| Literature DB >> 30774957 |
João Baetas1,2, Ana Rabaça1, Ana Gonçalves3, Alberto Barros3,4,5, Mário Sousa1,6, Rosália Sá1,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although recent progress in cancer treatment has increased patient survival and improved quality of life, reproductive side effects are still for concern. One way to decrease gonadal impairment is to use cytoprotectors. In testicular cancer, etoposide is generally used in combination with other agents, but there are no in-vitro studies of sperm exposure to etoposide and cytoprotectors, namely N-acetylcysteine (NAC).Entities:
Keywords: Etoposide; N-acetylcysteine (NAC); Sperm DNA fragmentation; Sperm oxidative stress
Year: 2019 PMID: 30774957 PMCID: PMC6366041 DOI: 10.1186/s12610-018-0082-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Basic Clin Androl ISSN: 2051-4190
Mean values of studied parameters and comparisons between groups
| Parameters | TPM (%) | HOST (%) | AB+ (%) | TUNEL (%) | 8-OHdG (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean values | |||||
| CT | 57.0 ± 6.0 | 50.7 ± 5.3 | 21.8 ± 9.5 | 16.1 ± 3.2 | 9.3 + 4.4 |
| NAC | 68.6 ± 9.2 | 49.9 ± 5.2 | 22.2 ± 11.4 | 15.4 ± 2.4 | 23.7 ± 13.5 |
| ETO | 60.1 ± 7.1 | 56.4 ± 6.6 | 33.7 ± 11.1 | 23.7 ± 1.1 | 24 ± 16.5 |
| NAC-ETO | 49.3 ± 9.9 | 47.5 ± 4.8 | 23.2 ± 6.6 | 20.4 ± 4.5 | 26 ± 12 |
| ETO-NAC | 50.2 ± 5.2 | 49.4 ± 8.0 | 20.8 ± 9.0 | 19.1 ± 6.3 | 25.6 ± 11.7 |
| Statistical comparisons between groups ( | |||||
| CT vs NAC | NS | NS | NS | NS | 0.002 |
| CT vs ETO | NS | NS | 0.02 | 0.0019 | 0.002 |
| CT vs NE | NS | NS | NS | 0.0044 | 0.0421 |
| CT vs EN | NS | NS | NS | NS | 0.0283 |
| NAC vs ETO | NS | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.02 | NS |
| NAC vs NE | NS | NS | NS | 0.0039 | NS |
| NAC vs EN | NS | NS | NS | 0.0042 | NS |
| ETO vs NE | NS | 0.01 | 0.0001 | NS | NS |
| ETO vs EN | NS | 0.04 | 0.00001 | NS | NS |
| NE vs EN | NS | NS | 0.0044 | NS | NS |
Values are expressed in mean ± standard deviation, TPM = sperm total progressive motility, HOST = sperm hypoosmotic swelling test, AB+ = positive sperm aniline blue staining (presence of immature chromatin), TUNEL = terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labelling (presence of sperm DNA fragmentation), 8-OHdG = 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine (presence of sperm oxidative damage), CT = control, NAC = N-acetylcysteine, ETO = etoposide, NAC-ETO = incubation with NAC followed by etoposide addition, ETO-NAC = incubation with etoposide followed by addition of NAC, Significant differences (P < 0.05), NS = not significant
Fig. 1Glutathione production measured in human sperm with comparisons between groups. CT = control group (samples incubated with sperm preparation medium), NAC group = sperm treated with 50 μM of N-acetylcysteine, ETO group = sperm treated with 25 μg/mL of etoposide, NAC + ETO group = sperm pre-treated with 50 μM of NAC for the first hour plus 25 μg/mL of etoposide for the second hour of incubation, ETO + NAC group = sperm incubated with 25 μg/mL of etoposide for the first hour plus post treatment with 50 μM of NAC for the second hour. Significant differences (P < 0.05) between experimental groups are indicated by letters over corresponding lines (a = a, b = b, a ≠ b)