Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-6g96d Total loading time: 1.875 Render date: 2022-07-03T06:51:08.822Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Book contents

Chapter 22 - DNA Damage: Halo Sperm Test

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2021

Ashok Agarwal
Affiliation:
The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Ralf Henkel
Affiliation:
University of the Western Cape, South Africa
Ahmad Majzoub
Affiliation:
Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha
Get access

Summary

Fertility, pregnancy and childbirth are connected and inseparable realities that ultimately need to combine to result in a “baby at home”; each one of these phenomena possesses their own suite of challenges and limitations. From a biological viewpoint, the factors contributing to a successful “baby at home” are male factors (mainly sperm quality) and female factors (mainly oocyte quality and endometrial receptivity). Any failure or disability in one of these competences shall likely contribute to the reduced probability of having a “baby at home”. However, in modern times a new factor is playing a crucial role in this scenario, the so called “Artificial Reproduction Techniques” (ART). Thus, it is becoming increasingly possible for reproductive biologists and clinicians to apply a range of technologies to transform a biologically infertile couple to an assisted fertile one. To this purpose, a series of novel technologies, some of them with ethical implications at the time of their use on a routine basis, have and will continue to have a remarkable potential impact on fertility treatments [1].

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gleicher, N. Expected advances in human fertility treatments and their likely translational consequences. J Transl Med 2018; 16: 149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boivin, J, Bunting, L, Collins, JA, Nygren, KG. International estimates of infertility prevalence and treatment-seeking: potential need and demand for infertility medical care. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 1506–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kothandaraman, N, Agarwal, A, Al-Qahtani, MHE. Pathogenic landscape of idiopathic male infertility: new insight towards its regulatory networks. Genomic Med 2016; 1: 16023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santia, D, Spaggiaria, G, Simonia, M. Sperm DNA fragmentation index as a promising predictive tool for male infertility diagnosis and treatment management-meta-analyses. Reprod BioMed Online 2018; 37: 315–26.Google Scholar
Evenson, DP, Darzynkiewicz, Z, Melamed, MR. Relation of mammalian sperm chromatin heterogeneity to fertility. Science 1980; 210: 1131–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evenson, DP, Wixon, R. Data analysis of two in vivo fertility studies using sperm chromatin structure assay-derived DNA fragmentation index vs. pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 1229–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zini, A, Meriano, J, Kader, K, Jarvi, K, Laskin, CA, Cadesky, K. Potential adverse effect of sperm DNA damage on embryo quality after ICSI. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 3476–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castilla, JA, Zamora, S, Gonzalvo, MC, del Castillo JD, Luna, Roldan-Nofuentes, JA, Clavero, A, Björndahl, L, Martínez, L. Sperm chromatin structure assay and classical semen parameters: systematic review. Reprod BioMed Online 2010; 20: 114–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tang, Q, Pan, F, Yang, J, Fu, Z, Lu, Y, Wu, X, Han, X, Chen, M, Lu, C, Xia, Y, Wang, X, Wu, W. Idiopathic male infertility is strongly associated with aberrant DNA methylation of imprinted loci in sperm: a case-control study. Clin Epigenet 2018; 10: 134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernández, JL, Goyanes, VJ, Ramiro-Díaz, J, Gosálvez, J. Application of FISH for in situ detection and quantification of DNA breakage. Cytogenet Cell Genet 1998; 82: 251–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernández, JL, Muriel, L, Rivero, MT, Goyanes, V, Vazquez, R, Alvarez, JG. The sperm chromatin dispersion test: a simple method for the determination of sperm DNA fragmentation. J Androl 2003; 24: 5966.Google ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, Caballero, P, López-Fernández, C, Ortega, L, Guijarro, JA, Fernández, JL, Johnston, SD, Nuñez-Calonge, R. Can DNA fragmentation of neat or swim-up spermatozoa be used to predict pregnancy following ICSI of fertile oocyte donors? Asian J Androl 2013; 15: 812–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernández, JL, Muriel, L, Goyanes, V, Segrelles, E, Gosálvez, J, Enciso, M, LaFromboise, M, De Jonge, C. Simple determination of human sperm DNA fragmentation with an improved sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test. Fertil Steril 2005; 84: 833–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santiso, R, Tamayo, M, Gosálvez, J, Johnston, SJ, Mariño, A, Fernández, C, Losada, C, Fernández, JL. DNA fragmentation dynamics allows the assessment of cryptic sperm damage in humans: evaluation of exposure to ionizing radiation, hyperthermia, acidic pH and nitric oxide. Mutation Res 2012; 734: 41–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chohan, KR, Griffin, JT, Lafromboise, M, De Jonge, CJ, Carrell, DT. Comparison of chromatin assays for DNA fragmentation evaluation in human sperm. J Androl 2006; 27: 53–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ribas-Maynou, J, Garcia-Peiro, A, Fernández-Encinas, A, Abad, C, Amengual, MJ, Prada, E, Navarro, J, Benet, J. Comprehensive analysis of sperm DNA fragmentation by five different assays: TUNEL assay, SCSA, SCD test and alkaline and neutral Comet assay. Andrology 2013; 1:715–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aamir, J, Talkad, MS, Ramaiah, K. Evaluation of sperm DNA fragmentation using multiple methods: a comparison of their predictive power for male infertility. Clin Exp Reprod Med 2019; 46: 1421.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, B, et al. Varicocele, leukocytospermia and its impact on the spermatic DNA fragmentation. Revista Internacional de Andrología 2012; 10(1): 310.Google Scholar
Nuñez, R, López-Fernández, C, Arroyo, F, Caballero, P, Gosálvez, J. Characterization of sperm DNA damage in Kartagener´s syndrome with recurrent fertilization failure: case revisited. Sex Reprod Health 2010; 1: 73–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esteves, SC, Gosálvez, J, López-Fernández, C, Núñez-Calonge, R, Caballero, P, Agarwal, A, Fernández, JL. Diagnostic accuracy of sperm DNA degradation index (DDSi) as a potential noninvasive biomarker to identify men with varicocele-associated infertility. Int Urol Nephrol 2015; 47: 1471–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parmegiani, L, Cognigni, GE, Bernardi, S, Troilo, E, Ciampaglia, W, Filicori, M. “Physiologic ICSI”, Hyaluronic acid (HA) favors selection of spermatozoa without DNA fragmentation and with normal nucleus, resulting in improvement of embryo quality. Fertil Steril 2010; 93: 598604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
González-Martínez, M, Sánchez-Martín, P, Dorado-Silva, M, Fernández, JL, Girones, E, Johnston, SD, Gosálvez, J. Magnetic-activated cell sorting is not completely effective at reducing sperm DNA fragmentation. J Assist Reprod Genet 2018; 35: 2215–21.Google Scholar
Santiso, R, Tamayo, M, Gosálvez, J, Meseguer, M, Garrido, N, Fernández, JL. Simultaneous determination in situ of DNA fragmentation and 8-oxoguanine in human sperm. Fertil Steril 2010; 93: 314–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, González-Martínez, M, López-Fernández, C, Fernández, JL, Sánchez-Martín, P. Shorter abstinence decreases sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation in ejaculate. Fertil Steril 2011; 96: 1083–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muriel, L, Goyanes, V, Segrelle, E, Gosálvez, J, Alvarez, J, Fernández, JL. Increased aneuploidy rate in sperm with fragmented DNA as determined by the Sperm Chromatin Dispersion (SCD) test and FISH analysis. J Androl 2007; 28: 3849.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, SW, Jee, BC, Kim, SK, Kim, SH. Sperm DNA fragmentation and sex chromosome aneuploidy after swim-up versus density gradient centrifugation. Clin Exp Reprod Med 2017; 44: 201–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
