Abstract
In brief
The genetic heterogeneity of CFTR gene mutations in Chinese patients with congenital absence of the vas deferens (CAVD) differs from the hotspot mutation pattern in Caucasians. This paper reviews and suggests a more suitable screening strategy for the Chinese considering the dilemma of CFTR genetic blocking.
Abstract
Congenital absence of the vas deferens (CAVD) is a major cause of obstructive azoospermia and male infertility, with CFTR gene mutation as the main pathogenesis. Other genes such as ADGRG2, SLC9A3, and PANK2 have been discovered and proven to be associated with CAVD in recent studies. Multiple CFTR hotspot mutations have been found in Caucasians in several foreign countries, and relevant genetic counseling and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) have been conducted for decades. However, when we examined research on Chinese CAVD, we discovered that CFTR mutations show heterogeneity in the Chinese Han population, and there is currently no well-established screening strategy. Therefore, we have reviewed the literature, combining domestic and international research as well as our own, aiming to review research progress on the CFTR gene in China and discuss the appropriate scope for CFTR gene detection, the detection efficiency of other CAVD-related genes, and the screening strategy applicable to the Chinese Han population. This study provides more valuable information for genetic counseling and a theoretical basis for PGD and treatment for couples with CAVD when seeking reproductive assistance.
Introduction
Definition, history, and classification of CAVD
The absence of the vas deferens was first discovered during an autopsy by Hunter, a Scottish urologist and anatomist. Then in the middle of the 20th century, urologists discovered that congenital absence of the vas deferens (CAVD) was one of the causes of male infertility (Nelson 1950). Over the years, with a large number of clinical observations and summaries, CAVD has been classified into three clinical subtypes: congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens (CBAVD), congenital unilateral absence of the vas deferens (CUAVD), and a special subtype called congenital bilateral partial aplasia of the vas deferens (Wagenknecht et al. 1983). This phenotypic diversity makes the elucidation of the pathogenesis difficult, and in particular morphological abnormalities of the epididymis, seminal vesicles, and kidneys may also be associated with CAVD (Tizzano et al. 1994). Due to different clinical examination methods, there are differences in the size of seminal vesicles (including hypogoblet, atrophy, and dilation) or the lack of seminal vesicles reported in previous studies (Goldstein & Schlossberg 1988, Schlegel et al. 1996, Casals et al. 2000). In general, bilateral seminal vesicle abnormalities occurred twice as frequently in CBAVD than in other subtypes (50% vs 25%), while unilateral seminal vesicle abnormalities occurred predominantly in CUAVD (80%) and are usually ipsilateral. However, these data on CUAVD, mainly involving azoospermic patients, may be biased. The seminal vesicles and vas deferens are histologically homologous, and tissue studies suggest that their absence shares the same pathogenic mechanism (Trezise et al. 1993). In contrast, the relationship between the development of the kidney and the vas deferens is not very close; however, kidney abnormality combined with CAVD is not uncommon. Studies have shown that the incidence of unilateral renal absence (URA) combined with CAVD is as high as approximately 25%, while that of URA at birth is much lower (0.04%) (Laurichesse Delmas et al. 2017, Mieusset et al. 2017, Mieusset et al. 2020). Notably, the prevalence of URA in patients with CUAVD (20–40%) is two to four times that in patients with CBAVD (5–10%).
Biological mechanisms and clinical diagnosis of CAVD
There are currently two explanations for the pathogenesis of CAVD, namely, abnormal expression or function of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein caused by gene mutation and abnormal development of the mesonephric duct in the embryo. The CFTR gene is located on human chromosome 7q31.2, with a total length of 188,704 bp (Riordan et al. 1989). CFTR contains 27 regions encoding exons and encodes a peptide chain consisting of 1480 amino acids, which is mainly expressed in glandular epithelial cells of the respiratory tract, digestive tract, and reproductive tract. CFTR is composed of five domains, and a selective chloride channel is formed between two repetitive transmembrane domains (MSDs). A regulatory domain (RD) undergoes phosphorylation and dephosphorylation, and it promotes the binding and dissociation of two nucleotide-binding domains (NBDs) with ATP, causing conformational changes in the MSD and controlling the opening and closing of ion channels to maintain and regulate the transmembrane transport of ions across epithelial cells (Jentsch et al. 2002). CFTR controls channels that transport chloride and bicarbonate, which affects the concentration of liquid ions, pH levels, and liquid flow in glandular ducts (Choi et al. 2001). The epididymal duct and vas deferens are tortuous ducts with a small lumen, long duct, and long stroke, and the liquid in them is rich in various glycoproteins with viscosity (Zondek & Zondek 1980), which leads to a slow flow rate of liquid and easy stagnation and accumulation to cause obstruction. Tizzano et al. tested the reproductive tract tissues of neonates, infants and adults for CFTR expression. They found that from caput to cauda epididymis and then through the vas deferens to the seminal vesicles, CFTR expression gradually ceased. Interestingly, CFTR expression in the bilateral genital tracts was not consistent, suggesting that the morphological defects of the male reproductive ducts resulted from abnormal secretion processes rather than abnormal development (Tizzano et al. 1994). In summary, this mechanistic hypothesis is that abnormal expression or structure of CFTR leads to an insufficient transport function of its ion channels, resulting in an increased concentration and a decreased flow rate of liquid in the reproductive tract. Finally, the blockage of the lumen gradually develops into atrophy, degeneration, and disappearance of the vas deferens duct, which explains the existence of multiple subtypes of CAVD. Another potential or probable mechanism is that developmental defects of the mesonephric duct in the embryonic stage lead to undifferentiated or incomplete differentiation of the vas deferens. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that the development of the reproductive tract is homologous to that of the urinary tract and by the significantly lower detection rate of CFTR mutations in cases of CAVD with renal malformations. However, to date, no study has been conducted to clearly confirm and clarify the process and mechanism of vas deferens absence, and therefore, there is no treatment or prevention for this disease.
CAVD is diagnosed by impalpable scrotal vas deferens by physical examination and invisible pelvic or scrotal vas deferens by ultrasound, and the differential diagnosis mainly included nonobstructive azoospermia and oligozoospermia. Auxiliary diagnoses included normal testicular volume, decreased sperm volume, normal sex hormone levels, and testicular biopsy. There are three major circumstances in which CAVD is diagnosed: in men with cystic fibrosis (CF) or other genetically related conditions called CFTR-related disorders (CFTR-RDs), for which they have symptoms; in apparently healthy men who are referred for infertility due to azoospermia; or in asymptomatic fertile men with CAVD discovered by chance, such as during vasectomy or physical examination (Bieth et al. 2021). Upon diagnosis of CAVD, color Doppler ultrasound and MRI should be performed to assess whether there is any combination of epididymis or seminal vesicle defects, kidney and urinary system deformities, etc., and the volume and pH of semen and the level of seminal fructose may also contribute to the diagnosis.
