers. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:238-244.
62. Aitken RJ, Krausz C. Oxidative stress, DNA damage and the Y chromosome. Reproduction 2001;122:497-506.
63. Gosalvez J, Gonzalez-Martinez M, Lopez-Fernandez C, et al. Shorter abstinence decreases sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation in ejaculate. Fertil Steril 2011;96:1083-1086. This is a prospective study of normozoospermic men challenging the classic information about the recommended abstinence period by showing that sperm DNA fragmentation may improve with even 3 h of abstinence.
64. Colacurci N, Monti MG, Fornaro F, et al. Recombinant human FSH reduces sperm DNA fragmentation in men with idiopathic oligoasthenoteratozoospermia. J Androl 2011. [Epub ahead of print]
65. Jackson RE, Bormann CL, Hassun PA, et al. Effects of semen storage and separation techniques on sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil Steril 2010;94:2626-2630.
66. Zhang XD, Chen MY, Gao Y, et al. The effects of different sperm preparation methods and incubation time on the sperm DNA fragmentation. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2011;14:187-191. This study shows that DGC method may even be superior than swim-up in selecting sperm with more stable DNA integrity over time as assessed with SCD assay when the samples are tested in IVF culture media.
67. Larson KL, Brannian JD, Timm BK, et al. Density gradient centrifugation and glass wool filtration of semen remove spermatozoa with damaged chromatin structure. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2015-2019.
68. Larson KL, DeJonge CJ, Barnes AM, et al. Sperm chromatin structure assay parameters as predictors of failed pregnancy following assisted reproductive techniques. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1717-1722.
69. Bungum M, Spano M, Humaidan P, et al. Sperm chromatin structure assay parameters measured after density gradient centrifugation are not predictive for the outcome of ART. Hum Reprod 2008;23:4-10.
70. Matsuura R, Takeuchi T, Yoshida A. Preparation and incubation conditions affect the DNA integrity of ejaculated human spermatozoa. Asian J Androl 2010;12:753-759.
71. Chiamchanya C, Kaewnoonual N, Visutakul P, et al. Comparative study of the effects of three semen preparation media on semen analysis, DNA damage and protamine deficiency, and the correlation between DNA integrity and sperm parameters. Asian J Androl 2010;12:271-277.
72. Mahfouz RZ, Sharma RK, Said TM, et al. Association of sperm apoptosis and DNA ploidy with sperm chromatin quality in human spermatozoa. Fertil Steril 2009;91:1110-1118.
73. Morrell JM, Moffatt O, Sakkas D, et al. Reduced senescence and retained nuclear DNA integrity in human spermatozoa prepared by density gradient centrifugation. J Assist Reprod Genet 2004;21:217-222.
74. Zini A, Mak V, Phang D, Jarvi K. Potential adverse effect of semen processing on human sperm deoxyribonucleic acid integrity. Fertil Steril 1999;72:496-499.
75. Zini A, Finelli A, Phang D, Jarvi K. Influence of semen processing technique on human sperm DNA integrity. Urology 2000;56:1081-1084.
76. Zini A, Nam RK, Mak V, et al. Influence of initial semen quality on the integrity of human sperm DNA following semen processing. Fertil Steril 2000;74:824-827.
77. Niu ZH, Shi HJ, Zhang HQ, et al. Sperm chromatin structure assay results after swim-up are related only to embryo quality but not to fertilization and pregnancy rates following IVF. Asian J Androl 2011;13:862-866. The sperm prepared by swim-up resulted in significantly lower SCSA DFI as compared with the neat sperm (4.9±3.1 vs. 14.3±11.2%, respectively). Although the assessment of sperm DFI after swim-up predicted the quality of day 3 embryos, it showed no association with conventional IVF outcome.
78. Zini A, Phillips S, Courchesne A, et al. Sperm head morphology is related to high deoxyribonucleic acid stainability assessed by sperm chromatin structure assay. Fertil Steril 2009;91:2495-2500.
79. Donnelly ET, Steele EK, McClure N, Lewis SE. Assessment of DNA integrity and morphology of ejaculated spermatozoa from fertile and infertile men before and after cryopreservation. Hum Reprod 2001;16:1191-1199.