González-Marín, C, Roy, R, López-Fernández, C, Diez, B, Carabaño, MJ, Fernández, JL, Kjelland, ME, Moreno, JF, Gosálvez, J. Bacteria in bovine semen can increase sperm DNA fragmentation rates: a kinetic experimental approach. Animal Reprod Sci 2011; 123: 139–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, López-Fernández, C, Hermoso, A, Fernández, JL, Kjelland, ME. Sperm DNA fragmentation in zebrafish (Danio rerio) and its impact on fertility and embryo viability. Implications for fisheries and aquaculture. Aquaculture 2014; 433: 173–82.Google Scholar
Evenson, DP, Wixon, R. Clinical aspects of sperm DNA fragmentation detection and male infertility. Theriogenology 2006; 65 : 979–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, L, Liu, L, Murphy, K, Ge, S, Hotaling, J, Aston, KI, Emery, B, Carrell, DT. Comparative analysis of three sperm DNA damage assays and sperm nuclear protein content in couples undergoing assisted reproduction treatment. Hum Reprod 2014; 29: 904–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bungum, M, Humaidan, P, Axmon, A, Spano, M, Bungum, L, Erenpreiss, J, Giwercman, A. Sperm DNA integrity assessment in prediction of assisted reproduction technology outcome. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 174–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frydman, N, Prisant, N, Hesters, L, Frydman, R, Tachdjian, G, Cohen-Bacrie, P, Fanchin, R. Adequate ovarian follicular status does not prevent the decrease in pregnancy rates associated with high sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil Steril 2008; 89: 92–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avendano, C, Franchi, A, Duran, H, Oehninger, S. DNA fragmentation of normal spermatozoa negatively impacts embryo quality and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 549–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, L, Brunborg, G, Stevenson, M, Lutton, D, McManus, J, Lewis, SE. Clinical significance of sperm DNA damage in assisted reproduction outcome. Hum Reprod 2010; 25: 1594–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speyer, BE, Pizzey, AR, Ranieri, M, Joshi, R, Delhanty, JD, Serhal, P. Fall in implantation rates following ICSI with sperm with high DNA fragmentation. Hum Reprod 2010; 25: 1609–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nuñez-Calonge, R, Caballero, P, López-Fernández, C, Guijarro, JA, Fernández, JL, Johnston, SD, Gosálvez, J. An improved experimental model for understanding the impact of sperm DNA fragmentation on human pregnancy following ICSI. Reprod Sci 2012; 19: 1163–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandini, L, Lombardo F, Paoli D, Caruso, F, Eleuteri, P, Leter, G, Ciriminna, R, Culasso, F, Dondero, F, Lenzi, A, Spanò, M . Full-term pregnancies achieved with ICSI despite high levels of sperm chromatin damage. Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 1409–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muriel, L, Garrido, N, Fernández, JL, Remohi, J, Pellicer, A, de los Santos, MJ, Meseguer, M. Value of the sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation level, as measured by the sperm chromatin dispersion test, in the outcome of in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2006; 85: 371–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esbert, M, Pacheco, A, Vidal, F, Florensa, M, Riqueros, M, Ballesteros, A, Garrido, N, Calderón, G. Impact of sperm DNA fragmentation on the outcome of IVF with own or donated oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online 2011; 23: 704–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vélez de la Calle, JF, Muller, A, Walschaerts, M, Clavere, JL, Jimenez, C, Wittemer, C, Thonneau, P. Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation as assessed by the sperm chromatin dispersion test in assisted reproductive technology programs: results of a large prospective multicenter study. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 1792–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Enciso, M, Iglesias, M, Galán, I, Sarasa, J, Gosálbez, A, Gosálvez, J. The ability of sperm selection techniques to remove single- or double-strand DNA damage. Asian J Androl 2011; 13: 764–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
López-Fernández, C, Crespo, F, Arroyo, F, Fernández, JL, Arana, P, Johnston, SD, Gosálvez, J. Dynamics of sperm DNA fragmentation in domestic animals II: the stallion. Theriogenology 2007; 68: 1240–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
