skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Association of male fatty acid intake with fecundability among couples planning pregnancy
Abstract STUDY QUESTIONTo what extent is male fatty acid intake associated with fecundability among couples planning pregnancy? SUMMARY ANSWERWe observed weak positive associations of male dietary intakes of total and saturated fatty acids with fecundability; no other fatty acid subtypes were appreciably associated with fecundability. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADYMale fatty acid intake has been associated with semen quality in previous studies. However, little is known about the extent to which male fatty acid intake is associated with fecundability among couples attempting spontaneous conception. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATIONWe conducted an internet-based preconception prospective cohort study of 697 couples who enrolled during 2015–2022. During 12 cycles of observation, 53 couples (7.6%) were lost to follow-up. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODSParticipants were residents of the USA or Canada, aged 21–45 years, and not using fertility treatment at enrollment. At baseline, male participants completed a food frequency questionnaire from which we estimated intakes of total fat and fatty acid subtypes. We ascertained time to pregnancy using questionnaires completed every 8 weeks by female participants until conception or up to 12 months. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% CIs for the associations of fat intakes with fecundability, adjusting for male and female partner characteristics. We used the multivariate nutrient density method to account for energy intake, allowing for interpretation of results as fat intake replacing carbohydrate intake. We conducted several sensitivity analyses to assess the potential for confounding, selection bias, and reverse causation. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCEAmong 697 couples, we observed 465 pregnancies during 2970 menstrual cycles of follow-up. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy during 12 cycles of follow-up after accounting for censoring was 76%. Intakes of total and saturated fatty acids were weakly, positively associated with fecundability. Fully adjusted FRs for quartiles of total fat intake were 1.32 (95% CI 1.01–1.71), 1.16 (95% CI 0.88–1.51), and 1.43 (95% CI 1.09–1.88) for the second, third, and fourth vs the first quartile, respectively. Fully adjusted FRs for saturated fatty acid intake were 1.21 (95% CI 0.94–1.55), 1.16 (95% CI 0.89–1.51), and 1.23 (95% CI 0.94–1.62) for the second, third, and fourth vs the first quartile, respectively. Intakes of monounsaturated, polyunsaturated, trans-, omega-3, and omega-6 fatty acids were not strongly associated with fecundability. Results were similar after adjustment for the female partner’s intakes of trans- and omega-3 fats. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTIONDietary intakes estimated from the food frequency questionnaire may be subject to non-differential misclassification, which is expected to bias results toward the null in the extreme categories when exposures are modeled as quartiles. There may be residual confounding by unmeasured dietary, lifestyle, or environmental factors. Sample size was limited, especially in subgroup analyses. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGSOur results do not support a strong causal effect of male fatty acid intakes on fecundability among couples attempting to conceive spontaneously. The weak positive associations we observed between male dietary fat intakes and fecundability may reflect a combination of causal associations, measurement error, chance, and residual confounding. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, grant numbers R01HD086742 and R01HD105863. In the last 3 years, PRESTO has received in-kind donations from Swiss Precision Diagnostics (home pregnancy tests) and Kindara.com (fertility app). L.A.W. is a consultant for AbbVie, Inc. M.L.E. is an advisor to Sandstone, Ro, Underdog, Dadi, Hannah, Doveras, and VSeat. The other authors have no competing interests to report. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERN/A.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1914792
PAR ID:
10466727
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Oxford
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Human Reproduction
Volume:
38
Issue:
8
ISSN:
0268-1161
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1601 to 1612
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, American Journal of Epidemiology)