80. Trisini AT, Singh NP, Duty SM, Hauser R. Relationship between human semen parameters and deoxyribonucleic acid damage assessed by the neutral comet assay. Fertil Steril 2004;82:1623-1632.
81. Wilding M, Coppola G, di Matteo L, et al. Intracytoplasmic injection of morphologically selected spermatozoa (IMSI) improves outcome after assisted reproduction by deselecting physiologically poor quality spermatozoa. J Assist Reprod Genet 2011;28:253-262. This study examined the impact of IMSI with MSOME on sperm DNA fragmentation and ART outcome. It provides comprehensive information about the technique.
82. Oliveira JB, Cavagna M, Petersen CG, et al. Pregnancy outcomes in women with repeated implantation failures after intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI). Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2011;9:99.
83. Knez K, Zorn B, Tomazevic T, et al. The IMSI procedure improves poor embryo development in the same infertile couples with poor semen quality: a comparative prospective randomized study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2011;9:123.
84. Antinori M, Licata E, Dani G, et al. Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection: a prospective randomized trial. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;16:835-841.
85. Bartoov B, Berkovitz A, Eltes F, et al. Pregnancy rates are higher with intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection than with conventional intracytoplasmic injection. Fertil Steril 2003;80:1413-1419.
86. Huszar G, Jakab A, Sakkas D, et al. Fertility testing and ICSI sperm selection by hyaluronic acid binding: clinical and genetic aspects. Reprod Biomed Online 2007;14:650-663.
87. Jakab A, Sakkas D, Delpiano E, et al. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a novel selection method for sperm with normal frequency of chromosomal aneuploidies. Fertil Steril 2005;84:1665-1673.
88. Parmegiani L, Cognigni GE, Bernardi S, et al. Physiologic ICSI": hyaluronic acid (HA) favors selection of spermatozoa without DNA fragmentation and with normal nucleus, resulting in improvement of embryo quality. Fertil Steril 2010;93:598-604.
89. Rawe VY, Boudri HU, Alvarez Sedo C, et al. Healthy baby born after reduction of sperm DNA fragmentation using cell sorting before ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online 2010;20:320-323.
90. Said T, Agarwal A, Grunewald S, et al. Selection of nonapoptotic spermatozoa as a new tool for enhancing assisted reproduction outcomes: an in vitro model. Biol Reprod 2006;74:530-537.
91. Grunewald S, Paasch U, Glander HJ. Enrichment of nonapoptotic human spermatozoa after cryopreservation by immunomagnetic cell sorting. Cell Tissue Bank 2001;2:127-133.
92. Greco E, Scarselli F, Iacobelli M, et al. Efficient treatment of infertility due to sperm DNA damage by ICSI with testicular spermatozoa. Hum Reprod 2005;20:226-230.
93. Meseguer M, Santiso R, Garrido N, et al. Sperm DNA fragmentation levels in testicular sperm samples from azoospermic males as assessed by the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test. Fertil Steril 2009;92:1638-1645.
94. Minor A, Chow V, Ma S. Aberrant DNA methylation at imprinted genes in testicular sperm retrieved from men with obstructive azoospermia and undergoing vasectomy reversal. Reproduction 2011;141:749-757.
95. Tsai CC, Huang FJ, Wang LJ, et al. Clinical outcomes and development of children born after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) using extracted testicular sperm or ejaculated extreme severe oligo-asthenoteratozoospermia sperm: a comparative study. Fertil Steril 2011;96:567-571.
96. Woldringh GH, Besselink DE, Tillema AH, et al. Karyotyping, congenital anomalies and follow-up of children after intracytoplasmic sperm injection with nonejaculated sperm: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2010;16:12-19.
97. Belva F, De Schrijver F, Tournaye H, et al. Neonatal outcome of 724 children born after ICSI using nonejaculated sperm. Hum Reprod 2011;26:1752-1758.
98. Egozcue J, Sarrate Z, Codina-Pascual M, et al. Meiotic abnormalities in infertile males. Cytogenet Genome Res 2005;111:337-342.