This Key Event Relationship is licensed under the Creative Commons BY-SA license. This license allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms.

Relationship: 3771

Title

A descriptive phrase which clearly defines the two KEs being considered and the sequential relationship between them (i.e., which is upstream, and which is downstream). More help

Alkylation, DNA leads to Decrease, Sperm count

Upstream event
The causing Key Event (KE) in a Key Event Relationship (KER). More help
Downstream event
The responding Key Event (KE) in a Key Event Relationship (KER). More help

Key Event Relationship Overview

The utility of AOPs for regulatory application is defined, to a large extent, by the confidence and precision with which they facilitate extrapolation of data measured at low levels of biological organisation to predicted outcomes at higher levels of organisation and the extent to which they can link biological effect measurements to their specific causes.Within the AOP framework, the predictive relationships that facilitate extrapolation are represented by the KERs. Consequently, the overall WoE for an AOP is a reflection in part, of the level of confidence in the underlying series of KERs it encompasses. Therefore, describing the KERs in an AOP involves assembling and organising the types of information and evidence that defines the scientific basis for inferring the probable change in, or state of, a downstream KE from the known or measured state of an upstream KE. More help

AOPs Referencing Relationship

AOP Name Adjacency Weight of Evidence Quantitative Understanding Point of Contact Author Status OECD Status
Alkylation of DNA leading to decreased sperm count non-adjacent High Low Carole Yauk (send email) Under development: Not open for comment. Do not cite

Taxonomic Applicability

Latin or common names of a species or broader taxonomic grouping (e.g., class, order, family) that help to define the biological applicability domain of the KER.In general, this will be dictated by the more restrictive of the two KEs being linked together by the KER.  More help
Term Scientific Term Evidence Link
human Homo sapiens High NCBI
rat Rattus norvegicus High NCBI
mouse Mus musculus High NCBI
Macaca mulatta Macaca mulatta Moderate NCBI

Sex Applicability

An indication of the the relevant sex for this KER. More help
Sex Evidence
Male High

Life Stage Applicability

An indication of the the relevant life stage(s) for this KER.  More help
Term Evidence
All life stages

Key Event Relationship Description

Provides a concise overview of the information given below as well as addressing details that aren’t inherent in the description of the KEs themselves. More help

DNA alkylating agents can form covalent adducts in the DNA of any exposed cell types; however, actively proliferating germ cells, particularly spermatogonia, are especially susceptible to the cytotoxic consequences of alkylation damage. During DNA replication, alkyl adducts can interfere with replication fork progression and activate DNA damage response pathways. Persistent or unrepaired lesions can result in cell cycle arrest and apoptosis, leading to depletion of differentiating germ cell populations and, consequently, reduced sperm production.

Evidence Collection Strategy

Include a description of the approach for identification and assembly of the evidence base for the KER. For evidence identification, include, for example, a description of the sources and dates of information consulted including expert knowledge, databases searched and associated search terms/strings.  Include also a description of study screening criteria and methodology, study quality assessment considerations, the data extraction strategy and links to any repositories/databases of relevant references.Tabular summaries and links to relevant supporting documentation are encouraged, wherever possible. More help

Evidence Supporting this KER

Addresses the scientific evidence supporting KERs in an AOP setting the stage for overall assessment of the AOP. More help
Biological Plausibility
Addresses the biological rationale for a connection between KEupstream and KEdownstream.  This field can also incorporate additional mechanistic details that help inform the relationship between KEs, this is useful when it is not practical/pragmatic to represent these details as separate KEs due to the difficulty or relative infrequency with which it is likely to be measured.   More help

The biological plausibility of this KER is strong. DNA alkylation refers to the covalent addition of alkyl groups (e.g., methyl, ethyl, propyl) to nucleotides at noncanonical positions in DNA, generating lesions that interfere with DNA replication, transcription, and chromosome integrity (Soll et al., 2017). These lesions can occur across all stages of spermatogenesis and trigger downstream signalling cascades that lead to apoptosis. Across species, actively proliferating cells have long been shown to be particularly susceptible to chemotherapeutic alkylating drugs due to ongoing DNA replication; this provides a conserved biological basis for alkylation-induced impairment of spermatogenesis (Drewinko et al., 1981; Meistrich, 1982a).