Genetics of CFTR and genetic spectrum of CAVD patients in China
The impact of CFTR mutations on its function and associated clinical phenotypes
According to the pathogenic mechanism of CFTR dysfunction, gene mutations can be divided into six classes (Zielenski & Tsui 1995, Rowe et al. 2005, Wang et al. 2014). Class I, involving defective protein production, is mainly caused by nonsense mutations, frameshift mutations, and splicing mutations, which prevent the biosynthesis of CFTR protein. For example, the second most common CF mutation, G542X, creates a premature stop codon, which leads to early termination of transcription, causing a severe reduction in CFTR mRNA and eventually little or no functional CFTR protein reaching the plasma membrane (Hamosh et al. 1992). Class II, characterized by defective protein maturation and premature degradation, is caused by damage to the synthesis and folding process of CFTR protein. The prime example is F508del, the most common CF mutation in Caucasians (70% detection rate) (Rosenstein & Cutting 1998), which generates a misfolded polypeptide with no ability to resist digestive enzymes that are then degraded by the proteasome shortly after synthesis before it reaches its crucial site of action at the cell surface (Cheng et al. 1990, Farinha et al. 2013). Class III involves defective channel regulation. Although normal CFTR protein is produced and transferred to the cell membrane, it loses certain regulatory functions, and its ion transport function is compromised. The third most common CF mutation, G551D, possesses little or no chloride channel function in vivo because of the abnormal function of an NBD, resulting in disordered regulation (Bompadre et al. 2007). Fortunately, it is also the first clinically applicable CFTR mutation that can be targeted for treatment with an ion transport enhancer (ivacaftor) at the cellular molecular level (Van Goor et al. 2009, Ramsey et al. 2011). Class IV, involving defective channel conduction, is characterized by a reduction in the single-channel conductance of CFTR to different degrees, thereby reducing transport conduction efficiency. The common CF mutation R117H was estimated to reduce the single-channel conductance efficiency by approximately 15% (Sheppard et al. 1993). Class V involves reduced protein synthesis. Mutations of this class may include promoter mutations that reduce transcription (e.g. c-34C>T (Lukowski et al. 2011)), nucleotide alterations that promote alternative splicing of the CFTR transcript (e.g. 5T variant (Rave-Harel et al. 1997)), and amino acid substitutions that cause inefficient protein maturation (e.g. P574H and A455E (Kristidis et al. 1992)). All these mutations are considered to generate CFTR protein of normal function but with reduced expression compared to WT levels of tissue expression (Zielenski & Tsui 1995). Class VI, which involves reduced protein stability, was discovered and proposed by Haardt et al. in a study on the mechanism of the Q1412X termination mutation at the end of the coding chain (Haardt et al. 1999). Their study showed that Q1412X mutation reduces CFTR stability at the plasma membrane (half-life in COS cells: WT CFTR, 14 h; Q1412X, 3.5 h) but has no effect on the protein synthesis process.
Classes I–III are categorized as severe mutations and are associated with CF disease or severe pancreatic insufficiency of CFTR-RDs. Classes IV–VI are classified as mild mutations, for which the expressed CFTR protein can still bear part of the normal protein function, and they are associated with milder CFTR-RDs such as CAVD (LaRusch et al. 2014). CF is one of the most common autosomal recessive genetic diseases in Caucasians. The main manifestations of the disease are recurrent pulmonary infection, pancreatic insufficiency, and infertility caused by CAVD. The life span of these patients is usually much shorter than that of healthy patients, and approximately 95% of patients with CF have CBAVD. Although the prevalence of CF is lower in the non-Caucasian population, the prevalence of CBAVD does not seem to differ between regions and populations, showing a consistent level of approximately 1 in 1000 (Bombieri et al. 2011). In the Chinese population, CAVD dominates, and CF disease or severe CFTR-RDs are relatively rare. Several studies supported the conclusion that CBAVD is caused by compound heterozygosity for either one severe and one mild mutation or two mild mutations (Cuppens & Cassiman 2004, Claustres 2005). Chillon et al. studied CBAVD patients without clinical manifestations of CF and found that the combination of the 5T allele with a severe mutation in the other CFTR gene was the most common cause of CBAVD, which is consistent with the former conclusion since the 5T allele is the most common mild CFTR mutation. However, patients with CAVD alone were found to have race-specific CFTR mutations (Yang et al. 2015). According to statistics from our previous research, the most common mutation type in Chinese CBAVD patients is the combination of two mild mutations; that is, homozygous 5T alleles are dominant (Feng et al. 2019, Luo et al. 2021). To our knowledge, studies indicating which CFTR mutation types are associated with each subtype of CAVD have not been published. For CUAVDs, less than half of the patients carry at least one CFTR mutation according to comprehensive gene scanning, which means that more than half of the CUAVDs are not closely related (Cai et al. 2019, Mieusset et al. 2020), and some of them are combined with renal abnormalities, which are usually CFTR mutation-free (McCallum et al. 2001, Kolettis & Sandlow 2002, Yang et al. 2015).
CFTR genetic spectrum of Chinese CAVD patients
The genetic heterogeneity of Chinese patients differs from the hotspot mutation pattern in Caucasians
In China, screening studies for the CFTR gene are lacking. In our previous mutation analysis of the CFTR gene in CAVD patients, we estimated that between 63 and 72.5% of Chinese patients presented at least one mutated CFTR allele (Yang et al. 2015, Luo et al. 2021). The reason may be that infertility caused by CAVD is the main disease related to CFTR in China, and the need for further studies seems less urgent compared with that for the fatal CF disease in other countries. However, in recent years, with the increase in reproductive health examinations and the improvement of medical examination technology, the number of confirmed cases of CAVD has greatly increased, and screening research related to the CFTR gene has gradually increased. Although more than 2000 CFTR mutations have been reported worldwide (https://www.genet.sickkids.on.ca/), new mutations continue to be identified, yet few studies have been conducted to prove their pathogenicity (https://www.cftr2.org/). Through a literature review and database searches, we summarized the types of pathogenic mutations found in the CAVD population in China. Li et al. detected 30 different exonic mutations in 73 Chinese patients with CBAVD, including nine novel mutations (Li et al. 2012). Yang et al. detected eight different exonic mutations, including four novel mutations, in 19 Chinese patients with CAVD (Yang et al. 2015). Bai et al. detected seven mutations in the promoter regions in 66 Chinese patients with CBAVD (Bai et al. 2018). Yuan et al. detected 28 different exonic mutations in 72 Chinese patients with CAVD, including 5 novel mutations (Yuan et al. 2019). Wang et al. detected 15 different exonic mutations in 38 Chinese patients with CBAVD, including 4 novel mutations (Wang et al. 2020). In our previous study, we screened 276 Chinese patients with CAVD and detected 63 different mutations, among which 13 novel mutations were found. The most common pathogenic allele frequency was observed for 5T (c.1210–12T[5], 27.54%), p.Q1352H (c.4056G > C, 5.98%), and p.I556V (c.1666A > G, 3.08%) (Luo et al. 2021). In summary, the CFTR mutations in the Chinese CAVD population are very scattered and heterogeneous, similar to those in local studies in India (Sharma et al. 2009, Sharma et al. 2014), with no mutations occurring more than 10% of the time, except for 5T (38% on average in major Chinese studies, 31% in non-Caucasian studies (Lu et al. 2014, Bieth et al. 2021), which should be classified as a hotspot mutation. This pattern is significantly different from that in Caucasians, in that Caucasian patients with CAVD have multiple hotspot mutations. Specifically, the highest mutant gene frequency is observed for the well-known F508del, and statistics and calculations from large series show that the average mutant frequency of F508del in isolated CBAVD (iCBAVD) patients is approximately 28%, while that in CF patients is as high as 70%. A global oversight of the prevalence of CFTR gene mutations detected in CAVD patients and the characteristics of CFTR hotspot mutations in CAVD patients are summarized in Fig. 1 and Tables 1, 2. Therefore, for many years, multiple reproduction centers in Europe and America have been routinely screened for high-frequency mutation sites in Caucasians, such as F508del, for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in CAVD patients (Field & Martin 2011, Girardet et al. 2015). In contrast, unfortunately, an efficient screening method and authoritative genetic counseling guidelines in China have not been developed.
