ArticleReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2026
Cryopreservation of Human Spermatozoa Using Penetrating Cryoprotectant-Free Vitrification Medium Exhibits an Altered Proteomic Profile Compared to the Conventional Rapid Freezing Method.
Article in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study aimed to assess the functional and proteomic changes in human spermatozoa cryopreserved in a vitrification medium without a penetrating cryoprotectant. Leftover ejaculates (n = 71) from men visiting the andrology laboratory for routine semen analysis were used. The liquefied semen samples were cryopreserved using rapid freezing and vitrification for a minimum of seven days. Post-thaw motility, mitochondrial function, DNA damage, and acrosomal integrity of spermatozoa were similar between the cryoprotectant-free vitrification and rapid freezing methods. However, the head morphology of spermatozoa was better preserved when cryopreserved by vitrification method. Proteomic analysis led to the identification of a total of 4378 proteins in spermatozoa. Proteomic profiling identified 760 and 1661 significantly altered proteins in the spermatozoa subjected to rapid freezing and vitrification, respectively, compared with fresh spermatozoa. Gene Ontology (GO) analysis revealed considerable overlapping functional enrichment patterns between rapid freezing and vitrification, indicating that both cryopreservation methods influence several common functional pathways in spermatozoa. Both methods resulted in differential abundance of proteins involved in cytoskeletal organization, oxidative stress response, energy metabolism, and fertilization. Although functional analyses demonstrated that the functional properties of spermatozoa cryopreserved by penetrating cryoprotectant-free vitrification is similar to those subjected to rapid freezing, proteomic analysis revealed distinct molecular alterations, warranting further investigation to establish the possible differences in fertilizing potential, long-term safety aspects and reproductive outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42722975What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.