Background
Between 30% to 80% of male subfertility cases are considered to be due to the damaging effects of oxidative stress on sperm and 1 man in 20 will be affected by subfertility. Antioxidants are widely available and inexpensive when compared to other fertility treatments and many men are already using these to improve their fertility. It is thought that oral supplementation with antioxidants may improve sperm quality by reducing oxidative stress. Pentoxifylline, a drug that acts like an antioxidant, was also included in this review.  

Objectives
This Cochrane review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oral supplementation with antioxidants for subfertile male partners in couples seeking fertility assistance.

Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and AMED databases (from inception until January 2014); trial registers; sources of unpublished literature and reference lists. An updated search was run in August 2014 when potentially eligible studies were placed in 'Studies awaiting assessment'.

Selection criteria
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any type or dose of antioxidant supplement (single or combined) taken by the subfertile male partner of a couple seeking fertility assistance with a placebo, no treatment or another antioxidant.

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. The primary review outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rates, adverse events, sperm DNA fragmentation, sperm motility and concentration. Data were combined, where appropriate, to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main outcomes using GRADE methods.  

Main results
This updated review included 48 RCTs that compared single and combined antioxidants with placebo, no treatment or another antioxidant in a population of 4179 subfertile men. The duration of the trials ranged from 3 to 26 weeks with follow up ranging from 3 weeks to 2 years. The men were aged from 20 to 52 years. Most of the men enrolled in these trials had low total sperm motility and sperm concentration. One study enrolled men after varicocelectomy, one enrolled men with a varicocoele, and one recruited men with chronic prostatitis. Three trials enrolled men who, as a couple, were undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and one trial enrolled men who were part of a couple undergoing intrauterine insemination (IUI). Funding sources were stated by 15 trials. Four of these trials stated that funding was from a commercial source and the remaining 11 obtained funding through non-commercial avenues or university grants. Thirty-three trials did not report any funding sources.

A limitation of this review was that in a sense we had included two different groups of trials, those that reported on the use of antioxidants and the effect on live birth and clinical pregnancy, and a second group that reported on sperm parameters as their primary outcome and had no intention of reporting the primary outcomes of this review. We included 25 trials reporting on sperm parameters and only three of these reported on live birth or clinical pregnancy. Other limitations included poor reporting of study methods, imprecision, the small number of trials providing usable data, the small sample size of many of the included studies and the lack of adverse events reporting. The evidence was graded as 'very low' to 'low'. The data were current to 31 January 2014.

Live birth: antioxidants may have increased live birth rates (OR 4.21, 95% CI 2.08 to 8.51, P< 0.0001, 4 RCTs, 277 men, I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 5%, the chance following the use of antioxidants is estimated to be between 10% and 31%. However, this result was based on only 44 live births from a total of 277 couples in four small studies.

Clinical pregnancy rate: antioxidants may have increased clinical pregnancy rates (OR 3.43, 95% CI 1.92 to 6.11, P < 0.0001, 7 RCTs, 522 men, I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 6%, the chance following the use of antioxidants is estimated at between 11% and 28%. However, there were only seven small studies in this analysis and the quality of the evidence was rated as low.

Miscarriage: only three trials reported on this outcome and the event rate was very low. There was insufficient evidence to show whether there was a difference in miscarriage rates between the antioxidant and placebo or no treatment groups (OR 1.74, 95% CI 0.40 to 7.60, P = 0.46, 3 RCTs, 247 men, I2 = 0%, very low quality evidence). The findings suggest that in a population of subfertile men with an expected miscarriage rate of 2%, use of an antioxidant would result in the risk of a miscarriage lying between 1% and 13%.

Gastrointestinal upsets: there was insufficient evidence to show whether there was a difference in gastrointestinal upsets when antioxidants were compared to placebo or no treatment as the event rate was very low (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.50, P = 0.46, 6 RCTs, 429 men, I2 = 0%).

We were unable to draw any conclusions from the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison as not enough trials compared the same interventions.

