One4Two®: An Integrated Molecular Approach to Optimize Infertile Couples' Journey

Metagenomics Reveals Specific Microbial Features in Males with Semen Alterations

Infertility incidence is rising worldwide, with male infertility accounting for about 50% of cases. To date, several factors have been associated with male infertility; in particular, it has been suggested that semen microbiota may play a role. Here, we report the NGS-based analyses of 20 semen samples collected from men with (Case) and without (Control) semen alterations. Genomic DNA was extracted from each collected sample, and a specific PCR was carried out to amplify the V4-V6 regions of the 16S rRNA. Sequence reactions were carried out on the MiSeq and analyzed by specific bioinformatic tools. We found a reduced richness and evenness in the Case versus the Control group. Moreover, specific genera, the Mannheimia, the Escherichia_Shigella, and the Varibaculum, were significantly increased in the Case compared to the Control group. Finally, we highlighted a correlation between the microbial profile and semen hyperviscosity. Even if further studies are required on larger groups of subjects to confirm these findings and explore mechanistic hypotheses, our results confirm the correlation between semen features and seminal microbiota. These data, in turn, may open the way to the possible use of semen microbiota as an attractive target for developing novel strategies for infertility management.

Semen rheology and its relation to male infertility

Infertility affects 15% of couples of reproductive age worldwide. In spite of many advances in understanding and treating male infertility, there is still a number of issues that need further investigation and translation to the clinic. Here, we review the current knowledge and practice concerning semen rheology and its relation with pathological states affecting male infertility. Although it is well recognized that altered rheological properties of semen can impair normal sperm movement in the female reproductive tract, routine semen analysis is mostly focused on number, motility and morphology of spermatozoa, and includes only an approximate, operator-dependent measure of semen viscosity. The latter is based on the possible formation of a liquid thread from a pipette where a semen sample has been aspirated, a method that is sensitive not only to viscosity but also to elongational properties and surface tension of semen. The formation of a liquid thread is usually associated with a gel-like consistency of the sample and changes in spermatozoa motility in such a complex medium are still to be fully elucidated. The aim of this review is to point out that a more quantitative and reliable characterization of semen rheology is in order to improve the current methods of semen analysis and to develop additional tools for the diagnosis and treatment of male infertility.

Novel Genomic Variants, Atypical Phenotypes and Evidence of a Digenic/Oligogenic Contribution to Disorders/Differences of Sex Development in a Large North African Cohort

In a majority of individuals with disorders/differences of sex development (DSD) a genetic etiology is often elusive. However, new genes causing DSD are routinely reported and using the unbiased genomic approaches, such as whole exome sequencing (WES) should result in an increased diagnostic yield. Here, we performed WES on a large cohort of 125 individuals all of Algerian origin, who presented with a wide range of DSD phenotypes. The study excluded individuals with congenital adrenal hypoplasia (CAH) or chromosomal DSD. Parental consanguinity was reported in 36% of individuals. The genetic etiology was established in 49.6% (62/125) individuals of the total cohort, which includes 42.2% (35/83) of 46, XY non-syndromic DSD and 69.2% (27/39) of 46, XY syndromic DSD. No pathogenic variants were identified in the 46, XX DSD cases (0/3). Variants in the AR, HSD17B3, NR5A1 and SRD5A2 genes were the most common causes of DSD. Other variants were identified in genes associated with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH), including the CHD7 and PROKR2. Previously unreported pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (n = 30) involving 25 different genes were identified in 22.4% of the cohort. Remarkably 11.5% of the 46, XY DSD group carried variants classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant in more than one gene known to cause DSD. The data indicates that variants in PLXNA3, a candidate CHH gene, is unlikely to be involved in CHH. The data also suggest that NR2F2 variants may cause 46, XY DSD.

