Effect of next-generation sequencing in preimplantation genetic testing on live birth ratio
Joanna Liss A B , Ewa Pastuszek A C , Sebastian Pukszta A , Eva Hoffmann D , Waldemar Kuczynski E F , Aron Lukaszuk A G I and Krzysztof Lukaszuk A C H
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A INVICTA Fertility and Reproductive Center, ul. Trzy Lipy 3, 80-172 Gdansk, Poland.
B Department of Biology and Medical Genetics, University of Gdansk, ul. Wita Stwosza 59, 80-308 Gdansk, Poland.
C Medical University of Gdansk, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecological Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, ul. Marii Sklodowskiej-Curie 3a, 80-210 Gdansk, Poland.
D Center for Chromosome Stability, Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark.
E Centre for Reproductive Medicine KRIOBANK, ul. Stoleczna 11, 15-879 Bialystok, Poland.
F Medical University of Bialystok, ul. Jana Kilinskiego 1, 15-089 Bialystok, Poland.
G Medical University of Gdansk, Department of Gynaeology, Endocrine Gynaecology and Gynaecological Oncology, ul. Marii Sklodowskiej-Curie 3a, 80-210 Gdansk, Poland.
H Medical University of Warsaw, Department of Gynecological Endocrinology, ul. Karowa 2, 00-315 Warsaw, Poland.
I Corresponding author. Email: aron@gumed.edu.pl
Reproduction, Fertility and Development 30(12) 1720-1727 https://doi.org/10.1071/RD17428
Submitted: 8 November 2017 Accepted: 24 May 2018 Published: 22 June 2018
Abstract
The present study analysed live birth ratios in frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles where embryo ploidy status was determined with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) using next-generation sequencing (NGS). PGT was performed on trophectoderm cells biopsied at the blastocyst stage. The present prospective cohort study included 112 women undergoing frozen embryo transfer, with NGS PGT. The control group consisted of 85 patients who underwent the IVF procedure with FET planned for a subsequent cycle. The live birth rate per cycle was higher by ~18.5 percentage points in the investigated compared with control group (42.0% vs 23.5% respectively; P = 0.012). The differences between the study and control groups were also significant for clinical pregnancy (42.0% vs 23.5% respectively; P = 0.012), implantation (41.2% vs 22.2% respectively; P = 0.001) and pregnancy loss rates (9.6% vs 28.6% respectively; P = 0.027). The results show that PGT NGS is a useful method for embryo selection and it may be implemented in routine clinical practice with propitious results.
Additional keywords: frozen embryo transfer.
References
Basirat, Z., Adib Rad, H., Esmailzadeh, S., Jorsaraei, S. G. A., Hajian-Tilaki, K., Pasha, H., and Ghofrani, F. (2016). Comparison of pregnancy rate between fresh embryo transfers and frozen–thawed embryo transfers following ICSI treatment. Int. J. Reprod. Biomed. (Yazd) 14, 39–46.| Comparison of pregnancy rate between fresh embryo transfers and frozen–thawed embryo transfers following ICSI treatment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Brezina, P. R., Anchan, R., and Kearns, W. G. (2016). Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences? J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 33, 823–832.
| Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cao, Y.-X., Xing, Q., Li, L., Cong, L., Zhang, Z.-G., Wei, Z.-L., and Zhou, P. (2009). Comparison of survival and embryonic development in human oocytes cryopreserved by slow-freezing and vitrification. Fertil. Steril. 92, 1306–1311.
| Comparison of survival and embryonic development in human oocytes cryopreserved by slow-freezing and vitrification.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Capalbo, A., Treff, N. R., Cimadomo, D., Tao, X., Upham, K., Ubaldi, F. M., Rienzi, L., and Scott, R. T. (2015). Comparison of array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative real-time PCR-based aneuploidy screening of blastocyst biopsies. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 23, 901–906.
| Comparison of array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative real-time PCR-based aneuploidy screening of blastocyst biopsies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Capalbo, A., Romanelli, V., Cimadomo, D., Girardi, L., Stoppa, M., Dovere, L., Dell’Edera, D., Ubaldi, F. M., and Rienzi, L. (2016). Implementing PGD/PGD-A in IVF clinics: considerations for the best laboratory approach and management. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 33, 1279–1286.
| Implementing PGD/PGD-A in IVF clinics: considerations for the best laboratory approach and management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Coates, A., Bankowski, B. J., Kung, A., Griffin, D. K., and Munne, S. (2017). Differences in pregnancy outcomes in donor egg frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles following preimplantation genetic screening (PGS): a single center retrospective study. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 34, 71–78.
| Differences in pregnancy outcomes in donor egg frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles following preimplantation genetic screening (PGS): a single center retrospective study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Deleye, L., Dheedene, A., De Coninck, D., Sante, T., Christodoulou, C., Heindryckx, B., Van den Abbeel, E., De Sutter, P., Deforce, D., Menten, B., and Van Nieuwerburgh, F. (2015). Shallow whole genome sequencing is well suited for the detection of chromosomal aberrations in human blastocysts. Fertil. Steril. 104, 1276–1285.e1.
| Shallow whole genome sequencing is well suited for the detection of chromosomal aberrations in human blastocysts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fiorentino, F., Biricik, A., Karadayi, H., Berkil, H., Karlikaya, G., Sertyel, S., Podini, D., Baldi, M., Magli, M. C., Gianaroli, L., and Kahraman, S. (2004). Development and clinical application of a strategy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single gene disorders combined with HLA matching. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 10, 445–460.