Distribution of mutations in the CFTR gene detected in patients with CAVD on transcripts. This graph summarizes the CFTR gene mutations in the transcript (and 5T allele). The size of a pie on a lollipop indicates the gene frequency of the mutation, and the hotspot mutations has been labeled accordingly.
Citation: Reproduction 164, 3; 10.1530/REP-21-0315
Distribution of mutations in the CFTR gene detected in patients with CAVD on transcripts. This graph summarizes the CFTR gene mutations in the transcript (and 5T allele). The size of a pie on a lollipop indicates the gene frequency of the mutation, and the hotspot mutations has been labeled accordingly.
Citation: Reproduction 164, 3; 10.1530/REP-21-0315
Distribution of mutations in the CFTR gene detected in patients with CAVD on transcripts. This graph summarizes the CFTR gene mutations in the transcript (and 5T allele). The size of a pie on a lollipop indicates the gene frequency of the mutation, and the hotspot mutations has been labeled accordingly.
Citation: Reproduction 164, 3; 10.1530/REP-21-0315
Description of CFTR mutations in CAVD patients (details of Fig. 1).
| Mutation | Amino acid change | Deteced in |
|---|---|---|
| S50P | Ser→Pro | Both races |
| E56K | Glu→Lys | Caucasian |
| E56G | Glu→Gly | Caucasian |
| D58N | Asp→Asn | Caucasian |
| R75Q | Arg→Gln | Caucasian |
| F78Sfs*13 | Phe→Ser fs*13 | Chinese |
| F87I | Phe→Ile | Caucasian |
| L88X | Leu→Termination | Chinese |
| Q98P | Gln→Pro | Caucasian |
| L101S | Leu→Ser | Caucasian |
| D110Y | Asp→Tyr | Caucasian |
| P111L | Pro→Leu | Caucasian |
| N113I | Asn→Ile | Caucasian |
| R117G | Arg→Gly | Caucasian |
| R117H | Arg→His | Caucasian |
| S118P | Ser→Pro | Caucasian |
| Y122H | Tyr→His | Caucasian |
| I125T | Ile→Thr | Both races |
| G126S | Gly→Ser | Caucasian |
| G126C | Gly→Cys | Caucasian |
| R134G | Arg→Gly | Chinese |
| P140S | Pro→Ser | Both races |
| H146R | His→Arg | Caucasian |
| Q151K | Gln→Lys | Caucasian |
| F157C | Phe→Cys | Caucasian |
| S158R | Ser→Arg | Caucasian |
| Y161C | Tyr→Cys | Both races |
| R170H | Arg→His | Caucasian |
| N186K | Asn→Lys | Both races |
| A198P | Ala→Pro | Both races |
| F200I | Phe→Ile | Caucasian |
| V201M | Val→Met | Both races |
| I203M | Ile→Met | Caucasian |
| L206W | Leu→Trp | Caucasian |
| E217G | Glu→Gly | Both races |
| A238V | Ala→Val | Caucasian |
| M244K | Met→Lys | Caucasian |
| R248T | Arg→Thr | Caucasian |
| I255N | Ile→Asn | Both races |
| M265R | Met→Arg | Caucasian |
| M281R | Met→Arg | Caucasian |
| N287K | Asn→Lys | Chinese |
| R289X | Arg→Termination | Both races |
| R297W | Arg→Trp | Caucasian |
| A309G | Ala→Gly | Both races |
| L320V | Leu→Val | Caucasian |
| R334W | Arg→Trp | Both races |
| R334L | Arg→Leu | Caucasian |
| T338A | Thr→Ala | Caucasian |
| R347H | Arg→His | Both races |
| A357T | Ala→Thr | Chinese |
| Q372R | Gln→Arg | Chinese |
| E379K | Glu→Lys | Caucasian |
| L383S | Leu→Ser | Caucasian |
| V392A | Val→Ala | Caucasian |
| A399D | Ala→Asp | Caucasian |
| 5T allele | - | Both races |
| E407K | Glu→Lys | Chinese |
| K411E | Lys→Glu | Both races |
| R419I | Arg→Ile | Chinese |
| D443Y | Asp→Tyr | Caucasian |
| K464Q | Lys→Gln | Chinese |
| T465N | Thr→Asn | Both races |
| S466L | Ser→Leu | Caucasian |
| M469I | Met→Ile | Chinese |
| M469V | Met→Val | Chinese |
| L475Wfs*52 | Leu→Trp fs*52 | Chinese |
| H484Y | His→Tyr | Caucasian |
| C491S | Cys→Ser | Caucasian |
| C491F | Cys→Phe | Chinese |
| I497V | Ile→Val | Both races |
| P499A | Pro→Ala | Caucasian |
| T501N | Thr→Asn | Chinese |
| I507N | Ile→Asn | Chinese |
| I507V | Ile→Val | Caucasian |
| F508del | Phe→Delete | Caucasian |
| D513G | Asp→Gly | Caucasian |
| V520I | Val→Ile | Both races |
| E527K | Glu→Lys | Chinese |
| K536X | Lys→Termination | Caucasian |
| L541P | Leu→Pro | Caucasian |
| G542X | Gly→Termination | Caucasian |
| E543A | Glu→Ala | Caucasian |
| G544V | Gly→Val | Caucasian |
| G551A | Gly→Ala | Caucasian |
| G551D | Gly→Asp | Caucasian |
| R553X | Arg→Termination | Both races |
| I556V | Ile→Val | Both races |
| S557T | Ser→Thr | Chinese |
| D565G | Asp→Gly | Caucasian |
| L568F | Leu→Phe | Caucasian |
| P574S | Pro→Ser | Caucasian |
| G576A | Gly→Ala | Caucasian |
| Y577X | Tyr→Termination | Both races |
| T582S | Thr→Ser | Caucasian |
| F587I | Phe→Ile | Caucasian |