López-Fernández, C, Fernández, JL, Gosálbez, A, Arroyo, F, Vázquez, JM, Holt, WV, Gosálvez, J. Dynamics of sperm DNA fragmentation in domestic animals III. Ram. Theriogenology 2008; 70: 898–908.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, López-Fernández, C, Fernández, JL, Gouraud, A, Holt, WV. Relationships between the dynamics of iatrogenic DNA damage and genomic design in mammalian sperm from eleven species. Mol Reprod Dev 2011a; 78: 951–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, Núñez, R, Fernández, JL. López-Fernández, C, Caballero, P. Dynamics of sperm DNA damage in fresh versus frozen-thawed and gradient processed ejaculates in human donors. Andrologia 2011b; 43: 373–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, Cortés-Gutierrez, EI, López-Fernández, C, Fernández, JL, Caballero, P, Nuñez, R. Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation dynamics in fertile donors. Fertil Steril 2009; 92: 170–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gosálvez, J, Sánchez, R, Alvarez, JG. Single- and double-strand DNA breaks after incubation of thawed cryopreserved human spermatozoa. Fertil Steril 2019 (in press).Google Scholar
Dalzell, LH, McVicar, CM, McClure, N, Lutton, D, Lewis, SE. Effects of short and long incubations on DNA fragmentation of testicular sperm. Fertil Steril 2004; 82: 1443–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bungum, M, Bungum, L, Humaidan, P. A prospective study, using sibling oocytes, examining the effect of 30 seconds versus 90 minutes gamete co-incubation in IVF. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 518–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnston, SD, López-Fernández, C, Arroyo, F, Gosálbez, A, Gutiérrez, Cortés Fernández, EI Gosálvez, JL J. Reduced sperm DNA longevity is associated with an increased incidence of still born; evidence from a multi-ovulating sequential artificial insemination animal model. J Assist Reprod Genet 2016; 33: 1231–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tvrdá, E, López-Fernández, C, Sánchez-Martín, P, Gosálvez, J. Sperm DNA fragmentation in donors and normozoospermic patients attending for a first spermiogram: static and dynamic assessment. Andrologia 2018a; 50: e12986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosálvez, J, Agarwal, A, Esteves, SC. Strategies to diminish DNA damage in sperm samples used for ART. In Zini, A. and Agarwal, A., eds., A Clinician’s Guide to Sperm DNA and Chromatin Damage. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, pp. 571–87.Google Scholar
Pons, I, Cercas, R, Villas, C, Braña, C, Fernández-Shaw, S. One abstinence day decreases sperm DNA fragmentation in 90% of selected patients. J Assist Reprod Genet 2013; 30: 1211–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshburn, PB, Alanis, MC, Matthew, MLS. A short period of abstinence before intrauterine insemination is associated with higher pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril 2009; 93: 286–8.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Martín, P, Sánchez-Martín, F, González-Martínez, M, Gosálvez, J. Increased pregnancy after reduced male abstinence. System Biol Reprod Sci 2013; 59: 256–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Cohen, J, Euser, R, Schenck, PE, Brugman, FW, Zeilmaker, GH. Motility and morphology of human spermatozoa in split ejaculates. Andrologia 1981; 13: 491–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Mortimer, D. Biochemistry of spermatozoa and seminal plasma. In Practical Laboratory Andrology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 89–109.Google Scholar
Hebles, M, Dorado, M, González-Martínez, M, Sánchez-Martín, P. Seminal quality in the first fraction of ejaculate. Syst Biol Reprod Med 2014; 30: 1–4.Google Scholar
de la Torre, J, Sánchez-Martín, P, Gosálvez, J, Crespo, F. Equivalent seminal characteristics in human and stallion at first and second ejaculated fractions. Andrologia 2016; 49: 15.Google ScholarPubMed
Mann, T, Lutwak-Mann, C. Biochemistry of spermatozoa: chemical and functional correlations in ejaculated semen. Andrological aspect. In Mann, T., Lutwak-Mann, C., eds., Male Reproductive Function and Semen. London: Springer, pp. 195–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, WV, Van Look, KJ. Concepts in sperm heterogeneity, sperm selection and sperm competition as biological foundations for laboratory tests of semen quality. Reproduction 2004; 127: 527–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santolaria, P, Soler, C, Recreo, P, Carretero, T, Bono, A, Berné, JM, Yániz, JL. Morphometric and kinematic sperm subpopulations in split ejaculates of normozoospermic men. Asian J Androl 2016; 18: 831–4.Google ScholarPubMed
