The lack of evidence behind over-the-counter antioxidant supplements for male fertility patients: a scoping review.

IF 8.3 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Human reproduction open Pub Date : 2023-05-17 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1093/hropen/hoad020
Wiep R de Ligny, Kathrin Fleischer, Hilde Grens, Didi D M Braat, Jan Peter de Bruin
{"title":"The lack of evidence behind over-the-counter antioxidant supplements for male fertility patients: a scoping review.","authors":"Wiep R de Ligny, Kathrin Fleischer, Hilde Grens, Didi D M Braat, Jan Peter de Bruin","doi":"10.1093/hropen/hoad020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study question: </strong>What is the evidence for over-the-counter antioxidant supplements for male infertility?</p><p><strong>Summary answer: </strong>Less than half of over-the-counter antioxidant supplements for male fertility patients have been tested in a clinical trial, and the available clinical trials are generally of poor quality.</p><p><strong>What is known already: </strong>The prevalence of male infertility is rising and, with this, the market for supplements claiming to improve male fertility is expanding. Up to now, there is limited data on the evidence for these over-the-counter supplements.</p><p><strong>Study design size duration: </strong>Amazon, Google Shopping and other relevant shopping websites were searched on 24 June 2022 with the following terms: 'supplements', 'antioxidants', 'vitamins', AND 'male fertility', 'male infertility', 'male subfertility', 'fertility men', 'fertility man'. All supplements with a description of ingredients in English, Dutch, French, Spanish, or German were included. Subsequently, Pubmed and Google Scholar were searched for studies that included the supplements.</p><p><strong>Participants/materials setting methods: </strong>Inclusion criteria were supplements with antioxidant properties, of which the main purpose was to improve male fertility. Included supplements must be available without a doctor's prescription. Supplements containing plant extracts were excluded, as well as supplements of which the content or dosage was not clear. The ingredients, dosage, price and health claims of the supplements were recorded. We assessed whether substances in the supplements exceeded the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) or tolerable upper intake level (UL). All clinical trials and animal studies investigating included supplements were selected for this review. Clinical trials were assessed for risk of bias with a risk of bias tool appropriate for the study design.</p><p><strong>Main results and the role of chance: </strong>There were 34 eligible antioxidant supplements found, containing 48 different active substances. The average price per 30 days was 53.10 US dollars. Most of the supplements (27/34, 79%) contained substances in a dosage exceeding the recommended daily allowance (RDA). All manufacturers of the supplements made health claims related to the improvement of sperm quality or male fertility. For 13 of the 34 supplements (38%), published clinical trials were available, and for one supplement, only an animal study was found. The overall quality of the included studies was poor. Only two supplements were tested in a good quality clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Limitations reasons for caution: </strong>As a consequence of searching shopping websites, a comprehensive search strategy could not be formulated. Most supplements were excluded because they contained plant extracts or because supplement information was not available (in an appropriate language).</p><p><strong>Wider implications of the findings: </strong>This is the first review that gives an insight into the market of male fertility supplements as available to infertility patients and other men seeking to improve their fertility. Earlier reviews have focused only on supplements with published clinical trials. However, we show that more than half of the supplements have not been tested in a clinical trial. To our knowledge, this review is the first to assess the dosage of supplements in relation to the RDA. In agreement with the literature, we found that the evidence on male fertility supplements is generally of poor quality. This review should urge pharmaceutical companies to evaluate their products in randomized controlled trials in order to provide people with substantiated information.</p><p><strong>Study funding/competing interests: </strong>The research position of W.R.d.L. is funded by an unrestricted grant from Goodlife Pharma. W.R.d.L., K.F., and J.P.d.B. are in the research team of a clinical trial on Impryl<sup>®</sup>, one of the supplements included in this review.</p><p><strong>Registration number: </strong>N/A.</p>","PeriodicalId":73264,"journal":{"name":"Human reproduction open","volume":"2023 3","pages":"hoad020"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10244220/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human reproduction open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoad020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study question: What is the evidence for over-the-counter antioxidant supplements for male infertility?

Summary answer: Less than half of over-the-counter antioxidant supplements for male fertility patients have been tested in a clinical trial, and the available clinical trials are generally of poor quality.

What is known already: The prevalence of male infertility is rising and, with this, the market for supplements claiming to improve male fertility is expanding. Up to now, there is limited data on the evidence for these over-the-counter supplements.

Study design size duration: Amazon, Google Shopping and other relevant shopping websites were searched on 24 June 2022 with the following terms: 'supplements', 'antioxidants', 'vitamins', AND 'male fertility', 'male infertility', 'male subfertility', 'fertility men', 'fertility man'. All supplements with a description of ingredients in English, Dutch, French, Spanish, or German were included. Subsequently, Pubmed and Google Scholar were searched for studies that included the supplements.

Participants/materials setting methods: Inclusion criteria were supplements with antioxidant properties, of which the main purpose was to improve male fertility. Included supplements must be available without a doctor's prescription. Supplements containing plant extracts were excluded, as well as supplements of which the content or dosage was not clear. The ingredients, dosage, price and health claims of the supplements were recorded. We assessed whether substances in the supplements exceeded the recommended dietary allowance (RDA) or tolerable upper intake level (UL). All clinical trials and animal studies investigating included supplements were selected for this review. Clinical trials were assessed for risk of bias with a risk of bias tool appropriate for the study design.

