Top

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Published in:

01-11-2013 | Gamete Biology

Sperm DNA and chromatin integrity in semen samples used for intrauterine insemination

Authors: Abdullah Alkhayal, Maria San Gabriel, Krista Zeidan, Khalid Alrabeeah, Diana Noel, Rachelle McGraw, Francois Bissonnette, Isaac Jacques Kadoch, Armand Zini

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 11/2013

Abstract

Background

Sperm DNA damage is associated with male infertility but whether normozoospermic infertile men also have DNA damage is unknown.

Objective

To evaluate sperm DNA and chromatin integrity in men with mild male factor infertility.

Design, setting and participants

Prospective study of 102 consecutive men (78 normozoospermic, 15 asthenozoospermic, 9 oligozoospermic) enrolled for intrauterine insemination (IUI) and 15 fertile controls.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Standard semen parameters and sperm chromatin and DNA integrity were assessed and compared between groups. Sperm chromatin quality was assessed by (1) aniline blue staining (AB is specific to histone lysines), (2) iodoacetamide fluorescein fluorescence (IAF targets free protamine sulfhydryl groups) and (3) sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) with the results expressed as % DNA fragmentation index (%DFI).

Results and limitations

The mean (±SD) percentage of spermatozoa with positive IAF fluorescence was significantly higher in the IUI population compared to fertile controls (17 % ± 10 % vs. 8 % ± 6 %, P = 0.0011) and also in the normozoospermic subset (n = 78) compared to controls (16 % ± 9 % vs. 8 % ± 6 %, P < 0.0001, ANOVA). We also observed a trend toward lower %progressive motility, and higher %AB staining and %DFI in the IUI group compared to controls. We observed significant relationships between sperm %DFI and progressive motility (r = −0.40, P < 0.0001) and between positive AB staining and IAF fluorescence (r = 0.58, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

The data indicate that sperm chromatin integrity may be abnormal in men enrolled in IUI treatment cycles, despite the fact that most of these men are normozoospermic.

Brandes M, Hamilton CJ, de Bruin JP, Nelen WL, Kremer JA. The relative contribution of IVF to the total ongoing pregnancy rate in a subfertile cohort. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(1):118–26.PubMedCrossRef

Sakkas D, Mariethoz E, Manicardi G, Bizzaro D, Bianchi PG, Bianchi U. Origin of DNA damage in ejaculated human spermatozoa. Rev Reprod. 1999;4(1):31–7.PubMedCrossRef

Marcon L, Boissonneault G. Transient DNA strand breaks during mouse and human spermiogenesis new insights in stage specificity and link to chromatin remodeling. Biol Reprod. 2004;70(4):910–8.PubMedCrossRef

McPherson S, Longo FJ. Chromatin structure-function alterations during mammalian spermatogenesis: DNA nicking and repair in elongating spermatids. Eur J Histochem. 1993;37(2):109–28.PubMed

Sakkas D, Manicardi G, Bianchi PG, Bizzaro D, Bianchi U. Relationship between the presence of endogenous nicks and sperm chromatin packaging in maturing and fertilizing mouse spermatozoa. Biol Reprod. 1995;52(5):1149–55.PubMedCrossRef

Aitken J, Krausz C, Buckingham D. Relationships between biochemical markers for residual sperm cytoplasm, reactive oxygen species generation, and the presence of leukocytes and precursor germ cells in human sperm suspensions. Mol Reprod Dev. 1994;39(3):268–79.PubMedCrossRef

Greco E, Scarselli F, Iacobelli M, Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Ferrero S, et al. Efficient treatment of infertility due to sperm DNA damage by ICSI with testicular spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(1):226–30.PubMedCrossRef

Moskovtsev SI, Jarvi K, Mullen JB, Cadesky KI, Hannam T, Lo KC. Testicular spermatozoa have statistically significantly lower DNA damage compared with ejaculated spermatozoa in patients with unsuccessful oral antioxidant treatment. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(4):1142–6.PubMedCrossRef