Said, TM, Land, JA. Effects of advanced selection methods on sperm quality and ART outcome: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2011; 17: 719–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sikka, SC, Hellstrom, WJG. Current updates on laboratory techniques for the diagnosis of male reproductive failure. Asian J Androl 2016; 18: 392–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Fernández, C, Johnston, SD, Gosálbez, A, Fernández, JL, Álvarez, JG, Gosálvez, J. Inter-center variation in the efficiency of sperm DNA damage reduction following density gradient centrifugation. Nat Sci 2013; 5: 15–20.Google Scholar
Bansal, AK, Bilaspuri, GS. Impacts of oxidative stress and antioxidants on semen functions. Vet Med Int Article ID 686137; http://dx.doi.org/10.4061/2011/686137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tvrdá, E, Arroyo, F, Gosálvez, J. Dynamic assessment of human sperm DNA damage I: the effect of seminal plasma-sperm co-incubation after ejaculation. Int Urol Nephrol 2018b; 50: 1381–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Auger, J, Eustache, F, Ducot, B, Blandin, T, Daudin, M, Diaz, I, Matribi, SE, Gony, B, Keskes, L, Kolbezen, M, Lamarte, A, Lornage, J, Nomal, N, Pitaval, G, Simon, O, Virant-Klun, I, Spira, A, Jouannet, P. Intra- and inter-individual variability in human sperm concentration, motility and vitality assessment during a workshop involving ten laboratories. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 2360–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lüpold, S, Fitzpatrick, JL. Sperm number trumps sperm size in mammalian ejaculate evolution. Proc Biol Sci 2015; 282(1819): 20152122.Google ScholarPubMed
Januskauskas, A, Söderquist, L, Håård, MG, Håård, MC, Lundeheim, N, Rodriguez-Martinez, H. Influence of sperm number per straw on the post-thaw sperm viability and fertility of Swedish red and white A.I. bulls. Acta Vet Scand 1996; 37: 461–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Fernández, C, Johnston, SD, Fernández, JL, Wilson, RJ, Gosálvez, J. Fragmentation dynamics of frozen-thawed ram sperm DNA is modulated by sperm concentration. Theriogenology 2010; 74: 1362–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greco, E, Scarselli, F, Iacobelli, M, Rienzi, L, Ubaldi, F, Ferrero, S, Franco, G, Anniballo, N, Mendoza, C, Tesarik, J. Efficient treatment of infertility due to sperm DNA damage by ICSI with testicular spermatozoa. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 226–30.Google ScholarPubMed
Moskovtsev, SI, Jarvi, K, Mullen, JB, Cadesky, KI, Hannam, T, Lo, KC. Testicular spermatozoa have statistically significantly lower DNA damage compared with ejaculated spermatozoa in patients with unsuccessful oral antioxidant treatment. Fertil Steril 2010; 93: 1142–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esteves, SC, Sanchez-Martín, F, Sanchez-Martín, P, Schneider, DT, Gosálvez, J. Comparison of reproductive outcome in oligozoospermic men with high sperm DNA fragmentation undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection with ejaculated and testicular sperm. Fertil Steril 2015; 104: 1398–1405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rylander, L, Wetterstrand, B, Haugen, TB, Malm, G, Malm, J, Bjørsvik, C, Henrichsen, T, Sæther, T, Giwercman, A. Single semen analysis as a predictor of semen quality: clinical and epidemiological implications. Asian J Androl 2009; 11: 723–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, LA, Flook, JP, Hawk, HW. Sex preselection in rabbits: live births from X and Y sperm separated by DNA and cell sorting. Biol Reprod 1989; 41: 199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karabinus, DS, Marazzo, DP, Stern, HJ, Potter, DA, Opang, CI, Cole, ML, Johnson, LA, Schulman, JD. The effectiveness of flow cytometric sorting of human sperm (MicroSort®) for influencing a child’s sex. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2014; 12: 106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×