    Abstract We examined the association between childhood adversity and fecundability (the per-cycle probability of conception), and the extent to which childhood social support modified this association. We used data from 6318 female participants aged 21-45 years in Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), a North American prospective preconception cohort study (2013-2022). Participants completed a baseline questionnaire, bimonthly follow-up questionnaires (until pregnancy or a censoring event), and a supplemental questionnaire on experiences across the life course including adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and social support (using the modified Berkman-Syme Social Network Index [SNI]). We used proportional probabilities regression models to compute fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% CIs, adjusting for potential confounders and precision variables. Adjusted FRs for ACE scores 1-3 and ≥4 vs 0 were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.85-0.97) and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.77-0.91), respectively. The FRs for ACE scores ≥4 vs 0 were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78-0.94) among participants reporting high childhood social support (SNI ≥4) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.56-1.07) among participants reporting low childhood social support (SNI <4). Our findings confirm results from 2 previous studies and indicate that high childhood social support slightly buffered the effects of childhood adversity on fecundability. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, JBMR Plus)
    Abstract Western diets are becoming increasingly common around the world. Western diets have high omega 6 (ω-6) and omega 3 (ω-3) fatty acids and are linked to bone loss in humans and animals. Dietary fats are not created equal; therefore, it is vital to understand the effects of specific dietary fats on bone. We aimed to determine how altering the endogenous ratios of ω-6:ω-3 fatty acids impacts bone accrual, strength, and fracture toughness. To accomplish this, we used the Fat-1 transgenic mice, which carry a gene responsible for encoding a ω-3 fatty acid desaturase that converts ω-6 to ω-3 fatty acids. Male and female Fat-1 positive mice (Fat-1) and Fat-1 negative littermates (WT) were given either a high-fat diet (HFD) or low-fat diet (LFD) at 4 wk of age for 16 wk. The Fat-1 transgene reduced fracture toughness in males. Additionally, male BMD, measured from DXA, decreased over the diet duration for HFD mice. In males, neither HFD feeding nor the presence of the Fat-1 transgene impacted cortical geometry, trabecular architecture, or whole-bone flexural properties, as detected by main group effects. In females, Fat-1-LFD mice experienced increases in BMD compared to WT-LFD mice; however, cortical area, distal femur trabecular thickness, and cortical stiffness were reduced in Fat-1 mice compared to pooled WT controls. However, reductions in stiffness were caused by a decrease in bone size and were not driven by changes in material properties. Together, these results demonstrate that the endogenous ω-6:ω-3 fatty acid ratio influences bone material properties in a sex-dependent manner. In addition, Fat-1 mediated fatty acid conversion was not able to mitigate the adverse effects of HFD on bone strength and accrual. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, American Journal of Epidemiology)
    Abstract Some reproductive-aged individuals remain unvaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) because of concerns about potential adverse effects on fertility. Using data from an internet-based preconception cohort study, we examined the associations of COVID-19 vaccination and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with fertility among couples trying to conceive spontaneously. We enrolled 2,126 self-identified female participants aged 21–45 year residing in the United States or Canada during December 2020–September 2021 and followed them through November 2021. Participants completed questionnaires every 8 weeks on sociodemographics, lifestyle, medical factors, and partner information. We fit proportional probabilities regression models to estimate associations between self-reported COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection in both partners with fecundability (i.e., the per-cycle probability of conception), adjusting for potential confounders. COVID-19 vaccination was not appreciably associated with fecundability in either partner (female fecundability ratio (FR) = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95, 1.23; male FR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.10). Female SARS-CoV-2 infection was not strongly associated with fecundability (FR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.31). Male infection was associated with a transient reduction in fecundability (for infection within 60 days, FR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.47, 1.45; for infection after 60 days, FR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.47). These findings indicate that male SARS-CoV-2 infection may be associated with a short-term decline in fertility and that COVID-19 vaccination does not impair fertility in either partner. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Human Reproduction)
