Andrzej Kulczycki1, Ilene Brill2, Margaret Christine Snead3, Maurizio Macaluso4. 1. Department of Health Care Organization and Policy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. Electronic address: andrzej@uab.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, UAB, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. 4. Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the best established biomarker of semen exposure. PSA in vaginal fluid returns to pre-exposure concentrations within 24-48 h, but the speed of decay during the first 10 h is unknown. We sought to determine how fast PSA concentrations decline during the first 10 h after exposure to semen. STUDY DESIGN: Women in the 50 enrolled couples were intravaginally inoculated with 10, 20, 100 and 200 μl of their partner's semen and then collected vaginal swabs immediately after, 30 min, 4 h and 10 h after exposure. Forty-seven sets of samples were tested for PSA. Mixed linear models for repeated measures examined the association between log-transformed PSA values and sampling time and semen exposure volume. Sensitivity analyses excluded data from nonabstainers. Fixed-effect estimates from the statistical models were graphed. RESULTS: PSA values were highest at 200 μl inoculation volumes and at earlier post-exposure time points, then decline steadily. The lowest inoculation volume (10 μl) corresponded to the smallest concentration of PSA throughout the post-inoculation time points. Average PSA levels return to clinically non-detectable levels within 10 h only at the lowest semen exposures. The PSA decay curve assumes a very similar profile across all time points and semen amounts. CONCLUSIONS: The PSA decay curve is similar for varying semen exposure volumes, with average PSA concentrations remaining above clinical thresholds 10 h after exposure at all except the very smallest semen exposure levels. PSA is an objective marker of recent exposure to semen, permitting such detection with high accuracy. IMPLICATIONS: This study clarifies how PSA values vary at different semen exposure levels and time points during the first 10 h post-exposure. Future contraceptive studies that use PSA as a semen biomarker will be better informed about PSA concentrations at different sampling times and exposure amounts.
OBJECTIVE:Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the best established biomarker of semen exposure. PSA in vaginal fluid returns to pre-exposure concentrations within 24-48 h, but the speed of decay during the first 10 h is unknown. We sought to determine how fast PSA concentrations decline during the first 10 h after exposure to semen. STUDY DESIGN:Women in the 50 enrolled couples were intravaginally inoculated with 10, 20, 100 and 200 μl of their partner's semen and then collected vaginal swabs immediately after, 30 min, 4 h and 10 h after exposure. Forty-seven sets of samples were tested for PSA. Mixed linear models for repeated measures examined the association between log-transformed PSA values and sampling time and semen exposure volume. Sensitivity analyses excluded data from nonabstainers. Fixed-effect estimates from the statistical models were graphed. RESULTS:PSA values were highest at 200 μl inoculation volumes and at earlier post-exposure time points, then decline steadily. The lowest inoculation volume (10 μl) corresponded to the smallest concentration of PSA throughout the post-inoculation time points. Average PSA levels return to clinically non-detectable levels within 10 h only at the lowest semen exposures. The PSA decay curve assumes a very similar profile across all time points and semen amounts. CONCLUSIONS: The PSA decay curve is similar for varying semen exposure volumes, with average PSA concentrations remaining above clinical thresholds 10 h after exposure at all except the very smallest semen exposure levels. PSA is an objective marker of recent exposure to semen, permitting such detection with high accuracy. IMPLICATIONS: This study clarifies how PSA values vary at different semen exposure levels and time points during the first 10 h post-exposure. Future contraceptive studies that use PSA as a semen biomarker will be better informed about PSA concentrations at different sampling times and exposure amounts.
Authors: Roxanne Jamshidi; Ana Penman-Aguilar; Jeffrey Wiener; Maria F Gallo; Jonathan M Zenilman; J H Melendez; Margaret Snead; Carolyn M Black; Denise J Jamieson; Maurizio Macaluso Journal: Contraception Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Terri Walsh; Lee Warner; Maurizio Macaluso; Ron Frezieres; Margaret Snead; Brian Wraxall Journal: Contraception Date: 2012-03-02 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Terri L Walsh; Ron G Frezieres; Karen Peacock; Anita L Nelson; Virginia A Clark; Leslie Bernstein; Brian G D Wraxall Journal: Contraception Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Loren W Galvão; Laurione C Oliveira; Juan Díaz; Dhong-Jin Kim; Nádia Marchi; Johannes van Dam; Roger F Castilho; Michael Chen; Maurizio Macaluso Journal: Contraception Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Trevor G Cooper; Elizabeth Noonan; Sigrid von Eckardstein; Jacques Auger; H W Gordon Baker; Hermann M Behre; Trine B Haugen; Thinus Kruger; Christina Wang; Michael T Mbizvo; Kirsten M Vogelsong Journal: Hum Reprod Update Date: 2009-11-24 Impact factor: 15.610
Authors: Andrea Thurman; Terry Jacot; Johan Melendez; Thomas Kimble; Margaret Snead; Roxanne Jamshidi; Angie Wheeless; David F Archer; Gustavo F Doncel; Christine Mauck Journal: Contraception Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Alexandra M Minnis; Markus J Steiner; Maria F Gallo; Lee Warner; Marcia M Hobbs; Ariane van der Straten; Tsungai Chipato; Maurizio Macaluso; Nancy S Padian Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-09-09 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Terri L Walsh; Margaret C Snead; Breione J St Claire; Jill L Schwartz; Christine K Mauck; Ron G Frezieres; Diana L Blithe; David F Archer; Kurt T Barnhart; Jeffrey T Jensen; Anita L Nelson; Michael A Thomas; Livia S Wan; Mark A Weaver Journal: Contraception Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 3.375