Courtney C Carignan1, Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón2, Paige L Williams3, John D Meeker4, Heather M Stapleton5, Craig M Butt6, Thomas L Toth7, Jennifer B Ford8, Russ Hauser9. 1. Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. Electronic address: carignan@anr.msu.edu. 2. Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: lminguez@hsph.harvard.edu. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: paige@hsph.harvard.edu. 4. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: meekerj@umich.edu. 5. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: heather.stapleton@duke.edu. 6. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; SCIEX, Framingham, MA, USA. Electronic address: craig.butt@duke.edu. 7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: tltoth@mgh.harvard.edu. 8. Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: jford@hsph.harvard.edu. 9. Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: rhauser@hsph.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Use of organophosphate flame retardants (PFRs) has increased over the past decade following the phase out of some brominated flame retardants, leading to increased human exposure. We recently reported that increasing maternal PFR exposure is associated with poorer pregnancy outcomes among women from a fertility clinic. Because a small epidemiologic study previously reported an inverse association between male PFR exposures and sperm motility, we sought to examine associations of paternal urinary concentrations of PFR metabolites and their partner's pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This analysis included 201 couples enrolled in the Environment and Reproductive Health (EARTH) prospective cohort study (2005-2015) who provided one or two urine samples per IVF cycle. In both the male and female partner, we measured five urinary PFR metabolites [bis(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (BDCIPP), diphenyl phosphate (DPHP), isopropylphenyl phenyl phosphate (ip-PPP), tert-butylphenyl phenyl phosphate (tb-PPP) and bis(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (BCIPP)] using negative electrospray ionization liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The sum of the molar concentrations of the urinary PFR metabolites was calculated. We used multivariable generalized linear mixed models to evaluate the association of urinary concentrations of paternal PFR metabolites with IVF outcomes, accounting for multiple in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles per couple. Models were adjusted for year of IVF treatment cycle, primary infertility diagnosis, and maternal urinary PFR metabolites as well as paternal and maternal age, body mass index, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Detection rates were high for paternal urinary concentrations of BDCIPP (84%), DPHP (87%) and ip-PPP (76%) but low for tb-PPP (12%) and zero for BCIPP (0%). We observed a significant 12% decline in the proportion of fertilized oocytes from the first to second quartile of male urinary ΣPFR and a 47% decline in the number of best quality embryos from the first to third quartile of male urinary BDCIPP in our adjusted models. An 8% decline in fertilization was observed for the highest compared to lowest quartile of urinary BDCIPP concentrations (95% CI: 0.01, 0.12, p-trend=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Using IVF as a model to investigate human reproduction and pregnancy outcomes, we found that paternal urinary concentrations of BDCIPP were associated with reduced fertilization. In contrast to previously reported findings for the female partners, the paternal urinary PFR metabolites were not associated with the proportion of cycles resulting in successful implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth. These results indicate that paternal preconception exposure to TDCIPP may adversely impact successful oocyte fertilization, whereas female preconception exposure to ΣPFRs may be more relevant to adverse pregnancy outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Use of organophosphateflame retardants (PFRs) has increased over the past decade following the phase out of some brominated flame retardants, leading to increased human exposure. We recently reported that increasing maternal PFR exposure is associated with poorer pregnancy outcomes among women from a fertility clinic. Because a small epidemiologic study previously reported an inverse association between male PFR exposures and sperm motility, we sought to examine associations of paternal urinary concentrations of PFR metabolites and their partner's pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This analysis included 201 couples enrolled in the Environment and Reproductive Health (EARTH) prospective cohort study (2005-2015) who provided one or two