Authors' conclusions
There is low quality evidence from only four small randomised controlled trials suggesting that antioxidant supplementation in subfertile males may improve live birth rates for couples attending fertility clinics. Low quality evidence suggests that clinical pregnancy rates may increase. There is no evidence of increased risk of miscarriage but this is uncertain as the evidence is of very low quality. Data were lacking on other adverse effects. Further large well-designed randomised placebo-controlled trials are needed to clarify these results.

Antioxidants for male subfertility

https://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/170827/4/ProgLipResPostprint.pdf

A global perspective on carotenoids: Metabolism, biotechnology, and benefits for nutrition and health

The coronavirus-disease 2019 (COVID-19) was announced as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. Challenges arise concerning how to optimally support the immune system in the general population, especially under self-confinement. An optimal immune response depends on an adequate diet and nutrition in order to keep infection at bay. For example, sufficient protein intake is crucial for optimal antibody production. Low micronutrient status, such as of vitamin A or zinc, has been associated with increased infection risk. Frequently, poor nutrient status is associated with inflammation and oxidative stress, which in turn can impact the immune system. Dietary constituents with especially high anti-inflammatory and antioxidant capacity include vitamin C, vitamin E, and phytochemicals such as carotenoids and polyphenols. Several of these can interact with transcription factors such as NF-kB and Nrf-2, related to anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects, respectively. Vitamin D in particular may perturb viral cellular infection via interacting with cell entry receptors (angiotensin converting enzyme 2), ACE2. Dietary fiber, fermented by the gut microbiota into short-chain fatty acids, has also been shown to produce anti-inflammatory effects. In this review, we highlight the importance of an optimal status of relevant nutrients to effectively reduce inflammation and oxidative stress, thereby strengthening the immune system during the COVID-19 crisis.

Strengthening the Immune System and Reducing Inflammation and Oxidative Stress through Diet and Nutrition: Considerations during the COVID-19 Crisis.

Update on natural food pigments - A mini-review on carotenoids, anthocyanins, and betalains.

Food and feed laboratories share several similarities when facing the implementation of liquid-chromatographic analysis. Using the experience acquired over the years, through application chemistry in food and feed research, selected analytes of relevance for both areas were discussed. This review focused on the common obstacles and peculiarities that each analyte offers (during the sample treatment or the chromatographic separation) throughout the implementation of said methods. A brief description of the techniques which we considered to be more pertinent, commonly used to assay such analytes is provided, including approaches using commonly available detectors (especially in starter labs) as well as mass detection. This manuscript consists of three sections: feed analysis (as the start of the food chain); food destined for human consumption determinations (the end of the food chain); and finally, assays shared by either matrices or laboratories. Analytes discussed consist of both those considered undesirable substances, contaminants, additives, and those related to nutritional quality. Our review is comprised of the examination of polyphenols, capsaicinoids, theobromine and caffeine, cholesterol, mycotoxins, antibiotics, amino acids, triphenylmethane dyes, nitrates/nitrites, ethanol soluble carbohydrates/sugars, organic acids, carotenoids, hydro and liposoluble vitamins. All analytes are currently assayed in our laboratories.

Liquid Chromatography Analysis of Common Nutritional Components, in Feed and Food.

Experts in the field of carotenoids met at the Hohenheim consensus conference in July 2009 to elucidate the current status of β-carotene research and to summarize the current knowledge with respect to the chemical properties, physiological function, and intake of β-carotene. The experts discussed 17 questions and reached an agreement formulated in a consensus answer in each case. These consensus answers are based on published valid data, which were carefully reviewed by the individual experts and are justified here by background statements. Ascertaining the impact of β-carotene on the total dietary intake of vitamin A is complicated, because the efficiency of conversion of β-carotene to retinol is not a single ratio and different conversion factors have been used in various surveys and following governmental recommendations within different countries. However, a role of β-carotene in fulfilling the recommended intake for vitamin A is apparent from a variety of studies. Thus, besides elucidating the various functions, distribution, and uptake of β-carotene, the consensus conference placed special emphasis on the provitamin A function of β-carotene and the role of β-carotene in the realization of the required/recommended total vitamin A intake in both developed and developing countries. There was consensus that β-carotene is a safe source of vitamin A and that the provitamin A function of β-carotene contributes to vitamin A intake.

Guangweng Tang

Papers

β-Carotene Is an Important Vitamin A Source for Humans