Investigation on the mechanisms of human sperm DNA damage based on the proteomics analysis by SWATH-MS.

BACKGROUND: Spermatozoa have the task of delivering an intact paternal genome to the oocyte and supporting successful embryo development. The detection of sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) has been emerging as a complementary test to conventional semen analysis for male infertility evaluation, but the mechanism leading to SDF and its impact on assisted reproduction remain unclear. Therefore, the study identified and analyzed the differentially expressed proteins of sperm with high and low SDF. METHODS: Semen samples from men attended the infertility clinic during June 2020 and August 2020 were analyzed, and sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) was detected by the sperm chromatin structure assay. Semen samples with low DFI (< 30%, control group) and high DFI (≥ 30%, experimental group) were optimized by density gradient centrifugation (DGC), and the differentially expressed proteins of obtained sperm were identified by the Sequential Window Acquisition of All Theoretical Mass Spectra Mass Spectrometry (SWATH-MS) and performed GO and KEGG analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2186 proteins were identified and 1591 proteins were quantified, of which 252 proteins were identified as differentially expressed proteins, including 124 upregulated and 128 downregulated. These differentially expressed proteins were involved in metabolic pathways, replication/recombination/repair, acrosomal vesicles, kinase regulators, fertilization, tyrosine metabolism, etc. Western blotting results showed that the expression levels of RAD23B and DFFA proteins and the levels of posttranslational ubiquitination and acetylation modifications in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group, which was consistent with the results of proteomics analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Proteomic markers of sperm with high DNA fragmentation can be identified by the SWATH-MS and bioinformatic analysis, and new protein markers and posttranslational modifications related to sperm DNA damage are expected to be intensively explored. Our findings may improve our understanding of the basic molecular mechanism of sperm DNA damage.

Investigation of the mechanisms leading to human sperm DNA damage based on transcriptome analysis by RNA-seq techniques.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the molecular mechanisms leading to human sperm DNA damage? DESIGN: Semen samples were collected and the sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) was assessed. Differentially expressed RNA in spermatozoa with a high (DFI ≥30%, experimental group) or normal (DFI <30%, control group) DFI were identified by RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) technology, and Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analysis was performed. Three differentially expressed RNA related to sperm DNA damage and repair, namely PMS1, TP53BP1 and TLK2, were validated using real-time quantitative (RT-qPCR). RESULTS: A total of 19,970 expressed RNA were detected in the two groups. Compared with the control group, the expression levels of 189 RNA in the experimental group were significantly increased and those of 163 genes decreased. Gene Ontology enrichment analysis showed that these RNA were mainly concentrated in the ATPase-dependent transmembrane transport complex, extracellular exosome, somatic cell DNA recombination, protein binding, cytoplasm and regulation of localization. KEGG pathway analysis showed that these RNA were mainly related to the PI3K-Akt signalling pathway, endocytosis, p53 signalling pathway and cGMP-PKG signalling pathway. The RT-qPCR results showed that the expression levels of PMS1, TP53BP1 and TLK2 in the experimental group were significantly lower than in the control group (P = 0.01, 0.015 and 0.004, respectively), which was identical to the results of RNA sequencing. CONCLUSIONS: Differentially expressed RNA related to sperm DNA damage and repair may be identified by RNA-seq technology, which provides new insights into the understanding of sperm DNA damage and repair, and will help to discover new biomarkers related to sperm DNA damage.

Estrogen supplementation to progesterone as luteal phase support in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Meta-analyses have found conflicting results with respect to the use of progesterone or progesterone plus estrogen as luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocols involving gonadotropins and/or gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs. The aim of the present study was to perform an updated meta-analysis on the efficacy of progesterone versus progesterone plus estrogen as luteal phase support. We searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases (up to March 18, 2014). The search terms were (estrogen OR estradiol OR oestradiol) AND (progesterone) AND (IVF OR in vitro fertilization) AND (randomized OR prospective). We did not limit the form of estrogen and included subjects who contributed more than 1 cycle to a study. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. Secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy rate, fertilization rate, implantation rate, and miscarriage rate. A total of 11 articles were included in the present analysis, with variable numbers of studies assessing each outcome measure. Results of statistical analyses indicated that progesterone plus estrogen treatment was more likely to result in clinical pregnancy than progesterone alone (pooled odds ratio 1.617, 95% confidence interval 1.059-2.471; P = 0.026). No significant difference between the 2 treatment regimens was found for the other outcome measures. Progesterone plus estrogen for luteal phase support is associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate than progesterone alone in women undergoing IVF, but other outcomes such as ongoing pregnancy rate, fertilization rate, implantation rate, and miscarriage rate are the same for both treatments.

[Comparison of the methods of separating high-quality sperm for intrauterine insemination].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze and compare the pregnancy rates of intrauterine insemination (IUI) achieved by 3 optimized methods of separating high-quality sperm. METHODS: The data from 452 infertile couples who underwent 671 IUI cycles in our reproductive medicine center were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into three groups: 5% HSA Earle's swim-up, SpermRinse swim-up and SupraSperm density gradient centrifugation according to different methods for separating high-quality sperm, and the clinical pregnancy rates were compared. RESULTS: In the 5% HSA Earle's swim-up group, 21 pregnancies were achieved in 221 cycles (9.5%) and in the SpermRinse swim-up group, 34 in 215 cycles (15.8%), with a significantly higher rate in the latter than in the former (P < 0.05). In the SupraSperm density gradient centrifugation group, there were 34 pregnancies in 235 cycles (14.5%), with no statistically significant difference from the other two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The SpermRinse swim-up method can improve the clinical pregnancy rate and is suitable for various types of sterile patients. SupraSperm density gradient centrifugation, as an effective method available for separating high-quality sperm, is particularly suitable for those with lots of inflammatory cells and dead and abnormal sperm in the semen.