Main results and the role of chance: There were 34 eligible antioxidant supplements found, containing 48 different active substances. The average price per 30 days was 53.10 US dollars. Most of the supplements (27/34, 79%) contained substances in a dosage exceeding the recommended daily allowance (RDA). All manufacturers of the supplements made health claims related to the improvement of sperm quality or male fertility. For 13 of the 34 supplements (38%), published clinical trials were available, and for one supplement, only an animal study was found. The overall quality of the included studies was poor. Only two supplements were tested in a good quality clinical trial.

Limitations reasons for caution: As a consequence of searching shopping websites, a comprehensive search strategy could not be formulated. Most supplements were excluded because they contained plant extracts or because supplement information was not available (in an appropriate language).

Wider implications of the findings: This is the first review that gives an insight into the market of male fertility supplements as available to infertility patients and other men seeking to improve their fertility. Earlier reviews have focused only on supplements with published clinical trials. However, we show that more than half of the supplements have not been tested in a clinical trial. To our knowledge, this review is the first to assess the dosage of supplements in relation to the RDA. In agreement with the literature, we found that the evidence on male fertility supplements is generally of poor quality. This review should urge pharmaceutical companies to evaluate their products in randomized controlled trials in order to provide people with substantiated information.

Study funding/competing interests: The research position of W.R.d.L. is funded by an unrestricted grant from Goodlife Pharma. W.R.d.L., K.F., and J.P.d.B. are in the research team of a clinical trial on Impryl®, one of the supplements included in this review.

Registration number: N/A.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
男性不育患者服用非处方抗氧化剂补充剂缺乏证据:一项范围审查。
研究问题:非处方抗氧化补充剂治疗男性不育症的证据是什么?概要回答:用于男性不育患者的非处方抗氧化剂补充剂中,只有不到一半经过了临床试验,而且现有的临床试验通常质量较差。已知情况:男性不育症的患病率正在上升,与此同时,声称能提高男性生育能力的补品市场也在扩大。到目前为止,关于这些非处方补充剂的证据数据有限。研究设计规模持续时间:于2022年6月24日在亚马逊、谷歌购物和其他相关购物网站上搜索以下术语:“补品”、“抗氧化剂”、“维生素”和“男性生育能力”、“男性不育”、“男性低生育能力”、“生育能力男性”、“生育能力男性”。所有用英语、荷兰语、法语、西班牙语或德语描述成分的补充剂都被包括在内。随后,Pubmed和Google Scholar搜索了包含这些补充剂的研究。受试者/材料设置方法:纳入标准为抗氧化补充剂,其主要目的是提高男性生育能力。包括补充剂必须在没有医生处方的情况下获得。排除了含有植物提取物的补充剂,以及含量或剂量不明确的补充剂。记录了补充剂的成分、剂量、价格和健康声明。我们评估了补充剂中的物质是否超过了推荐膳食允许量(RDA)或可容忍的最高摄入量(UL)。所有临床试验和动物研究都被选为本综述的研究对象。使用适合研究设计的偏倚风险评估工具评估临床试验的偏倚风险。主要结果和偶然性的作用:共发现34种符合条件的抗氧化剂补充剂,含有48种不同的活性物质。每30天的平均价格为53.10美元。大多数补充剂(27/ 34,79%)所含物质的剂量超过了建议的每日允许量(RDA)。所有补品制造商都声称能提高精子质量或男性生育能力。对于34种补充剂中的13种(38%),已发表的临床试验是可用的,而对于一种补充剂,只发现了动物研究。纳入研究的总体质量较差。只有两种补品在高质量的临床试验中进行了测试。限制:谨慎的原因:搜索购物网站的结果,一个全面的搜索策略无法制定。大多数补充剂被排除在外,因为它们含有植物提取物,或者因为补充剂信息不可用(以适当的语言)。研究结果的更广泛意义:这是首次对男性生育补品市场进行深入研究的综述,该市场面向不育患者和其他寻求提高生育能力的男性。早期的评论只关注已发表临床试验的补充剂。然而,我们发现超过一半的补充剂没有经过临床试验。据我们所知,这篇综述是第一次评估补充剂的剂量与RDA的关系。与文献一致,我们发现关于男性生育补充剂的证据通常质量较差。这篇综述应该敦促制药公司在随机对照试验中评估他们的产品,以便为人们提供确凿的信息。研究经费/竞争利益:W.R.d.L.的研究职位由Goodlife Pharma提供无限制的资助。w.r.d.l., k.f.和J.P.d.B.是Impryl®临床试验的研究小组成员,Impryl®是本综述中包括的补充剂之一。注册号:无。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Birth defects reporting and the use of dydrogesterone: a disproportionality analysis from the World Health Organization pharmacovigilance database (VigiBase). The interplay between mitochondrial DNA genotypes, female infertility, ovarian response, and mutagenesis in oocytes. Unmasking the risk: clinical trials versus real-world evidence on dydrogesterone and birth defects. Evidence-based guideline: premature ovarian insufficiency. Independent factors associated with intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes in patients with complete azoospermia factor c microdeletions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1