| C592F | Cys→Phe | Chinese |
| T604I | Thr→Ile | Caucasian |
| H609R | His→Arg | Both races |
| G622D | Gly→Asp | Both races |
| S660X | Ser→Termination | Chinese |
| W679X | Trp→Termination | Both races |
| E681V | Glu→Val | Both races |
| E695Gfs*35 | Glu→Gly fs*35 | Both races |
| S753R | Ser→Arg | Caucasian |
| R766M | Arg→Met | Caucasian |
| R785Q | Arg→Gln | Both races |
| R792G | Arg→Gly | Caucasian |
| E804V | Glu→Val | Caucasian |
| I807M | Ile→Met | Caucasian |
| R810G | Arg→Gly | Caucasian |
| G817V | Gly→Val | Caucasian |
| P841R | Pro→Arg | Caucasian |
| N847S | Asn→Ser | Both races |
| R851Q | Arg→Gln | Both races |
| Y852F | Tyr→Phe | Caucasian |
| I853F | Ile→Phe | Caucasian |
| Q890R | Gln→Arg | Caucasian |
| D891G | Asp→Gly | Both races |
| N894S | Asn→Ser | Caucasian |
| S895N | Ser→Asn | Both races |
| V920L | Val→Leu | Caucasian |
| R933T | Arg→Thr | Caucasian |
| R933S | Arg→Ser | Caucasian |
| R933G | Arg→Gly | Caucasian |
| V938L | Val→Leu | Chinese |
| V938G | Val→Gly | Caucasian |
| M952T | Met→Thr | Caucasian |
| A959V | Ala→Val | Caucasian |
| G970D | Gly→Asp | Both races |
| S977P | Ser→Pro | Both races |
| D979A | Asp→Ala | Both races |
| L997F | Leu→Phe | Both races |
| Y1014C | Tyr→Cys | Caucasian |
| P1021L | Pro→Leu | Both races |
| P1021S | Pro→Ser | Caucasian |
| Y1032C | Tyr→Cys | Caucasian |
| L1055I | Leu→Ile | Chinese |
| A1067P | Ala→Pro | Caucasian |
| G1069R | Gly→Arg | Both races |
| Q1071X | Gln→Termination | Caucasian |
| A1081P | Ala→Pro | Caucasian |
| R1097C | Arg→Cys | Both races |
| Q1100K | Gln→Lys | Caucasian |
| V1108L | Val→Leu | Caucasian |
| G1130A | Gly→Ala | Caucasian |
| A1136V | Ala→Val | Chinese |
| W1145R | Trp→Arg | Caucasian |
| D1152H | Asp→His | Caucasian |
| V1153E | Val→Glu | Caucasian |
| D1154G | Asp→Gly | Caucasian |
| G1208D | Gly→Asp | Both races |
| T1220I | Thr→Ile | Both races |
| G1237D | Gly→Asp | Both races |
| D1270E | Asp→Glu | Caucasian |
| I1277V | Ile→Val | Chinese |
| W1282X | Trp→Termination | Caucasian |
| A1285V | Ala→Val | Caucasian |
| P1290S | Pro→Ser | Caucasian |
| N1303K | Asn→Lys | Caucasian |
| N1303H | Asn→His | Both races |
| Y1307C | Tyr→Cys | Caucasian |
| Q1309H | Gln→His | Caucasian |
| F1337V | Phe→Val | Caucasian |
| L1339F | Leu→Phe | Caucasian |
| K1351E | Lys→Glu | Caucasian |
| Q1352H | Gln→His | Chinese |
| A1364V | Ala→Val | Both races |
| D1377H | Asp→His | Caucasian |
| L1388Q | Leu→Gln | Caucasian |
| E1401K | Glu→Lys | Caucasian |
| E1401G | Glu→Gly | Caucasian |
| E1409K | Glu→Lys | Caucasian |
| Q1411X | Gln→Termination | Caucasian |
| L1414S | Leu→Ser | Caucasian |
| E1433K | Glu→Lys | Both races |
| E1473X | Glu→Termination | Caucasian |
| T1478R | Thr→Arg | Chinese |
fs, frame shift.
Characteristics of CFTR hotspot mutations in CAVD patients.
| Mutation | Amino acid change | Molecular change | Class | Clinical manifestation* | Mostly detected in | Frequency (%) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R117H | Arg→His | Defective protein conductance | IV | CAVD and CFTR-RDS, CF | Caucasian | 3.3–11 | Sharma et al. (2014), Dork et al. (1997) |
| L206W | Leu→Trp | Defective protein conductance | IV | CAVD and CFTR-RDS, CF | Caucasian | 5.3 | Casals et al. (2000) |
| R334W | Arg→Trp | Defective protein conductance | IV | CAVD and CFTR-RDS, CF | Caucasian | 8 | Grangeia et al. (2004) |
| F508del | Phe→Delete | Defective protein processing | II | CF, CFTR-RDS, CAVD | Caucasian | 12–33 | Kanavakis et al. (1998), Jarvi et al. (1998) |
| G542X | Gly→Termination | Defective protein production | I | CF, CFTR-RDS, CAVD | Caucasian | 4–7.6 | Grangeia et al. (2004), Safinejad et al. (2011) |
| I556V | Ile→Val | Defective protein conductance | IV | CAVD and CFTR-RDS, CF | Chinese | 3.1–4.8 | Luo et al. (2021), Li et al. (2012) |
| Q1352H | Gln→His | Defective protein conductance | IV | CAVD and CFTR-RDS, CF | Chinese | 2.1–6.9 | Luo et al. (2021), Li et al. (2012), Yuan et al. (2019) |
| 5T allele | – | Reduced protein synthesis | V | CAVD, CFTR-RDS, CF | All races | 10–43.7 | Wang et al. (2002), Lissens et al. (1999) |
| Chinese | 27.54–44.4 | Luo et al. (2021), Wu et al. (2004) |
*Most to least common.
CFTR screening strategy for Chinese patients with CAVD
Can a Caucasian-based CFTR genetic blocking strategy be applied to Chinese patients with CAVD?