Unrepaired alkylation damage in male germ cells can block DNA replication and induce base mispairing and strand breaks, which activate DNA damage response pathways and lead to cell cycle arrest and selective elimination of damaged cells through programmed cell death (Kaina, 2003). This stringent quality control mechanism is important to preserve germline genomic integrity; however, it inevitably reduces the supply of cells progressing through spermatogenesis (Agarwal et al., 2020; Li et al., 2025). Therefore, DNA alkylation-induced apoptosis in germ cells can plausibly lead to reduced sperm counts.

The consequences of alkylation-induced apoptosis on sperm counts vary depending on the developmental stage at which the damage occurs. Alkylation of DNA in proliferating or differentiating germ cells at early (pre-meiotic) stages compromises the ability of the testis to replenish the pool of developing germ cells and can cause sustained or irreversible reductions in sperm counts (Meistrich et al., 2013).

Meiosis gives rise to spermatocytes, which have tightly regulated meiotic DNA damage checkpoints to coordinate repair of endogenous programmed DNA strand breaks (Hunter, 2015). Alkylation-induced DNA lesions in meiotic cells can increase the overall repair burden and interfere with the tightly regulated repair of programmed meiotic breaks. When lesions persist, checkpoint signaling promotes the elimination of defective meiotic cells (Roeder and Bailis, 2000; Li et al., 2025). However, this effect is typically temporary because surviving SSCs can repopulate the seminiferous epithelium over time (Meistrich, 1982a).

In contrast, post-meiotic germ cells in late spermatogenesis are largely DNA repair deficient; thus, DNA damage at this stage can only be repaired after fertilization through maternal repair mechanisms (Olsen et al., 2005; Newman et al., 2021). Alkylation of DNA in post-meiotic germ cells does not typically drive germ cell death (and thus reduced sperm counts) contributing instead to sperm DNA damage and reduced sperm quality.

In addition to germ cells, alkylation damage in testicular Sertoli and Leydig cells may also indirectly contribute to reduced sperm counts through disruption of structural support and hormonal regulation required for spermatogenesis. However, differentiating germ cells are considered particularly sensitive targets of alkylating agents due to ongoing DNA replication, and are likely the primary drivers of alkylation-induced impairment of sperm production.

In addition to impacts on adult spermatogenesis, clinical and experimental studies demonstrate that exposure to alkylating chemotherapeutic agents during prepubertal or adolescent ages can impair germ cell populations and lead to persistent reductions in sperm production detectable in adulthood (reviewed by Delessard et al., 2019). Alterations in Sertoli cells and Leydig cells have also been reported following chemotherapy exposure, albeit the effects are inconsistent across studies and do not yet allow definitive conclusions (Delessard et al., 2019). These observations in cancer survivors and experimental models support the relevance of early-life stages and the delayed manifestation of impaired spermatogenesis following chemotherapy.

Together, these well-established biological processes support strong plausibility for a causal relationship between DNA alkylation damage and reduced sperm counts. While alkylation damage can occur across all stages of spermatogenesis, effects on sperm counts are primarily driven by damage to proliferating and meiotic germ cells and have typically been observed following exposure in sexually mature individuals. However, exposures during early developmental stages may result in more persistent or severe impairments due to disruption of the germ cell pool, with effects becoming apparent later in adulthood.

Uncertainties and Inconsistencies
Addresses inconsistencies or uncertainties in the relationship including the identification of experimental details that may explain apparent deviations from the expected patterns of concordance. More help

Several uncertainties remain in this KER. First, DNA alkyl adducts in germ cells and sperm output are rarely measured in the same study, and many studies rely on surrogate markers of DNA damage, such as DNA strand breaks, making it difficult to attribute downstream effects specifically to DNA alkylation.

