Effect of Folic Acid and Zinc Supplementation in Men on Semen Quality and Live Birth Among Couples Undergoing Infertility Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Enrique F Schisterman, Shriver EK , Lindsey A Sjaarda
Traci E. Clemons, Douglas T Carrell, Neil J Perkins, Erica Johnstone, Denise Lamb , Kayla Chaney , Bradley J. Van Voorhis, Ginny L. Ryan, Karen M. Summers, James M Hotaling, Jared C Robins, James L Mills, Pauline Mendola, Zhian Chen, Elizabeth A DeVilbiss, C Matthew Peterson, Sunni L Mumford
Author affiliations (8)
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentROR
Dietary supplements marketed for male fertility commonly contain folic acid and zinc based on limited prior evidence for improving semen quality. However, no large-scale trial has examined the efficacy of this therapy for improving semen quality or live birth.
Objective
To determine the effect of daily folic acid and zinc supplementation on semen quality and live birth.Design, setting, and participantsThe Folic Acid and Zinc Supplementation Trial was a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Couples (n = 2370; men aged ≥18 years and women aged 18-45 years) planning infertility treatment were enrolled at 4 US reproductive endocrinology and infertility care study centers between June 2013 and December 2017. The last 6-month study visit for semen collection occurred during August 2018, with chart abstraction of live birth and pregnancy information completed during April 2019.
Interventions
Men were block randomized by study center and planned infertility treatment (in vitro fertilization, other treatment at a study site, and other treatment at an outside clinic) to receive either 5 mg of folic acid and 30 mg of elemental zinc (n = 1185) or placebo (n = 1185) daily for 6 months.Main outcomes and measuresThe co-primary outcomes were live birth (resulting from pregnancies occurring within 9 months of randomization) and semen quality parameters (sperm concentration, motility, morphology, volume, DNA fragmentation, and total motile sperm count) at 6 months after randomization.
Results
Among 2370 men who were randomized (mean age, 33 years), 1773 (75%) attended the final 6-month study visit. Live birth outcomes were available for all couples, and 1629 men (69%) had semen available for analysis at 6 months after randomization. Live birth was not significantly different between treatment groups (404 [34%] in the folic acid and zinc group and 416 [35%] in the placebo group; risk difference, -0.9% [95% CI, -4.7% to 2.8%]). Most of the semen quality parameters (sperm concentration, motility, morphology, volume, and total motile sperm count) were not significantly different between treatment groups at 6 months after randomization. A statistically significant increase in DNA fragmentation was observed with folic acid and zinc supplementation (mean of 29.7% for percentage of DNA fragmentation in the folic acid and zinc group and 27.2% in the placebo group; mean difference, 2.4% [95% CI, 0.5% to 4.4%]). Gastrointestinal symptoms were more common with folic acid and zinc supplementation compared with placebo (abdominal discomfort or pain: 66 [6%] vs 40 [3%], respectively; nausea: 50 [4%] vs 24 [2%]; and vomiting: 32 [3%] vs 17 [1%]).
Conclusions and relevanceAmong a general population of couples seeking infertility treatment, the use of folic acid and zinc supplementation by male partners, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve semen quality or couples' live birth rates. These findings do not support the use of folic acid and zinc supplementation by male partners in the treatment of infertility.
folic acid zinc semen quality, male fertility supplementation, sperm count supplements, live birth rate supplementation, FAZST trial, male infertility treatment RCT, dietary supplements male fertility, semen parameters zinc, sperm morphology folate, couples infertility treatment
PMID 31910279 31910279 DOI 10.1001/jama.2019.18714 10.1001/jama.2019.18714
Cite this article
Schisterman, E. F., Sjaarda, L. A., Clemons, T., Carrell, D. T., Perkins, N. J., Johnstone, E., Lamb, D., Chaney, K., Van Voorhis, B. J., Ryan, G., Summers, K., Hotaling, J., Robins, J., Mills, J. L., Mendola, P., Chen, Z., DeVilbiss, E. A., Peterson, C. M., & Mumford, S. L. (2020). Effect of folic acid and zinc supplementation in men on semen quality and live birth among couples undergoing infertility treatment: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 323(1), 35-48. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.18714
Schisterman EF, Sjaarda LA, Clemons T, Carrell DT, Perkins NJ, Johnstone E, et al. Effect of folic acid and zinc supplementation in men on semen quality and live birth among couples undergoing infertility treatment: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(1):35-48. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.18714
Schisterman, E. F., et al. "Effect of folic acid and zinc supplementation in men on semen quality and live birth among couples undergoing infertility treatment: a randomized clinical trial." JAMA, vol. 323, no. 1, 2020, pp. 35-48.