    Abstract STUDY QUESTION To what extent is exposure to cellular telephones associated with male fertility? SUMMARY ANSWER Overall, we found little association between carrying a cell phone in the front pants pocket and male fertility, although among leaner men (BMI <25 kg/m2), carrying a cell phone in the front pants pocket was associated with lower fecundability. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Some studies have indicated that cell phone use is associated with poor semen quality, but the results are conflicting. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Two prospective preconception cohort studies were conducted with men in Denmark (n = 751) and in North America (n = 2349), enrolled and followed via the internet from 2012 to 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS On the baseline questionnaire, males reported their hours/day of carrying a cell phone in different body locations. We ascertained time to pregnancy via bi-monthly follow-up questionnaires completed by the female partner for up to 12 months or until reported conception. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between male cell phone habits and fecundability, focusing on front pants pocket exposure, within each cohort separately and pooling across the cohorts using a fixed-effect meta-analysis. In a subset of participants, we examined selected semen parameters (semen volume, sperm concentration and sperm motility) using a home-based semen testing kit. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE There was little overall association between carrying a cell phone in a front pants pocket and fecundability: the FR for any front pants pocket exposure versus none was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.0.83–1.05). We observed an inverse association between any front pants pocket exposure and fecundability among men whose BMI was <25 kg/m2 (FR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59–0.88) but little association among men whose BMI was ≥25 kg/m2 (FR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.90–1.22). There were few consistent associations between cell phone exposure and semen volume, sperm concentration, or sperm motility. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Exposure to radiofrequency radiation from cell phones is subject to considerable non-differential misclassification, which would tend to attenuate the estimates for dichotomous comparisons and extreme exposure categories (e.g. exposure 8 vs. 0 h/day). Residual confounding by occupation or other unknown or poorly measured factors may also have affected the results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Overall, there was little association between carrying one’s phone in the front pants pocket and fecundability. There was a moderate inverse association between front pants pocket cell phone exposure and fecundability among men with BMI <25 kg/m2, but not among men with BMI ≥25 kg/m2. Although several previous studies have indicated associations between cell phone exposure and lower sperm motility, we found few consistent associations with any semen quality parameters. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, grant number R03HD090315. In the last 3 years, PRESTO has received in-kind donations from Sandstone Diagnostics (for semen kits), Swiss Precision Diagnostics (home pregnancy tests), Kindara.com (fertility app), and FertilityFriend.com (fertility app). Dr. L.A.W. is a fibroid consultant for AbbVie, Inc. Dr. H.T.S. reports that the Department of Clinical Epidemiology is involved in studies with funding from various companies as research grants to and administered by Aarhus University. None of these studies are related to the current study. Dr. M.L.E. is an advisor to Sandstone Diagnostics, Ro, Dadi, Hannah, and Underdog. Dr. G.J.S. holds ownership in Sandstone Diagnostics Inc., developers of the Trak Male Fertility Testing System. In addition, Dr. G.J.S. has a patent pending related to Trak Male Fertility Testing System issued. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; (, American Journal of Epidemiology)
    Abstract Although electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) aerosol contains similar toxicants to combustible cigarettes, few studies have examined their influence on fecundability. We assessed the association between e-cigarette use and fecundability, overall and according to combustible cigarette smoking history, in a cohort of 4,586 North American women (aged 21–45 years) enrolled during 2017–2020 in Pregnancy Study Online, a Web-based prospective preconception study. Women reported current and former e-cigarette use on baseline and follow-up questionnaires, and they completed bimonthly follow-up questionnaires until self-reported pregnancy or censoring. Fecundability ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using proportional probabilities models, controlling for potential confounders. Overall, 17% of women had ever used e-cigarettes and 4% were current users. Compared with never use of e-cigarettes, current e-cigarette use was associated with slightly lower fecundability (fecundability ratio = 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67, 1.06). Compared with current nonusers of e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes, fecundability ratios were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.54, 1.29) for current dual users of e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes, 0.91 (95% CI: 0.70, 1.18) for current e-cigarette users who were nonsmokers of combustible cigarettes, and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.85, 1.20) for nonusers of e-cigarettes who were current smokers of combustible cigarettes. Current e-cigarette use was associated with slightly reduced fecundability, but estimates of its independent and joint associations with combustible cigarette smoking were inconsistent and imprecise. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email