In the past, the diagnosis of CAVD and fertility interventions were limited. Couples affected by CBAVD experienced infertility caused by obstructive azoospermia. Over the past three decades, CBAVD patients have been able to father children thanks to assisted reproduction techniques (ARTs), such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). However, the disease-causing genes could have been transmitted to the offspring, leading to the inheritance of CFTR-related diseases. As early as 1996, Asangla Ao et al. reported the clinical experience of using PGD to intervene in the reproduction of offspring by screening the F508del hotspot mutation to avoid CF in offspring and found that the pregnancy rate after PGD in these patients was similar to that in other patients with infertility (Ao et al. 1996). Subsequently, reproductive centers in major hospitals gradually performed genetic counseling related to the application of PGD (Harper et al. 2002). Girardet et al. summarized 10 years of PGD experience in relation to CF and found that for couples at risk for hereditary CF disease, the application rate was as high as 98%, and all follow-up offspring were free from CF disease (Girardet et al. 2015). Therefore, to prevent the inheritance of pathogenic genes, it is gradually acknowledged that couples with infertility, especially those including individuals who are diagnosed with CF disease or CFTR-RDs, should undergo screening of CFTR genes and apply PGD for assisted reproduction before performing ARTs, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) (Wong et al. 2004). Different screening methods are not contradictory. Salvado et al. proposed the application of microarray analysis to screen the F508del hotspot mutation, which has economic benefits (Salvado et al. 2004). Field et al. proposed routine screening for CFTR mutations in patients with infertility (Field & Martin 2011). Bieth et al. combined a variety of strategies to screen CAVD patients with a high risk of CFTR mutations, at least in hotspot mutations. Non-Caucasians should undergo comprehensive screening, and if conditions permit, next-generation sequencing (NGS) can even be performed, with relevant genes other than CFTR screened at the same time (e.g. ADGRG2, SLC9A3, and PANK2) (Bieth et al. 2021). Most of these recommendations are based on studies of CF disease in Caucasians. Can we draw lessons from these experiences for genetic counseling of Chinese patients with CAVD before seeking assisted reproduction? Han-Sun Chiang et al. reported a case in which the Caucasian father had iCBAVD with F508del in trans with p.L375F mutations and his Chinese female partner of Taiwanese descent had a negative CFTR screen. The two healthy offspring of the couple conceived by ICSI were heterozygous with each of the above mutations (Chiang et al. 2008). Han-Sun Chiang et al. argued that the CFTR gene should be screened in patients with infertility before assisted reproduction, especially in patients diagnosed with CBAVD. Hongxiang Wang et al. stated that there were no hotspot mutations other than the 5T allele in Chinese CBAVD patients; thus, NGS of the whole CFTR and ADGRG2 genes may be an appropriate genetic testing method. Although the majority of CFTR mutations in Chinese individuals are of the mild or heterozygous type with severe mutations, according to Mendelian genetic rules, it is still possible to give birth to offspring with CF disease, and the probability of offspring suffering from CAVD is higher. Therefore, we believe that, in view of the lack of strategic research on CFTR gene screening in Chinese individuals at present, we can learn from the screening strategy of Caucasians.
CFTR and ICSI
Obstructive azoospermia caused by CFTR gene mutation is relatively clear, but whether the generation and function of spermatozoa in the testis are affected has been controversial in the past. Later, Xu et al. showed that CFTR inhibitor or antibody significantly reduces the sperm capacitation due to decreased HCO3-dependent events and suggested that CFTR mutations with impaired CFTR function may lead to reduced sperm fertilizing capacity and male infertility other than CBAVD (Xu et al. 2007). Subsequent clinical cohort studies were consistent with these findings. Patients with CBAVD have been found to have a significantly increased risk of abortion and stillbirth with ICSI-assisted reproduction and a reduced live birth rate compared to patients with non-CBAVD obstruction, presumably due to CFTR mutations (Lu et al. 2014). Another study showed that those patients with CF have lower sperm quality, greater difficulty with sperm retrieval, and worse ICSI outcomes compared with CBAVD-only patients (McBride et al. 2021).
Screening strategies for Chinese patients with CF-related CAVD and iCAVD, and consideration of female partners for carrier screening
In our previous study, we calculated the genetic correlations of the disease-causing genes and the probability of the possible phenotype. Then, we studied the screening strategy for the CFTR gene in Caucasians (Daudin et al. 2000) and proposed a systematic strategy for screening Chinese CBAVD couples (Feng et al. 2019) in consideration of the particular genetic pattern of Chinese individuals. The method is also applicable to CF-related CAVD and isolated CAVD (iCAVD). This article summarizes and optimizes this strategy (see Fig. 2), and in general, we do not recommend CFTR gene screening in patients with infertility who are excluded as having CAVD after a detailed examination. When a patient is diagnosed with CF-related CAVD or iCAVD, we recommend at least comprehensive screening of the CFTR gene or NGS of this gene and other CAVD-related genes, if permitted. For couples seeking fertility assistance, it is recommended that the prospective mother be screened for at least the 5T alleles. If conditions allow, or if the couple has plans for PGD, the prospective mother can be screened in the same way as the prospective farther, considering economic conditions and risk tolerance. Of course, genetic counseling can be considered regardless of whether the screening results are negative or positive.
Screening strategies for Chinese CAVD couples. A guideline flowchart of screening strategies for Chinese couples with CAVD. Not applicable means there is no need for further screening of CAVD-related genes or other treatments; CS means comprehensive screening of all CAVD-related genes, including CFTR, ADGRG2, SLC9A3 and PANK2; NGS means next-generation sequencing; and IVF and ICSI mean in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, respectively.
Citation: Reproduction 164, 3; 10.1530/REP-21-0315
Screening strategies for Chinese CAVD couples. A guideline flowchart of screening strategies for Chinese couples with CAVD. Not applicable means there is no need for further screening of CAVD-related genes or other treatments; CS means comprehensive screening of all CAVD-related genes, including CFTR, ADGRG2, SLC9A3 and PANK2; NGS means next-generation sequencing; and IVF and ICSI mean in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, respectively.
Citation: Reproduction 164, 3; 10.1530/REP-21-0315
Screening strategies for Chinese CAVD couples. A guideline flowchart of screening strategies for Chinese couples with CAVD. Not applicable means there is no need for further screening of CAVD-related genes or other treatments; CS means comprehensive screening of all CAVD-related genes, including CFTR, ADGRG2, SLC9A3 and PANK2; NGS means next-generation sequencing; and IVF and ICSI mean in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, respectively.
Citation: Reproduction 164, 3; 10.1530/REP-21-0315
Other issues
Is genetic screening required for deep intron regions and adjacent intergenic regions of CFTR ?
Pathogenic mutations of the CFTR gene are mainly detected in the exon region because it encodes a functional protein, and some pathogenic mutations are detected in the promoter region and splicing sites, which affect the regulation of CFTR expression and transcription integrity. However, few researchers screen deep intron regions and adjacent intergenic regions because the functions of these regions are not very clear, and they are much longer, making sequencing analysis difficult. Audrézet et al. pointed out that 99% of the pathogenic mutation sites can be found in exons, promoters, and splicing sites, meaning that only 1% of the pathogenic mutations should be in the intron region (Audrézet et al. 2015). To date, only seven mutations of the intron region and adjacent intergenic regions have been reported to have pathogenic functions (Bergougnoux et al. 2019), including one mutation beyond 10 kb at the tail of the CFTR gene (Chiba-Falek et al. 1998). Although some scholars believe that these mutations should be included in CF diagnostic testing and carrier screening strategies (Bergougnoux et al. 2019), sequencing of intron regions and adjacent intergenic regions is not recommended at present in terms of efficiency ratio and economic effect.
Is genetic screening required for other CAVD-related genes?