Male infertility is an increasing and serious medical concern, though the mechanism remains poorly understood. Impaired male reproductive function affects approximately half of infertile couples worldwide. Multiple factors related to the environment, genetics, age, and comorbidities have been associated with impaired sperm function. Present-day clinicians rely primarily on standard semen analysis to diagnose male reproductive potential and develop treatment strategies. To address sperm quality assessment bias and enhance analysis accuracy, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended standardized sperm testing; however, conventional diagnostic and therapeutic options for male infertility, including physical examination and semen standard analysis, remain ineffective in relieving the associated social burden. Instead, assisted reproductive techniques are becoming the primary therapeutic approach. In the post-genomic era, multiomics technologies that deeply interrogate the genome, transcriptome, proteome, and/or the epigenome, even at single-cell level, besides the breakthroughs in robotic surgery, stem cell therapy, and big data, offer promises towards solving semen quality deterioration and male factor infertility. This review highlights the complex etiology of male infertility, especially the roles of lifestyle and environmental factors, and discusses advanced technologies/methodologies used in characterizing its pathophysiology. A comprehensive combination of these innovative approaches in a global and multi-centric setting and fulfilling the suitable ethical consent could ensure optimal reproductive and developmental outcomes. These combinatorial approaches should allow for the development of diagnostic markers, molecular stratification classes, and personalized treatment strategies. Since lifestyle choices and environmental factors influence male fertility, their integration in any comprehensive approach is required for safe, proactive, cost-effective, and noninvasive precision male infertility theranostics that are affordable, accessible, and facilitate couples realizing their procreation dream.
de Ligny W et al., 2022·Cochrane Database Syst Rev
The inability to have children affects 10% to 15% of couples worldwide. A male factor is estimated to account for up to half of the infertility cases with between 25% to 87% of male subfertility considered to be due to the effect of oxidative stress. Oral supplementation with antioxidants is thought to improve sperm quality by reducing oxidative damage. Antioxidants are widely available and inexpensive when compared to other fertility treatments, however most antioxidants are uncontrolled by regulation and the evidence for their effectiveness is uncertain. We compared the benefits and risks of different antioxidants used for male subfertility. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of supplementary oral antioxidants in subfertile men. The Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED, and two trial registers were searched on 15 February 2021, together with reference checking and contact with experts in the field to identify additional trials.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any type, dose or combination of oral antioxidant supplement with placebo, no treatment, or treatment with another antioxidant, among subfertile men of a couple attending a reproductive clinic. We excluded studies comparing antioxidants with fertility drugs alone and studies that included men with idiopathic infertility and normal semen parameters or fertile men attending a fertility clinic because of female partner infertility.