Second, reduced sperm count can arise through multiple mechanisms. In addition to direct alkylation-induced DNA damage in germ cells, other defects such as spermiation failure (i.e., retention of mature spermatozoa in late stage tubules) (Meistrich et al., 1982b), Sertoli cell dysfunction (Cui et al. 2024), and hormonal disruption (Sriram et al., 2024) may co-occur with alkylation damage and contribute to reduced testicular or epididymal sperm output. Moreover, alkylating agents have been shown to induce epigenetic alterations in sperm, including changes in DNA methylation at specific fertility-related genes (Altakroni et al., 2021). These alterations are associated with sperm DNA damage and reduced sperm counts (Jenkins et al., 2016); however, reported correlations between DNA damage markers and methylation are gene-specific and inconsistent across studies (Altakroni et al., 2021). As such, the relative contribution of epigenetic dysregulation to reduced sperm counts in this context remains uncertain.

Although Altakroni et al. (2021) reported an association between N7-MedG levels and decreased sperm concentration in 105 patients, this result was not replicated in a smaller follow-up study (n=16) (Altakroni et al., 2025). The latter study was based on a limited number of samples with N7-MedG measurements, which may have reduced statistical power. No significant correlations between N7-MedG levels, sperm concentration, or neutral comet assay measures (% tail DNA), despite observing a significant association with reduced fertilization rates.

Known modulating factors

This table captures specific information on the MF, its properties, how it affects the KER and respective references.1.) What is the modulating factor? Name the factor for which solid evidence exists that it influences this KER. Examples: age, sex, genotype, diet 2.) Details of this modulating factor. Specify which features of this MF are relevant for this KER. Examples: a specific age range or a specific biological age (defined by...); a specific gene mutation or variant, a specific nutrient (deficit or surplus); a sex-specific homone; a certain threshold value (e.g. serum levels of a chemical above...) 3.) Description of how this modulating factor affects this KER. Describe the provable modification of the KER (also quantitatively, if known). Examples: increase or decrease of the magnitude of effect (by a factor of...); change of the time-course of the effect (onset delay by...); alteration of the probability of the effect; increase or decrease of the sensitivity of the downstream effect (by a factor of...) 4.) Provision of supporting scientific evidence for an effect of this MF on this KER. Give a list of references.  More help
Response-response Relationship
Provides sources of data that define the response-response relationships between the KEs.  More help
Time-scale
Information regarding the approximate time-scale of the changes in KEdownstream relative to changes in KEupstream (i.e., do effects on KEdownstream lag those on KEupstream by seconds, minutes, hours, or days?). More help
Known Feedforward/Feedback loops influencing this KER
Define whether there are known positive or negative feedback mechanisms involved and what is understood about their time-course and homeostatic limits. More help

Domain of Applicability

A free-text section of the KER description that the developers can use to explain their rationale for the taxonomic, life stage, or sex applicability structured terms. More help

This KER is supported primarily by mammalian data (rodents and humans) and is applicable to other eukaryotic species that produce sperm. DNA adducts can occur in any cell type, but this KER is specific to the male germline. Although reduced sperm count can only be measured after sexual maturity, DNA alkylation may occur during fetal, juvenile, or adult life stages. Exposure during early development can impair germ cell populations and lead to delayed reductions in sperm production that become evident after reproductive maturation.

References

List of the literature that was cited for this KER description. More help

Agarwal, A., Majzoub, A., Baskaran, S., Selvam, M. K. P., Cho, C. L., Henkel, R., Finelli, R., Leisegang, K., Sengupta, P., Barbarosie, C., Parekh, N., Alves, M. G., Ko, E., Arafa, M., Tadros, N., Ramasamy, R., Kavoussi, P., Ambar, R., Kuchakulla, M., … Shah, R. (2020). Sperm DNA Fragmentation: A New Guideline for Clinicians. The World Journal of Men’s Health, 38(4), 412–471. https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.200128

Altakroni, B., Nevin, C., Carroll, M., Murgatroyd, C., Horne, G., Brison, D. R. & Povey, A. C. (2021). The marker of alkyl DNA base damage, N7-methylguanine, is associated with semen quality in men. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 3121. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81674-x

Altakroni, B., Hunter, H., Horne, G., Brison, D. R. & Povey, A. C. (2025). DNA damage in prepared semen is negatively associated with semen quality and fertilisation rate in assisted reproduction technology (ART) treatment. Human Fertility,28(1), 2442450. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2024.2442450

Beaud, H., Albert, O., Robaire, B., Rousseau, M. C., Chan, P. T. K. & Delbes, G. (2019). Sperm DNA integrity in adult survivors of paediatric leukemia and lymphoma: A pilot study on the impact of age and type of treatment. PLoS ONE, 14(12), e0226262. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226262

