Men's Intake of Vitamin C and β-Carotene Is Positively Related to Fertilization Rate but Not to Live Birth Rate in Couples Undergoing Infertility Treatment.
Adult
Antioxidants
/ administration & dosage
Ascorbic Acid
/ administration & dosage
Birth Rate
Cohort Studies
Dietary Supplements
Female
Fertilization in Vitro
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Infertility
/ physiopathology
Live Birth
Male
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Rate
Prospective Studies
Reproductive Techniques, Assisted
Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic
beta Carotene
/ administration & dosage
assisted reproductive technology
carotenoids
in vitro fertilization
probability of live birth
vitamins
Journal
The Journal of nutrition
ISSN: 1541-6100
Titre abrégé: J Nutr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0404243
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2019
01 11 2019
Historique:
received:
29
11
2018
revised:
19
04
2019
accepted:
05
06
2019
pubmed:
10
7
2019
medline:
27
6
2020
entrez:
10
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Randomized clinical trials show that men's use of antioxidant supplements during infertility treatment may improve clinical outcomes. However, important limitations in the design of most trials make it difficult to draw firm conclusions on their findings. We examined whether men's intake of antioxidants and biologically related compounds without direct antioxidant capacity is associated with outcomes of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). We conducted a prospective cohort study of men in couples who underwent infertility treatment with ART using their own gametes between 2007 and 2017. We followed 171 couples who presented at Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center and underwent 294 autologous ART cycles for infertility treatment. Diet was assessed in both partners using an FFQ. The primary study outcome was the probability of achieving a live birth as a result of infertility treatment. Secondary outcomes were fertilization, implantation, and clinical pregnancy rates. Generalized linear mixed models with random intercepts were fitted to account for multiple ART cycles per woman while adjusting for confounding. Men's vitamin C intake was positively associated with fertilization rate. The adjusted fertilization rate (95% CI) for couples in the lowest and highest quartiles of men's vitamin C intake were 69% (61-76%) and 81% (74-86%) (P-trend = 0.02). Men's β-carotene intake was positively associated with fertilization rate in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles but not in conventional in vitro fertilization cycles (P-interaction = 0.01). Men's α-carotene intake was inversely related to the probability of live birth. The adjusted probabilities of live birth for men in the lowest and highest quartiles of α-carotene intake were 43% (28-60%) and 22% (12-36%), respectively. Men's intake of vitamin C and β-carotene is positively related to fertilization rate but this does not translate into higher pregnancy or live birth rates in couples undergoing infertility treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Randomized clinical trials show that men's use of antioxidant supplements during infertility treatment may improve clinical outcomes. However, important limitations in the design of most trials make it difficult to draw firm conclusions on their findings.
OBJECTIVE
We examined whether men's intake of antioxidants and biologically related compounds without direct antioxidant capacity is associated with outcomes of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs).
METHODS
We conducted a prospective cohort study of men in couples who underwent infertility treatment with ART using their own gametes between 2007 and 2017. We followed 171 couples who presented at Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center and underwent 294 autologous ART cycles for infertility treatment. Diet was assessed in both partners using an FFQ. The primary study outcome was the probability of achieving a live birth as a result of infertility treatment. Secondary outcomes were fertilization, implantation, and clinical pregnancy rates. Generalized linear mixed models with random intercepts were fitted to account for multiple ART cycles per woman while adjusting for confounding.
RESULTS
Men's vitamin C intake was positively associated with fertilization rate. The adjusted fertilization rate (95% CI) for couples in the lowest and highest quartiles of men's vitamin C intake were 69% (61-76%) and 81% (74-86%) (P-trend = 0.02). Men's β-carotene intake was positively associated with fertilization rate in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles but not in conventional in vitro fertilization cycles (P-interaction = 0.01). Men's α-carotene intake was inversely related to the probability of live birth. The adjusted probabilities of live birth for men in the lowest and highest quartiles of α-carotene intake were 43% (28-60%) and 22% (12-36%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Men's intake of vitamin C and β-carotene is positively related to fertilization rate but this does not translate into higher pregnancy or live birth rates in couples undergoing infertility treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31287143
pii: S0022-3166(22)16480-1
doi: 10.1093/jn/nxz149
pmc: PMC6825820
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antioxidants
0
beta Carotene
01YAE03M7J
Ascorbic Acid
PQ6CK8PD0R
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1977-1984Subventions
Organisme : NIEHS NIH HHS
ID : P30 ES000002
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIEHS NIH HHS
ID : R01 ES009718
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : P30 DK046200
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIEHS NIH HHS
ID : R01 ES022955
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIEHS NIH HHS
ID : K99 ES026648
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIEHS NIH HHS
ID : R00 ES026648
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © American Society for Nutrition 2019.
Références
Hum Reprod. 2007 Jun;22(6):1506-12
pubmed: 17376819
Hum Reprod. 2005 Sep;20(9):2590-4
pubmed: 15932912
Fertil Steril. 2013 Apr;99(5):1211-5
pubmed: 23254182
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013 Aug 16;11:81
pubmed: 23958080
Fertil Steril. 1996 Sep;66(3):430-4
pubmed: 8751743
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1998 Aug;79(2):179-84
pubmed: 9720838
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Apr 1;185(7):570-584
pubmed: 28338828
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1997 Oct 20;1336(3):575-86
pubmed: 9367186
PLoS Med. 2012;9(12):e1001356
pubmed: 23271957
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(12):CD007411
pubmed: 25504418
J Androl. 1996 Sep-Oct;17(5):530-7
pubmed: 8957697
Annu Rev Nutr. 1995;15:111-32
pubmed: 8527214
Am J Clin Nutr. 2015 Oct;102(4):943-50
pubmed: 26354529
Am J Epidemiol. 2018 May 1;187(5):1051-1063
pubmed: 29036411
Hum Reprod Open. 2018 Feb;2018(2):
pubmed: 29888739
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007 Jun;47(3):216-21
pubmed: 17550489
Arch Biochem Biophys. 2001 Jan 1;385(1):20-7
pubmed: 11361018
Hum Reprod Update. 2003 Jul-Aug;9(4):331-45
pubmed: 12926527
Science. 1953 May 15;117(3046):535-6
pubmed: 13056604
Reprod Biomed Online. 2007 Jun;14(6):746-57
pubmed: 17579991
Hum Reprod. 2012 Oct;27(10):2899-907
pubmed: 22888168
BMJ. 2003 Sep 27;327(7417):721-4
pubmed: 14512481
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Oct;124(4):801-9
pubmed: 25198264
Nutr Res. 2014 Nov;34(11):907-29
pubmed: 25134454
Fertil Steril. 2012 Jul;98(1):109-16
pubmed: 22607889
Am J Clin Nutr. 1997 Apr;65(4 Suppl):1220S-1228S; discussion 1229S-1231S
pubmed: 9094926
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015 Dec;32(12):1721-9
pubmed: 26431955
Hum Reprod Update. 2009 Jan-Feb;15(1):31-44
pubmed: 18927070
Fertil Steril. 1995 Oct;64(4):825-31
pubmed: 7672157
Hum Reprod. 2012 Sep;27(9):2807-14
pubmed: 22752607
Nature. 2004 Nov 4;432(7013):48-52
pubmed: 15525979
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Aug 21;109(34):13668-73
pubmed: 22869719
Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Nov;110(5):1050-8
pubmed: 17978119
Hum Reprod Update. 2008 May-Jun;14(3):243-58
pubmed: 18281241