There are some other genes proven to be associated with CAVD, in which pathogenic mutations were detected in patients with iCBAVD, such as the recently discovered X-linked ADGRG2 gene (Patat et al. 2016) and CNVs involving the PANK2 (Lee et al. 2009) and SLC9A3 genes (Chiang et al. 2019, Wu et al. 2019). These new findings partially bridge the gap in the explanation of genetic etiology in patients with no CFTR mutations. We also treated a family with CAVD but no CFTR mutations were detected and then performed NGS to identify a pathogenic mutation in ADGRG2. At present, with the expansion and deepening of research on these genes, there has been continuous research participation and reporting of new mutations and functional verification (Yang et al. 2017, Pagin et al. 2020). The author believes that for patients with CF-related CAVD and iCAVD, if they are free of CFTR mutations, screening for other CAVD-related genes can be performed, but not as a part of routine clinical testing.
Conclusions
A review of the literature published over recent decades has revealed that the CFTR gene mutation spectrum shows significant ethnic differences. Unlike Caucasian populations, which are characterized by predominantly hotspot and severe mutations, CFTR mutations in Chinese Han patients with CAVD are heterogeneous and dominated by mild mutations. Therefore, considering the strategy of sequencing screening, we recommend a more suitable screening strategy for the Chinese Han population. However, from the genetic perspective of the inheritance of pathogenic genes, mild mutations also have the potential to cause a severe phenotype by combinations of inherited alleles. Therefore, couples with infertility, especially those with CAVD, should undergo as comprehensive a CFTR screening as possible. Regarding the controversial issue of sequencing scope, other CAVD-related genes discovered in recent years can be used as a complement to CFTR sequencing negativity; in other words, further studies are encouraged to discover their values.
Declaration of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 81771565).
Author contribution statements
J F, Y Z and X Y collected data and drafted the manuscript; Y Z and X Y read and helped to revise the manuscript; J F and Y Z conceived and designed the study. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof Zuping He for his valuable suggestions on this review, the fundings, and The Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University.
References
Ao A, Handyside A & Winston RM 1996 Preimplantation genetic diagnosis of cystic fibrosis (delta F508). European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 65 7–10. (https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-2243(9502294-3)
Audrézet MP, Munck A, Scotet V, Claustres M, Roussey M, Delmas D, Férec C & Desgeorges M 2015 Comprehensive CFTR gene analysis of the French cystic fibrosis screened newborn cohort: implications for diagnosis, genetic counseling, and mutation-specific therapy. Genetics in Medicine 17 108–116. (https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.113)
Bai S, Du Q, Liu X, Tong Y & Wu B 2018 The detection and significance of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene promoter mutations in Chinese patients with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. Gene 672 64–71. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2018.05.108)
Bergougnoux A, Délétang K, Pommier A, Varilh J, Houriez F, Altieri JP, Koenig M, Férec C, Claustres M & Lalau G et al.2019. Functional characterization and phenotypic spectrum of three recurrent disease-causing deep intronic variants of the CFTR gene. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis 18 468–475. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcf.2018.10.012)
Bieth E, Hamdi SM & & Mieusset R 2021 Genetics of the congenital absence of the vas deferens. Human Genetics 140 59–76. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-020-02122-w)
Bombieri C, Claustres M, De Boeck K, Derichs N, Dodge J, Girodon E, Sermet I, Schwarz M, Tzetis M & Wilschanski M et al.2011 Recommendations for the classification of diseases as CFTR-related disorders. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis 10 (Supplement 2) S86–S102. (https://doi.org/10.1016/S1569-1993(1160014-3)
Bompadre SG, Sohma Y, Li M & Hwang TC 2007 G551D and G1349D, two CF-associated mutations in the signature sequences of CFTR, exhibit distinct gating defects. Journal of General Physiology 129 285–298. (https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.200609667)
Cai H, Qing X, Niringiyumukiza JD, Zhan X, Mo D, Zhou Y & Shang X 2019 CFTR variants and renal abnormalities in males with congenital unilateral absence of the vas deferens (CUAVD): a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Genetics in Medicine 21 826–836. (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-018-0262-7)
Casals T, Bassas L, Egozcue S, Ramos MD, Giménez J, Segura A, Garcia F, Carrera M, Larriba S & Sarquella J et al.2000 Heterogeneity for mutations in the CFTR gene and clinical correlations in patients with congenital absence of the vas deferens. Human Reproduction 15 1476–1483. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.7.1476)
Cheng SH, Gregory RJ, Marshall J, Paul S, Souza DW, White GA, O'Riordan CR & Smith AE 1990 Defective intracellular transport and processing of CFTR is the molecular basis of most cystic fibrosis. Cell 63 827–834. (https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(9090148-8)
Chiang HS, Wang YY, Lin YH & Wu YN 2019 The role of SLC9A3 in Taiwanese patients with congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens (CBAVD). Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 118 1576–1583. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2019.01.019)
Chiang HS, Wu CC, Wu YN, Lu JF, Lin GH & Hwang JL 2008 CFTR mutation analysis of a Caucasian father with congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens, a Taiwanese mother, and twins resulting from ICSI procedure. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 107 736–740. (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-6646(0860119-9)
Chiba-Falek O, Kerem E, Shoshani T, Aviram M, Augarten A, Bentur L, Tal A, Tullis E, Rahat A & Kerem B 1998 The molecular basis of disease variability among cystic fibrosis patients carrying the 3849+10 kb C-->T mutation. Genomics 53 276–283. (https://doi.org/10.1006/geno.1998.5517)
Choi JY, Muallem D, Kiselyov K, Lee MG, Thomas PJ & Muallem S 2001 Aberrant CFTR-dependent HCO-3 transport in mutations associated with cystic fibrosis. Nature 410 94–97. (https://doi.org/10.1038/35065099)
Claustres M 2005 Molecular pathology of the CFTR locus in male infertility. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 10 14–41. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(1060801-2)
Cuppens H & Cassiman JJ 2004 CFTR mutations and polymorphisms in male infertility. International Journal of Andrology 27 251–256. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2004.00485.x)
Daudin M, Bieth E, Bujan L, Massat G, Pontonnier F & Mieusset R 2000 Congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens: clinical characteristics, biological parameters, cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene mutations, and implications for genetic counseling. Fertility and Sterility 74 1164–1174. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(0001625-3)
Dork T, Dworniczak B, Aulehla-Scholz C, Wieczorek D, Bohm I, Mayerova A, Seydewitz HH, Nieschlag E, Meschede D & Horst J et al.1997 Distinct spectrum of CFTR gene mutations in congenital absence of vas deferens. Human Genetics 100 365–377. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s004390050518)
Farinha CM, Matos P & Amaral MD 2013 Control of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator membrane trafficking: not just from the endoplasmic reticulum to the Golgi. FEBS Journal 280 4396–4406. (https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.12392)
Feng J, Wu X, Zhang Y, Yang X, Ma G, Chen S, Luo S & Zhang Y 2019 A novel mutation (−195C>A) in the promoter region of CFTR gene is associated with Chinese congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens (CBAVD). Gene 719 144007. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2019.144007)
Field PD & Martin NJ 2011 CFTR mutation screening in an assisted reproductive clinic. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 51 536–539. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-828X.2011.01348.x)