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was live birth. Clinical pregnancy, adverse events and sperm parameters were secondary outcomes. We included 90 studies with a total population of 10,303 subfertile men, aged between 18 and 65 years, part of a couple who had been referred to a fertility clinic and some of whom were undergoing medically assisted reproduction (MAR). Investigators compared and combined 20 different oral antioxidants. The evidence was of 'low' to 'very low' the main limitation was that out of the 67 included studies in the meta-analysis only 20 studies reported clinical pregnancy, and of those 12 reported on live birth. The evidence is current up to February 2021. antioxidants may lead to increased live birth rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.91, P = 0.02, 12 RCTs, 1283 men, I(2) = 44%, very low-certainty evidence). Results in the studies contributing to the analysis of live birth rate suggest that if the baseline chance of live birth following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 16%, the chance following the use of antioxidants is estimated to be between 17% and 27%. However, this result was based on only 246 live births from 1283 couples in 12 small or medium-sized studies. When studies at high risk of bias were removed from the analysis, there was no evidence of increased live birth (Peto OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.75, 827 men, 8 RCTs, P = 0.27, I(2) = 32%). antioxidants may lead to increased clinical pregnancy rates (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.47, P < 0.00001, 20 RCTs, 1706 men, I(2) = 3%, low-certainty evidence) compared with placebo or no treatment. This suggests that, in the studies contributing to the analysis of clinical pregnancy, if the baseline chance of clinical pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 15%, the chance following the use of antioxidants is estimated to be between 20% and 30%. This result was based on 327 clinical pregnancies from 1706 couples in 20 small studies. only six studies reported on this outcome and the event rate was very low. No evidence of a difference in miscarriage rate was found between the antioxidant and placebo or no treatment group (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.83, P = 0.27, 6 RCTs, 664 men, I(2) = 35%, very low-certainty evidence). The findings suggest that in a population of subfertile couples, with male factor infertility, with an expected miscarriage rate of 5%, the risk of miscarriage following the use of an antioxidant would be between 4% and 13%. antioxidants may lead to an increase in mild gastrointestinal discomfort when compared with placebo or no treatment (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.46 to 4.99, P = 0.002, 16 RCTs, 1355 men, I(2) = 40%, low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of gastrointestinal discomfort following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 2%, the chance following the use of antioxidants is estimated to be between 2% and 7%. However, this result was based on a low event rate of 46 out of 1355 men in 16 small or medium-sized studies, and the certainty of the evidence was rated low and heterogeneity was high. We were unable to draw conclusions from the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison as insufficient studies compared the same interventions. AUTHORS' In this review, there is very low-certainty evidence from 12 small or medium-sized randomised controlled trials suggesting that antioxidant supplementation in subfertile males may improve live birth rates for couples attending fertility clinics. Low-certainty evidence suggests that clinical pregnancy rates may increase. There is no evidence of increased risk of miscarriage, however antioxidants may give more mild gastrointestinal discomfort, based on very low-certainty evidence. Subfertile couples should be advised that overall, the current evidence is inconclusive based on serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of methods of randomisation, failure to report on the clinical outcomes live birth rate and clinical pregnancy, often unclear or even high attrition, and also imprecision due to often low event rates and small overall sample sizes. Further large well-designed randomised placebo-controlled trials studying infertile men and reporting on pregnancy and live births are still required to clarify the exact role of antioxidants.
At present infertility is affecting about 15% of couples and male factor is responsible for almost 50% of infertility cases. Oxidative stress, due to enhanced Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) production and/or decreased antioxidants, has been repeatedly suggested as a new emerging causative factor of this condition. However, the central roles exerted by ROS in sperm physiology cannot be neglected. On these bases, the present review is focused on illustrating both the role of ROS in male infertility and their main sources of production. Oxidative stress assessment, the clinical use of redox biomarkers and the treatment of oxidative stress-related male infertility are also discussed.
We herein summarise the evidence concerning the impact of sperm DNA fragmentation in various clinical infertility scenarios and the advances on sperm DNA fragmentation tests. The collected evidence was used to formulate 41 recommendations. Of these, 13 recommendations concern technical aspects of sperm DNA fragmentation testing, including pre-analytical information, clinical thresholds and interpretation of results. The remaining 28 recommendations relate to indications for sperm DNA fragmentation testing and clinical management. Clinical scenarios like varicocele, unexplained infertility, idiopathic infertility, recurrent pregnancy loss, intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection, fertility counselling for men with infertility risk factors and sperm cryopreservation have been contemplated. The bulk evidence supporting the recommendations has increased in recent years, but it is still of moderate to low quality. This guideline provides clinicians with advice on best practices in sperm DNA fragmentation testing. Also, recommendations are provided on possible management strategies to overcome infertility related to sperm DNA fragmentation, based on the best available evidence. Lastly, we identified gaps in knowledge and opportunities for research and elaborated a list of recommendations to stimulate further investigation.