The role of N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC) orally daily on the sperm parameters and serum hormones in idiopathic infertile men: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Antioxidant therapy for infertile couples: a comprehensive review of the current status and consideration of future prospects

Oxidative stress (OS) is established as a key factor in the etiology of both male and female infertility, arising from an imbalance between reactive oxygen species (ROS) production and the endogenous antioxidant (AOX) defenses. In men, OS adversely affects sperm function by inducing DNA damage, reducing motility, significantly impairing sperm vitality through plasma membrane peroxidation and loss of membrane integrity, and ultimately compromising overall sperm quality. In women, OS is implicated in various reproductive disorders, including polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, and premature ovarian failure, leading to diminished oocyte quality, disrupted folliculogenesis, and poorer reproductive outcomes. Antioxidant therapy represents a promising intervention to mitigate the harmful effects of ROS on reproductive health in additions to its easy accessibility, safety, and low cost. Despite several findings suggesting improvements in fertility potential with AOX therapy, the data remains inconclusive regarding optimal dosage and combination, duration of treatment, and the specific patient populations most likely to benefit. In this review, we discuss the role of AOXs in the management of infertile couples, focusing on their biological mechanisms, potential adverse effects, therapeutic efficacy, and clinical applications in improving reproductive outcomes in both natural conception and medically assisted reproduction. Additionally, we highlight the current practice patterns and recommendations for AOX supplementation during the course of infertility treatment. Further, we provide an overview on the limitations of the current research on the topic and insights for future studies to establish standardized AOX regimens and to assess their long-term impact on key outcomes such as live birth rates and miscarriage rates.

Empirical Treatments for Male Infertility: A Focus on Lifestyle Modifications and Medicines

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Male infertility is a prevalent issue impacting numerous couples worldwide. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of empirical therapies for male infertility, focusing on both lifestyle modifications and medical treatments. This study provides a comprehensive overview of interventions aimed at improving male fertility outcomes.

METHODS

A thorough review of the existing literature was conducted, encompassing studies on lifestyle changes such as dietary changes, smoking cessation, alcohol moderation, and exercise. Additionally, medical treatments including selective estrogen receptor modulators, gonadotropins, aromatase inhibitors, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, antioxidants, dopamine agonists, kallikrein, indomethacin, low-dose corticosteroids, alpha-blockers, and nitric oxide donors were evaluated. The study population included males diagnosed with infertility, focusing on various underlying causes.

RESULTS

Lifestyle modifications were found to have a positive impact on sperm quality. Evidence shows that a healthy diet, smoking cessation, moderate alcohol consumption, and regular exercise improve fertility outcomes. Medical treatments demonstrated significant improvements in sperm production and quality. Selective estrogen receptor modulators and gonadotropins enhanced sperm parameters. Aromatase inhibitors and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors specifically improved sperm motility and increased pregnancy rates. Antioxidants, such as vitamins E and C and coenzyme Q10, reduced oxidative stress and enhanced sperm counts, motility, and morphology. Dopamine agonists, particularly cabergoline, normalized prolactin levels and improved fertility outcomes. Kallikrein therapy improved sperm parameters and increased pregnancy rates. Indomethacin treatment was associated with increased sperm concentrations and motility. Low-dose corticosteroids and alpha-blockers showed variable results, and nitric oxide donors like L-arginine enhanced sperm counts and motility.

CONCLUSIONS

Empirical therapies, including lifestyle modifications and medical treatments, significantly enhance sperm quality and reproductive potential. These integrated approaches are essential in improving fertility outcomes in males. However, further extensive randomized trials are necessary to definitively establish the most effective treatments.