Barratt CL, Aitken RJ, Bjorndahl L, Carrell DT, de Boer P, Kvist U, et al. Sperm DNA: organization, protection and vulnerability: from basic science to clinical applications—a position report. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(4):824–38.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Chohan KR, Griffin JT, Lafromboise M, De Jonge CJ, Carrell DT. Comparison of chromatin assays for DNA fragmentation evaluation in human sperm. J Androl. 2006;27(1):53–9.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Moskovtsev SI, Willis J, White J, Mullen JB. Sperm DNA damage: correlation to severity of semen abnormalities. Urology. 2009;74(4):789–93.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Zini A, Fischer MA, Sharir S, Shayegan B, Phang D, Jarvi K. Prevalence of abnormal sperm DNA denaturation in fertile and infertile men. Urology. 2002;60(6):1069–72.PubMedCrossRef

13.

WHO. WHO laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and sperm-cervical mucus interaction. 4th ed. Cambridge: UCUP; 1999.

14.

Evenson DP, Jost LK, Marshall D, Zinaman MJ, Clegg E, Purvis K, et al. Utility of the sperm chromatin structure assay as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in the human fertility clinic. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(4):1039–49.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Zini A, Azhar R, Baazeem A, Gabriel MS. Effect of microsurgical varicocelectomy on human sperm chromatin and DNA integrity: a prospective trial. Int J Androl. 2011;34(1):14–9.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Zini A, Bielecki R, Phang D, Zenzes MT. Correlations between two markers of sperm DNA integrity, DNA denaturation and DNA fragmentation, in fertile and infertile men. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(4):674–7.PubMedCrossRef

17.

de Lamirande E, San Gabriel MC, Zini A. Human sperm chromatin undergoes physiological remodeling during in vitro capacitation and acrosome reaction. J Androl. 2012;33(5):1025–35.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Chatterjee S, de Lamirande E, Gagnon C. Cryopreservation alters membrane sulfhydryl status of bull spermatozoa: protection by oxidized glutathione. Mol Reprod Dev. 2001;60(4):498–506.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Saleh RA, Agarwal A, Sharma RK, Said TM, Sikka SC, Thomas Jr AJ. Evaluation of nuclear DNA damage in spermatozoa from infertile men with varicocele. Fertil Steril. 2003;80(6):1431–6.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Saleh RA, Agarwal A, Nada EA, El-Tonsy MH, Sharma RK, Meyer A, et al. Negative effects of increased sperm DNA damage in relation to seminal oxidative stress in men with idiopathic and male factor infertility. Fertil Steril. 2003;79 Suppl 3:1597–605.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Chi HJ, Chung DY, Choi SY, Kim JH, Kim GY, Lee JS, et al. Integrity of human sperm DNA assessed by the neutral comet assay and its relationship to semen parameters and clinical outcomes for the IVF-ET program. Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2011;38(1):10–7.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Oliveira JB, Massaro FC, Baruffi RL, Mauri AL, Petersen CG, Silva LF, et al. Correlation between semen analysis by motile sperm organelle morphology examination and sperm DNA damage. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(5):1937–40.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Varghese AC, Bragais FM, Mukhopadhyay D, Kundu S, Pal M, Bhattacharyya AK, et al. Human sperm DNA integrity in normal and abnormal semen samples and its correlation with sperm characteristics. Andrologia. 2009;41(4):207–15.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Cohen-Bacrie P, Belloc S, Menezo YJ, Clement P, Hamidi J, Benkhalifa M. Correlation between DNA damage and sperm parameters: a prospective study of 1,633 patients. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(5):1801–5.PubMedCrossRef

25.

De Iuliis GN, Thomson LK, Mitchell LA, Finnie JM, Koppers AJ, Hedges A, et al. DNA damage in human spermatozoa is highly correlated with the efficiency of chromatin remodeling and the formation of 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine, a marker of oxidative stress. Biol Reprod. 2009;81(3):517–24.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Leduc F, Nkoma GB, Boissonneault G. Spermiogenesis and DNA repair: a possible etiology of human infertility and genetic disorders. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2008;54(1):3–10.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Sakkas D, Seli E, Bizzaro D, Tarozzi N, Manicardi GC. Abnormal spermatozoa in the ejaculate: abortive apoptosis and faulty nuclear remodelling during spermatogenesis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;7(4):428–32.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Darzynkiewicz Z. Critical aspects in analysis of cellular DNA content. Curr Protoc Cytom. 2011;Chapter 7:Unit 7 2.