Girardet A, Ishmukhametova A, Willems M, Coubes C, Hamamah S, Anahory T, Des Georges M & Claustres M 2015 Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for cystic fibrosis: the Montpellier center's 10-year experience. Clinical Genetics 87 124–132. (https://doi.org/10.1111/cge.12411)
Goldstein M & Schlossberg S 1988 Men with congenital absence of the vas deferens often have seminal vesicles. Journal of Urology 140 85–86. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(1741493-5)
Grangeia A, Niel F, Carvalho F, Fernandes S, Ardalan A, Girodon E, Silva J, Ferras L, Sousa M & Barros A 2004 Characterization of cystic fibrosis conductance transmembrane regulator gene mutations and IVS8 poly(T) variants in Portuguese patients with congenital absence of the vas deferens. Human Reproduction 19 2502–2508. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh462)
Haardt M, Benharouga M, Lechardeur D, Kartner N & Lukacs GL 1999 C-terminal truncations destabilize the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator without impairing its biogenesis. A novel class of mutation. Journal of Biological Chemistry 274 21873–21877. (https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.274.31.21873)
Hamosh A, Rosenstein BJ & Cutting GR 1992 CFTR nonsense mutations G542X and W1282X associated with severe reduction of CFTR mRNA in nasal epithelial cells. Human Molecular Genetics 1 542–544. (https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/1.7.542)
Harper JC, Wells D, Piyamongkol W, Abou-Sleiman P, Apessos A, Ioulianos A, Davis M, Doshi A, Serhal P & Ranieri M et al.2002 Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for single gene disorders: experience with five single gene disorders. Prenatal Diagnosis 22 525–533. (https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.394)
Jarvi K, Mccallum S, Zielenski J, Durie P, Tullis E, Wilchanski M, Margolis M, Asch M, Ginzburg B & Martin S et al.1998 Heterogeneity of reproductive tract abnormalities in men with absence of the vas deferens: role of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene mutations. Fertility and Sterility 70 724–728. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(9800247-7)
Jentsch TJ, Stein V, Weinreich F & Zdebik AA 2002 Molecular structure and physiological function of chloride channels. Physiological Reviews 82 503–568. (https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00029.2001)
Kanavakis E, Tzetis M, Antoniadi T, Pistofidis G, Milligos S & Kattamis C 1998 Cystic fibrosis mutation screening in CBAVD patients and men with obstructive azoospermia or severe oligozoospermia. Molecular Human Reproduction 4 333–337. (https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/4.4.333)
Kolettis PN & Sandlow JI 2002 Clinical and genetic features of patients with congenital unilateral absence of the vas deferens. Urology 60 1073–1076. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(0201973-8)
Kristidis P, Bozon D, Corey M, Markiewicz D, Rommens J, Tsui LC & Durie P 1992 Genetic determination of exocrine pancreatic function in cystic fibrosis. American Journal of Human Genetics 50 1178–1184.
LaRusch J, Jung J, General IJ, Lewis MD, Park HW, Brand RE, Gelrud A, Anderson MA, Banks PA & Conwell D et al.2014 Mechanisms of CFTR functional variants that impair regulated bicarbonate permeation and increase risk for pancreatitis but not for cystic fibrosis. PLoS Genetics 10 e1004376. (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1004376)
Laurichesse Delmas H, Kohler M, Doray B, Lémery D, Francannet C, Quistrebert J, Marie C & Perthus I 2017. Congenital unilateral renal agenesis: prevalence, prenatal diagnosis, associated anomalies. Data from two birth-defect registries. Birth Defects Research 109 1204–1211. (https://doi.org/10.1002/bdr2.1065)
Lee CH, Wu CC, Wu YN & Chiang HS 2009 Gene copy number variations in Asian patients with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. Human Reproduction 24 748–755. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den413)
Li H, Wen Q, Li H, Zhao L, Zhang X, Wang J, Cheng L, Yang J, Chen S & Ma X et al.2012 Mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) in Chinese patients with congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis 11 316–323. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcf.2012.01.005)
Lissens W, Mahmoud KZ, El-Gindi E, Abdel-Sattar A, Seneca S, Van Steirteghem A & Liebaers I 1999 Molecular analysis of the cystic fibrosis gene reveals a high frequency of the intron 8 splice variant 5T in Egyptian males with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. Molecular Human Reproduction 5 10–13. (https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/5.1.10)
Lu S, Cui Y, Li X, Zhang H, Liu J, Kong B, Cai F & Chen ZJ 2014 Association of cystic fibrosis transmembrane-conductance regulator gene mutation with negative outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection pregnancy in cases of congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens. Fertility and Sterility 101 1255–1260. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.01.033)
Lukowski SW, Bombieri C & Trezise AEO 2011 Disrupted posttranscriptional regulation of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) by a 5′UTR mutation is associated with a cftr-related disease. Human Mutation 32 E2266–E2282. (https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.21545)
Luo S, Feng J, Zhang Y, Yang X, Ma G, Hu T, Xi Y, Tu X, Wang C & Zhang H et al.2021 Mutation analysis of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene in Chinese congenital absence of vas deferens patients. Gene 765 145045. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2020.145045)
McBride JA, Kohn TP, Mazur DJ, Lipshultz LI & Coward RM 2021 Sperm retrieval and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes in men with cystic fibrosis disease versus congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. Asian Journal of Andrology 23 140–145. (https://doi.org/10.4103/aja.aja_48_20)
McCallum T, Milunsky J, Munarriz R, Carson R, Sadeghi-Nejad H & Oates R 2001 Unilateral renal agenesis associated with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens: phenotypic findings and genetic considerations. Human Reproduction 16 282–288. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.2.282)
Mieusset R, Fauquet I, Chauveau D, Monteil L, Chassaing N, Daudin M, Huart A, Isus F, Prouheze C & Calvas P et al.2017 The spectrum of renal involvement in male patients with infertility related to excretory-system abnormalities: phenotypes, genotypes, and genetic counseling. Journal of Nephrology 30 211–218. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s40620-016-0286-5)
Mieusset R, Bieth E, Daudin M, Isus F, Delaunay B, Bujan L, Monteil L, Fauquet I, Huyghe E & Hamdi SM 2020 Male partners of infertile couples with congenital unilateral absence of the vas deferens are mainly non-azoospermic. Andrology 8 645–653. (https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12749)
Nelson RE 1950 Congenital absence of the vas deferens; a review of the literature and report of three cases. Journal of Urology 63 176–182. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(1768750-0)
Pagin A, Bergougnoux A, Girodon E, Reboul MP, Willoquaux C, Kesteloot M, Raynal C, Bienvenu T, Humbert M & Lalau G et al.2020 Novel ADGRG2 truncating variants in patients with X-linked congenital absence of vas deferens. Andrology 8 618–624. (https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12744)
Patat O, Pagin A, Siegfried A, Mitchell V, Chassaing N, Faguer S, Monteil L, Gaston V, Bujan L & Courtade-Saïdi M et al.2016 Truncating mutations in the adhesion G protein-coupled receptor G2 gene ADGRG2 cause an X-linked congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens. American Journal of Human Genetics 99 437–442. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.06.012)
Ramsey BW, Davies J, Mcelvaney NG, Tullis E, Bell SC, Drevinek P, Griese M, Mckone EF, Wainwright CE & Konstan MW et al.2011 A CFTR potentiator in patients with cystic fibrosis and the G551D mutation. New England Journal of Medicine 365 1663–1672. (https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1105185)
Rave-Harel N, Kerem E, Nissim-Rafinia M, Madjar I, Goshen R, Augarten A, Rahat A, Hurwitz A, Darvasi A & Kerem B 1997 The molecular basis of partial penetrance of splicing mutations in cystic fibrosis. American Journal of Human Genetics 60 87–94.