On Males, Antioxidants and Infertility (MOXI): Certitudes, Uncertainties and Trends

Male infertility (MI) involves various endogenous and exogenous facts. These include oxidative stress (OS), which is known to alter several physiological pathways and it is estimated to be present at high levels in up to 80% of infertile men. That is why since the late 20th century, the relationship between OS and MI has been widely studied. New terms have emerged, such as Male Oxidative Stress Infertility (MOSI), which is proposed as a new category to define infertile men with high OS levels. Another important term is MOXI: Male, Antioxidants, and Infertility. This term refers to the hypothesis that antioxidants could improve male fertility without the use of assisted reproductive technology. However, there are no evidence-based antioxidant treatments that directly improve seminal parameters or birth ratio. In this regard, there is controversy about their use. While certain scientists argue against their use due to the lack of results, others support this use because of their safety profile and low price. Some uncertainties related to the use of antioxidants for treating MI are their questionable efficacy or the difficulties in knowing their correct dosage. In addition, the lack of quality methods for OS detection can lead to excessive antioxidant supplementation, resulting in "reductive stress". Another important problem is that, although the inflammatory process is interdependent and closely linked to OS, it is usually ignored. To solve these uncertainties, new trends have recently emerged. These include the use of molecules with anti-inflammatory and antioxidant potential, which are also able to specifically target the reproductive tissue; as well as the use of new methods that allow for reliable quantification of OS and a quality diagnosis. This review aims to elucidate the main uncertainties about MOXI and to outline the latest trends in research to develop effective therapies with clinically relevant outcomes.

COVID-19 and Male Infertility: Is There a Role for Antioxidants?

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), jeopardizes male fertility because of the vulnerability of the male reproductive system, especially the testes. This study evaluates the effects of the virus on testicular function and examines the potential role of antioxidants in mitigating the damage caused by oxidative stress (OS). A comprehensive PubMed search examined exocrine and endocrine testicular function alteration, the interplay between OS and COVID-19-induced defects, and the potential benefit of antioxidants. Although the virus is rarely directly detectable in sperm and testicular tissue, semen quality and hormonal balance are affected in patients, with some changes persisting throughout a spermatogenesis cycle. Testicular pathology in deceased patients shows defects in spermatogenesis, vascular changes, and inflammation. Acute primary hypogonadism is observed mainly in severely infected cases. Elevated OS and sperm DNA fragmentation markers suggest redox imbalance as a possible mechanism behind the fertility changes. COVID-19 vaccines appear to be safe for male fertility, but the efficacy of antioxidants to improve sperm quality after infection remains unproven due to limited research. Given the limited and inconclusive evidence, careful evaluation of men recovering from COVID-19 seeking fertility improvement is strongly recommended.

Medical management of male infertility: now and future

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Medical therapy for idiopathic male infertility has historically been empiric and based on small observational studies rather than larger well designed clinical trials. This review is timely and relevant because of the recent publication of several studies that are less susceptible to bias because of being placebo-controlled and more highly powered.

RECENT FINDINGS

The largest proportion of recent publications covered antioxidants, with eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in this review. The Males, Antioxidants, and Infertility (MOXI) trial is of particular interest, being a large multicenter RCT, which demonstrated no improvement in semen parameters or live-birth rates with antioxidant use. In addition, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5i) have been shown to improve semen parameters, while duloxetine use was not associated with any adverse effects on sperm. Progress was also made in the realm of regenerative medicine, with the realization of the first successful primate model of sperm production from pluripotent stem cells.

SUMMARY

It may be time to stop recommending antioxidants for idiopathic male infertility given recent studies suggesting lack of efficacy, but given their relative safety, it is reasonable to continue their use until the evidence is overwhelming. Otherwise, stem cell therapy is another anticipated area of research interest.

Antioxidants for male subfertility

BACKGROUND

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.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of supplementary oral antioxidants in subfertile men.

SEARCH METHODS

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.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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.

MAIN RESULTS

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' certainty: 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. Live birth: 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, I2 = 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, I2 = 32%). Clinical pregnancy rate: 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, I2 = 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. Adverse events Miscarriage: 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, I2 = 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%. Gastrointestinal: 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, I2 = 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' CONCLUSIONS

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.