29.

Gregoire MC, Massonneau J, Simard O, Gouraud A, Brazeau MA, Arguin M, et al. Male-driven de novo mutations in haploid germ cells. Mol Hum Reprod. 2013;19(8):495–9.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Kong A, Frigge ML, Masson G, Besenbacher S, Sulem P, Magnusson G, et al. Rate of de novo mutations and the importance of father’s age to disease risk. Nature. 2012;488(7412):471–5.PubMedCrossRef

31.

The clinical utility of sperm DNA integrity testing: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:673–7.

32.

Giwercman A, Lindstedt L, Larsson M, Bungum M, Spano M, Levine RJ, et al. Sperm chromatin structure assay as an independent predictor of fertility in vivo: a case–control study. Int J Androl. 2010;33:e221–7.

33.

Spano M, Bonde JP, Hjollund HI, Kolstad HA, Cordelli E, Leter G. Sperm chromatin damage impairs human fertility. The Danish First Pregnancy Planner Study Team. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(1):43–50.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Bungum M, Humaidan P, Axmon A, Spano M, Bungum L, Erenpreiss J, et al. Sperm DNA integrity assessment in prediction of assisted reproduction technology outcome. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(1):174–9.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Collins JA, Barnhart KT, Schlegel PN. Do sperm DNA integrity tests predict pregnancy with in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril. 2008;89(4):823–31.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Zini A. Are sperm chromatin and DNA defects relevant in the clinic? Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2011;57(1–2):78–85.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Zini A, Sigman M. Are tests of sperm DNA damage clinically useful? Pros and cons. J Androl. 2009;30(3):219–29.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Robinson L, Gallos ID, Conner SJ, Rajkhowa M, Miller D, Lewis S, et al. The effect of sperm DNA fragmentation on miscarriage rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(10):2908–17.PubMedCrossRef

39.

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(12):2663–8.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Bungum M, Bungum L, Lynch KF, Wedlund L, Humaidan P, Giwercman A. Spermatozoa DNA damage measured by sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) and birth characteristics in children conceived by IVF and ICSI. Int J Androl. 2012;35(4):485–90.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Fernandez-Gonzalez R, Moreira PN, Perez-Crespo M, Sanchez-Martin M, Ramirez MA, Pericuesta E, 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(4):761–72.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Wyrobek AJ, Eskenazi B, Young S, Arnheim N, Tiemann-Boege I, Jabs EW, et al. Advancing age has differential effects on DNA damage, chromatin integrity, gene mutations, and aneuploidies in sperm. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(25):9601–6.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Sperm DNA and chromatin integrity in semen samples used for intrauterine insemination
Authors: Abdullah Alkhayal
Maria San Gabriel
Krista Zeidan
Khalid Alrabeeah
Diana Noel
Rachelle McGraw
Francois Bissonnette
Isaac Jacques Kadoch
Armand Zini
Publication date: 01-11-2013
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 11/2013
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-013-0101-3

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Sperm DNA and chromatin integrity in semen samples used for intrauterine insemination

Abstract

Background

Objective

Design, setting and participants

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Results and limitations

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objective

Design, setting and participants

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Results and limitations

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2013

Human chorionic gonadotropin levels are equally predictive for pregnancy outcome after fresh and vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer

The impact of semen quality, occupational exposure to environmental factors and lifestyle on recurrent pregnancy loss

Reproductive implications of psychological distress for couples undergoing IVF

Clomiphene Citrate co-treatment with low dose urinary FSH versus urinary FSH for clomiphene resistant PCOS: randomized controlled trial

TNF-α haplotype association with polycystic ovary syndrome – a South Indian study

Comment on: “Clomiphene Citrate co-treatment with low dose urinary FSH versus urinary FSH for clomiphene resistant PCOS: randomized controlled trial.” by Ghanem et al.