Evaluation of a Four-Gene Panel for Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment

BRCA1/2 are tumor suppressor genes involved in DNA double-strand break repair. They are the most penetrant genes for hereditary breast and ovarian cancers, but pathogenic variants in these two genes can be identified only in a fraction of hereditary cases. Following the diffusion of BRCA molecular testing and the availability of specific therapeutic strategies for the management of pathogenic variant carriers, the demand for the analysis of additional predisposing genetic factors has increased. Indeed, there is accumulating evidence regarding the role of other genes, including CHEK2 and PALB2. Both of them are involved in the same molecular pathway as BRCA genes, with CHEK2 being responsible for cell cycle stopping to allow the repair of DNA double-strand breaks and PALB2 being able to interact with BRCA1 and activate BRCA2. Thus, their role as additional hereditary cancer predisposing factors is intriguing. Accordingly, guidelines for hereditary cancer risk assessment have been updated to include the criteria for additional genes testing. In this context, we validated a commercially available kit allowing for the simultaneous analysis of BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and PALB2. Forty-eight patients, already tested for BRCA mutational status, were re-analyzed in the present study. Results comparison showed that the tested method was able to correctly identify all the variants previously detected in the same patients. In particular, all single-nucleotide variants and small indels were correctly identified. Moreover, two copy number variants, included to assess the software’s performance in detecting this kind of gene alteration, were also detected. Even if copy number variant estimation still requires confirmation by a molecular technique to avoid false positive results, it is able to reduce the number of patients requiring multiplex ligation probe amplification analysis, positively impacting the test’s turnaround time. Finally, since the time and costs of the analysis are similar to those required just for BRCA genes, this strategy may be affordable for providing a more comprehensive test for hereditary cancer risk assessment.

Current Updates on Expanded Carrier Screening: New Insights in the Omics Era

Genetic carrier screening has been successfully used over the last decades to identify individuals at risk of transmitting specific DNA variants to their newborns, thus having an affected child. Traditional testing has been offered based on familial and/or ethnic backgrounds. The development of high-throughput technologies, such as next-generations sequencing, able to allow the study of large genomic regions in a time and cost-affordable way, has moved carrier screening toward a more comprehensive and extensive approach, i.e., expanded carrier screening (ECS). ECS simultaneously analyses several disease-related genes and better estimates individuals’ carrier status. Indeed, it is not influenced by ethnicity and is not limited to a subset of mutations that may arise from poor information in some populations. Moreover, if couples carry out ECS before conceiving a baby, it allows them to obtain a complete estimation of their genetic risk and the possibility to make an informed decision regarding their reproductive life. Despite these advantages, some weakness still exists regarding, for example, the number of genes and the kind of diseases to be analyzed and the interpretation and communication of the obtained results. Once these points are fixed, it is expectable that ECS will become an ever more frequent practice in clinical settings.

The Gender Gap in the Diagnostic-Therapeutic Journey of the Infertile Couple

Medical procreation impairs both the biological and psychological lives of couples. However, male and female attitudes to infertility are different and require a different approach during the IVF journey. Thus, the gender impact assessment (GIA) method was used to analyse original studies present in the literature. We found some gender-related differences and, subsequently, possible outcomes of intervention to improve healthy reproduction management and prevent infertility. In particular, it became apparent that there was the need for an in-depth male infertility assessment and a gender-specific follow-up.

Unraveling the Balance between Genes, Microbes, Lifestyle and the Environment to Improve Healthy Reproduction

Humans’ health is the result of a complex and balanced interplay between genetic factors, environmental stimuli, lifestyle habits, and the microbiota composition. The knowledge about their single contributions, as well as the complex network linking each to the others, is pivotal to understand the mechanisms underlying the onset of many diseases and can provide key information for their prevention, diagnosis and therapy. This applies also to reproduction. Reproduction, involving almost 10% of our genetic code, is one of the most critical human’s functions and is a key element to assess the well-being of a population. The last decades revealed a progressive decline of reproductive outcomes worldwide. As a consequence, there is a growing interest in unveiling the role of the different factors involved in human reproduction and great efforts have been carried out to improve its outcomes. As for many other diseases, it is now clear that the interplay between the underlying genetics, our commensal microbiome, the lifestyle habits and the environment we live in can either exacerbate the outcome or mitigate the adverse effects. Here, we aim to analyze how each of these factors contribute to reproduction highlighting their individual contribution and providing supporting evidence of how to modify their impact and overall contribution to a healthy reproductive status.