Bucci, L. R. & Meistrich, M. L. (1987). Effects of busulfan on murine spermatogenesis: cytotoxicity, sterility, sperm abnormalities, and dominant lethal mutations. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, 176(2), 259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/0027-5107(87)90057-1

Comish, P. B., Drumond, A. L., Kinnell, H. L., Anderson, R. A., Matin, A., Meistrich, M. L. & Shetty, G. (2014). Fetal Cyclophosphamide Exposure Induces Testicular Cancer and Reduced Spermatogenesis and Ovarian Follicle Numbers in Mice. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e93311. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093311

Cheviakoff, S., Calamera, J. C., Morgenfeld, M. & Mancini, R. E. (1973). Recovery of spermatogenesis in patients with lymphoma after treatment with chlorambucil. Reproduction, 33(1), 155–157. https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.0330155

Cui, Y., Harteveld, F., Omar, H. A. M. B., Yang, Y., Bjarnason, R., Romerius, P., Sundin, M., Nyström, U. N., Langenskiöld, C., Vogt, H., Henningsohn, L., Frisk, P., Vepsäläinen, K.,

Delessard, M., Saulnier, J., Rives, A., Dumont, L., Rondanino, C. & Rives, N. (2020). Exposure to Chemotherapy During Childhood or Adulthood and Consequences on Spermatogenesis and Male Fertility. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 21(4), 1454. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21041454

Green, D. M., Kawashima, T., Stovall, M., Leisenring, W., Sklar, C. A., Mertens, A. C., Donaldson, S. S., Byrne, J. & Robison, L. L. (2009). Fertility of Male Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28(2), 332–339. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.24.9037

Grigorii, V. A., Leonid, F. S., Tatyana, L. P., Oleg, A. B., Olga, Yu. L. & Vadim, S. S. (1991). Direct observation of the alkylation products of deoxyguanosine and DNA by fast atom bombardment mass spectrometry. Biological Mass Spectrometry, 20(11), 665–668. https://doi.org/10.1002/bms.1200201103

Musser, S. M., Pan, S. S. & Callery, P. S. (1989). Liquid chromatography-thermospray mass spectrometry of DNA adducts formed with mitomycin C, porfiromycin and thiotepa. Journal of Chromatography, 474(1), 197–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9673(01)93915-9

Petersen, C., Mitchell, R. T., Guo, J., Alves-Lopes, J. P., Jahnukainen, K. & Stukenborg, J.-B. (2024). Prior exposure to alkylating agents negatively impacts testicular organoid formation in cells obtained from childhood cancer patients. Human Reproduction Open, 2024(3), hoae049. https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoae049

Drewinko, B., Patchen, M., Yang, L. Y. & Barlogie, B. (1981). Differential killing efficacy of twenty antitumor drugs on proliferating and nonproliferating human tumor cells. Cancer Research, 41(6), 2328–2333.

Hermann, B. P., Sukhwani, M., Lin, C., Sheng, Y., Tomko, J., Rodriguez, M., Shuttleworth, J. J., McFarland, D., Hobbs, R. M., Pandolfi, P. P., Schatten, G. P. & Orwig, K. E. (2009). Characterization, Cryopreservation, and Ablation of Spermatogonial Stem Cells in Adult Rhesus Macaques. Stem Cells, 25(9), 2330–2338. https://doi.org/10.1634/stemcells.2007-0143

Howell, S. J. & Shalet, S. M. (2005). Spermatogenesis After Cancer Treatment: Damage and Recovery. JNCI Monographs, 2005(34), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgi003

Hunter, N. (2015). Meiotic Recombination: The Essence of Heredity. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, 7(12), a016618. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a016618

Jenkins, T. G., Aston, K. I., Hotaling, J. M., Shamsi, M. B., Simon, L. & Carrell, D. T. (2016). Teratozoospermia and asthenozoospermia are associated with specific epigenetic signatures. Andrology, 4(5), 843–849. https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12231

Kaina, B. (2003). DNA damage-triggered apoptosis: critical role of DNA repair, double-strand breaks, cell proliferation and signaling. Biochemical Pharmacology, 66(8), 1547–1554. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-2952(03)00510-0