Riordan JR, Rommens JM, Kerem B, Alon N, Rozmahel R, Grzelczak Z, Zielenski J, Lok S, Plavsic N & Chou JL 1989 Identification of the cystic fibrosis gene: cloning and characterization of complementary DNA. Science 245 1066–1073. (https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2475911)
Rosenstein BJ & Cutting GR 1998 The diagnosis of cystic fibrosis: a consensus statement. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Consensus Panel. Journal of Pediatrics 132 589–595. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3476(9870344-0)
Rowe SM, Miller S & Sorscher EJ 2005 Cystic fibrosis. New England Journal of Medicine 352 1992–2001. (https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra043184)
Safinejad K, Darbouy M, Kalantar SM, Zeinali S, Mirfakhraie R, Yadegar L & Houshmand M 2011 The prevalence of common CFTR mutations in Iranian infertile men with non-CAVD obstructive azoospermia by using ARMS PCR techniques. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 28 1087–1090. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-011-9632-7)
Salvado CS, Trounson AO & Cram DS 2004 Towards preimplantation diagnosis of cystic fibrosis using microarrays. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 8 107–114. (https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(1060504-4)
Schlegel PN, Shin D & Goldstein M 1996 Urogenital anomalies in men with congenital absence of the vas deferens. Journal of Urology 155 1644–1648. (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(0166152-4)
Sharma N, Acharya N, Singh SK, Singh M, Sharma U & Prasad R 2009 Heterogenous spectrum of CFTR gene mutations in Indian patients with congenital absence of vas deferens. Human Reproduction 24 1229–1236. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den500)
Sharma H, Mavuduru RS, Singh SK & Prasad R 2014 Heterogeneous spectrum of mutations in CFTR gene from Indian patients with congenital absence of the vas deferens and their association with cystic fibrosis genetic modifiers. Molecular Human Reproduction 20 827–835. (https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gau047)
Sheppard DN, Rich DP, Ostedgaard LS, Gregory RJ, Smith AE & Welsh MJ 1993 Mutations in CFTR associated with mild-disease-form Cl- channels with altered pore properties. Nature 362 160–164. (https://doi.org/10.1038/362160a0)
Tizzano EF, Silver MM, Chitayat D, Benichou JC & Buchwald M 1994 Differential cellular expression of cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator in human reproductive tissues. Clues for the infertility in patients with cystic fibrosis. American Journal of Pathology 144 906–914.
Trezise AE, Chambers JA, Wardle CJ, Gould S & Harris A 1993 Expression of the cystic fibrosis gene in human foetal tissues. Human Molecular Genetics 2 213–218. (https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/2.3.213)
Van Goor F, Hadida S, Grootenhuis PD, Burton B, Cao D, Neuberger T, Turnbull A, Singh A, Joubran J & Hazlewood A et al.2009 Rescue of CF airway epithelial cell function in vitro by a CFTR potentiator, VX-770. PNAS 106 18825–18830. (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0904709106)
Wagenknecht LV, Lotzin CF, Sommer HJ & Schirren C 1983 Vas deferens aplasia: clinical and anatomical features of 90 cases. Andrologia 15 (Spec No) 605–613. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0272.1983.tb00225.x)
Wang Z, Milunsky J, Yamin M, Maher T, Oates R & Milunsky A 2002 Analysis by mass spectrometry of 100 cystic fibrosis gene mutations in 92 patients with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. Human Reproduction 17 2066–2072. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.8.2066)
Wang Y, Wrennall JA, Cai Z, Li H & Sheppard DN 2014 Understanding how cystic fibrosis mutations disrupt CFTR function: From single molecules to animal models. International Journal of Biochemistry and Cell Biology 52 47–57. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocel.2014.04.001)
Wang H, An M, Liu Y, Hu K, Jin Y, Xu S, Chen B & Lu M 2020 Genetic diagnosis and sperm retrieval outcomes for Chinese patients with congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens. Andrology 8 1064–1069. (https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12769)
Wong LJ, Alper OM, Hsu E, Woo MS & Margetis MF 2004 The necessity of complete CFTR mutational analysis of an infertile couple before in vitro fertilization. Fertility and Sterility 82 947–949. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.02.138)
Wu CC, Hsieh-Li HM, Lin YM & Chiang HS 2004 Cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene screening and clinical correlation in Taiwanese males with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. Human Reproduction 19 250–253. (https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh073)
Wu YN, Chen KC, Wu CC, Lin YH & Chiang HS 2019 SLC9A3 affects vas deferens development and associates with Taiwanese congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens. BioMed Research International 2019 3562719. (https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3562719)
Xu WM, Shi QX, Chen WY, Zhou CX, Ni Y, Rowlands DK, Yi Liu G, Zhu H, Ma ZG & Wang XF et al.2007 Cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator is vital to sperm fertilizing capacity and male fertility. PNAS 104 9816–9821. (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0609253104)
Yang X, Sun Q, Yuan P, Liang H, Wu X, Lai L & Zhang Y 2015 Novel mutations and polymorphisms in the CFTR gene associated with three subtypes of congenital absence of vas deferens. Fertility and Sterility 104 1268–75.e1. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.1143)
Yang B, Wang J, Zhang W, Pan H, Li T, Liu B, Li H & Wang B 2017 Pathogenic role of ADGRG2 in CBAVD patients replicated in Chinese population. Andrology 5 954–957. (https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12407)
Yuan P, Liang ZK, Liang H, Zheng LY, Li D, Li J, Zhang J, Tian J, Lai LH & Zhang K et al.2019 Expanding the phenotypic and genetic spectrum of Chinese patients with congenital absence of vas deferens bearing CFTR and ADGRG2 alleles. Andrology 7 329–340. (https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12592)
Zielenski J & Tsui LC 1995 Cystic fibrosis: genotypic and phenotypic variations. Annual Review of Genetics 29 777–807. (https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ge.29.120195.004021)
Zondek LH & Zondek T 1980 Normal and abnormal development of the epididymis of the fetus and infant. European Journal of Pediatrics 134 39–44. (https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00442401)