urine samples per IVF cycle. In both the male and female partner, we measured five urinary PFR metabolites [bis(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (BDCIPP), diphenyl phosphate (DPHP), isopropylphenyl phenyl phosphate (ip-PPP), tert-butylphenyl phenyl phosphate (tb-PPP) and bis(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (BCIPP)] using negative electrospray ionization liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The sum of the molar concentrations of the urinary PFR metabolites was calculated. We used multivariable generalized linear mixed models to evaluate the association of urinary concentrations of paternal PFR metabolites with IVF outcomes, accounting for multiple in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles per couple. Models were adjusted for year of IVF treatment cycle, primary infertility diagnosis, and maternal urinary PFR metabolites as well as paternal and maternal age, body mass index, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Detection rates were high for paternal urinary concentrations of BDCIPP (84%), DPHP (87%) and ip-PPP (76%) but low for tb-PPP (12%) and zero for BCIPP (0%). We observed a significant 12% decline in the proportion of fertilized oocytes from the first to second quartile of male urinary ΣPFR and a 47% decline in the number of best quality embryos from the first to third quartile of male urinary BDCIPP in our adjusted models. An 8% decline in fertilization was observed for the highest compared to lowest quartile of urinary BDCIPP concentrations (95% CI: 0.01, 0.12, p-trend=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Using IVF as a model to investigate human reproduction and pregnancy outcomes, we found that paternal urinary concentrations of BDCIPP were associated with reduced fertilization. In contrast to previously reported findings for the female partners, the paternal urinary PFR metabolites were not associated with the proportion of cycles resulting in successful implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth. These results indicate that paternal preconception exposure to TDCIPP may adversely impact successful oocyte fertilization, whereas female preconception exposure to ΣPFRs may be more relevant to adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Authors: Nele Van den Eede; Amy L Heffernan; Lesa L Aylward; Peter Hobson; Hugo Neels; Jochen F Mueller; Adrian Covaci Journal: Environ Int Date: 2014-09-29 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Courtney C Carignan; Michael D McClean; Ellen M Cooper; Deborah J Watkins; Alicia J Fraser; Wendy Heiger-Bernays; Heather M Stapleton; Thomas F Webster Journal: Environ Int Date: 2013-03-20 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Heather M Stapleton; Susan Klosterhaus; Sarah Eagle; Jennifer Fuh; John D Meeker; Arlene Blum; Thomas F Webster Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: L E Dodge; P L Williams; M A Williams; S A Missmer; I Souter; A M Calafat; R Hauser Journal: Reprod Toxicol Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 3.143
Authors: Megan E Romano; Nicola L Hawley; Melissa Eliot; Antonia M Calafat; Nayana K Jayatilaka; Karl Kelsey; Stephen McGarvey; Maureen G Phipps; David A Savitz; Erika F Werner; Joseph M Braun Journal: Environ Health Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Heather M Stapleton; Smriti Sharma; Gordon Getzinger; P Lee Ferguson; Michelle Gabriel; Thomas F Webster; Arlene Blum Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2012-11-28 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Carmen Messerlian; Paige L Williams; Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón; Courtney C Carignan; Jennifer B Ford; Craig M Butt; John D Meeker; Heather M Stapleton; Irene Souter; Russ Hauser Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Subham Dasgupta; Vanessa Cheng; Sara M F Vliet; Constance A Mitchell; David C Volz Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2018-09-10 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Arlene Blum; Mamta Behl; Linda Birnbaum; Miriam L Diamond; Allison Phillips; Veena Singla; Nisha S Sipes; Heather M Stapleton; Marta Venier Journal: Environ Sci Technol Lett Date: 2019-10-21
Authors: Stephanie C Hammel; Kate Hoffman; Allison L Phillips; Jessica L Levasseur; Amelia M Lorenzo; Thomas F Webster; Heather M Stapleton Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2020-03-11 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Xiaotong Wang; Trang Luu; Marc A Beal; Tara S Barton-Maclaren; Bernard Robaire; Barbara F Hales Journal: Toxicol Sci Date: 2022-03-28 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Anna S Young; Russ Hauser; Tamarra M James-Todd; Brent A Coull; Hongkai Zhu; Kurunthachalam Kannan; Aaron J Specht; Maya S Bliss; Joseph G Allen Journal: Environ Int Date: 2020-10-19 Impact factor: 9.621