Li, N., Wang, H., zou, S., Yu, X. & Li, J. (2025). Perspective in the Mechanisms for Repairing Sperm DNA Damage. Reproductive Sciences, 32(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43032-024-01714-5

Meistrich, M. L. (1982a). Quantitative Correlation Between Testicular Stem Cell Survival, Sperm Production, and Fertility in the Mouse After Treatment With Different Cytotoxic Agents. Journal of Andrology, 3(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1939-4640.1982.tb00646.x

Meistrich, M. L., Finch, M., Cunha, M. F. da, Hacker, U. & Au, W. W. (1982b). Damaging effects of fourteen chemotherapeutic drugs on mouse testis cells. Cancer Research, 42(1), 122–131.

Meistrich, M. L., Wilson, G., Brown, B. W., Cunha, M. F. da & Lipshultz, L. I. (1992). Impact of cyclophosphamide on long-term reduction in sperm count in men treated with combination chemotherapy for Ewing and soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer, 70(11), 2703–2712. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19921201)70:11<2703::aid-cncr2820701123>3.0.co;2-x

Newman, H., Catt, S., Vining, B., Vollenhoven, B. & Horta, F. (2021). DNA repair and response to sperm DNA damage in oocytes and embryos, and the potential consequences in ART: a systematic review. Molecular Human Reproduction, 28(1), gaab071. https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gaab071

Okada, K. & Fujisawa, M. (2018). Recovery of Spermatogenesis Following Cancer Treatment with Cytotoxic Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy. The World Journal of Men’s Health, 36(2), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.180043

Olsen, A.-K., Lindeman, B., Wiger, R., Duale, N. & Brunborg, G. (2005). How do male germ cells handle DNA damage? Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 207(2), 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2005.01.060

Richter, P., Calamera, J. C., Morgenfeld, M. C., Kierszenbaum, A. L., Lavieri, J. C. & Mancini, R. E. (1970). Effect of chlorambucil on spermatogenesis in the human with malignant lymphoma. Cancer, 25(5), 1026–1030. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197005)25:5<1026::aid-cncr2820250506>3.0.co;2-c

Roeder, G. S. & Bailis, J. M. (2000). The pachytene checkpoint. Trends in Genetics : TIG, 16(9), 395–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-9525(00)02080-1

Rübe, C. E., Zhang, S., Miebach, N., Fricke, A. & Rübe, C. (2011). Protecting the heritable genome: DNA damage response mechanisms in spermatogonial stem cells. DNA Repair, 10(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dnarep.2010.10.007

Soll, J. M., Sobol, R. W. & Mosammaparast, N. (2017). Regulation of DNA Alkylation Damage Repair: Lessons and Therapeutic Opportunities. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 42(3), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2016.10.001

Stocks, S. J., Agius, R. M., Cooley, N., Harrison, K. L., Brison, D. R., Horne, G., Gibbs, A. & Povey, A. C. (2010). Alkylation of sperm DNA is associated with male factor infertility and a reduction in the proportion of oocytes fertilised during assisted reproduction. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, 698(1–2), 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2010.02.019

Sriram, S., Macedo, T., Mavinkurve-Groothuis, A., Wetering, M. van de & Looijenga, L. H. J. (2024). Alkylating agents-induced gonadotoxicity in prepubertal males: Insights on the clinical and preclinical front. Clinical and Translational Science, 17(7), e13866. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.13866

Swayne, B. G., Kawata, A., Behan, N. A., Williams, A., Wade, M. G., MacFarlane, A. J. & Yauk, C. L. (2012). Investigating the effects of dietary folic acid on sperm count, DNA damage and mutation in Balb/c mice. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, 737(1–2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2012.07.002

van Zeeland, A. A., Groot, A. de & Neuhäuser-Klaus, A. (1990). DNA adduct formation in mouse testis by ethylating agents: a comparison with germ-cell mutagenesis. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, 231(1), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0027-5107(90)90176-5

Yin, J., Sun, K. & Chen, B. (2014). Time-dependent toxic effects of N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea on the testes of male C57BL/6J mice: a histological and ultrastructural study. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, 8(2), 1830–1843.