| Development and clinical application of a strategy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single gene disorders combined with HLA matching.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fiorentino, F., Biricik, A., Bono, S., Spizzichino, L., Cotroneo, E., Cottone, G., Kokocinski, F., and Michel, C.-E. (2014a). Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing-based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of embryos. Fertil. Steril. 101, 1375–1382.e2.
| Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing-based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of embryos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fiorentino, F., Bono, S., Biricik, A., Nuccitelli, A., Cotroneo, E., Cottone, G., Kokocinski, F., Michel, C. E., Minasi, M. G., and Greco, E. (2014b). Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum. Reprod. 29, 2802–2813.
| Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Forman, E. J., Tao, X., Ferry, K. M., Taylor, D., Treff, N. R., and Scott, R. T. (2012). Single embryo transfer with comprehensive chromosome screening results in improved ongoing pregnancy rates and decreased miscarriage rates. Hum. Reprod. 27, 1217–1222.
| Single embryo transfer with comprehensive chromosome screening results in improved ongoing pregnancy rates and decreased miscarriage rates.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gardner, D. K., Lane, M., Stevens, J., Schlenker, T., and Schoolcraft, W. B. (2000). Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil. Steril. 73, 1155–1158.
| Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Glujovsky, D., Farquhar, C., Quinteiro Retamar, A. M., Alvarez Sedo, C. R., and Blake, D. (2016). Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 30, CD002118.pub5.
| Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gutiérrez-Mateo, C., Colls, P., Sánchez-García, J., Escudero, T., Prates, R., Ketterson, K., Wells, D., and Munné, S. (2011). Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos. Fertil. Steril. 95, 953–958.
| Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Harton, G. L., Munné, S., Surrey, M., Grifo, J., Kaplan, B., McCulloh, D. H., Griffin, D. K., Wells, D., PGD Practitioners Group (2013). Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertil. Steril. 100, 1695–1703.
| Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Imudia, A. N., Awonuga, A. O., Kaimal, A. J., Wright, D. L., Styer, A. K., and Toth, T. L. (2013). Elective cryopreservation of all embryos with subsequent cryothaw embryo transfer in patients at risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome reduces the risk of adverse obstetric outcomes: a preliminary study. Fertil. Steril. 99, 168–173.
| Elective cryopreservation of all embryos with subsequent cryothaw embryo transfer in patients at risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome reduces the risk of adverse obstetric outcomes: a preliminary study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Juneau, C., Franasiak, J., and Treff, N. (2016). Challenges facing contemporary preimplantation genetic screening. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 28, 151–157.
| Challenges facing contemporary preimplantation genetic screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kuliev, A., Cieslak, J., and Verlinsky, Y. (2005). Frequency and distribution of chromosome abnormalities in human oocytes. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 111, 193–198.
| Frequency and distribution of chromosome abnormalities in human oocytes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kuwayama, M. (2007). Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: the Cryotop method. Theriogenology 67, 73–80.
| Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: the Cryotop method.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Liu, M., Su, Y., and Wang, W.-H. (2016). Assessment of clinical application of preimplantation genetic screening on cryopreserved human blastocysts. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 14, 16.
| Assessment of clinical application of preimplantation genetic screening on cryopreserved human blastocysts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lukaszuk, K., Kunicki, M., Liss, J., Jakiel, G., Bednarowska, A., Wasniewski, T., Neuberg, M., and Lukaszuk, M. (2013). Use of ovarian reserve parameters for predicting live births in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 168, 173–177.
| Use of ovarian reserve parameters for predicting live births in women undergoing in vitro fertilization.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lukaszuk, K., Pukszta, S., Wells, D., Cybulska, C., Liss, J., Plociennik, L., Kuczynski, W., and Zabielska, J. (2015). Routine use of next-generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of blastomeres obtained from embryos on Day 3 in fresh in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil. Steril. 103, 1031–1036.
| Routine use of next-generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of blastomeres obtained from embryos on Day 3 in fresh in vitro fertilization cycles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lukaszuk, K., Jakiel, G., Kuczynski, W., Pukszta, S., Liss, J., Plociennik, L., Lukaszuk, A., and Pastuszek, E. (2016). Next generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic testing of blastocysts aneuploidies in women of different ages. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 23, 163–166.
| Next generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic testing of blastocysts aneuploidies in women of different ages.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ly, K. D., Agarwal, A., and Nagy, Z. P. (2011). Preimplantation genetic screening: does it help or hinder IVF treatment and what is the role of the embryo? J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 28, 833–849.
| Preimplantation genetic screening: does it help or hinder IVF treatment and what is the role of the embryo?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Macklon, N. S., Geraedts, J. P., and Fauser, B. C. (2002). Conception to ongoing pregnancy: the ‘black box’ of early pregnancy loss. Hum. Reprod. Update 8, 333–343.
| Conception to ongoing pregnancy: the ‘black box’ of early pregnancy loss.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Martín, J., Cervero, A., Mir, P., Conejero Martinez, J. A., Pellicer, A., Simón, C., and Simón, C. (2013). The impact of next-generation sequencing technology on preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Fertil. Steril. 99, 1054–1061.e3.
| The impact of next-generation sequencing technology on preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Massart, P., Sermondade, N., Dupont, C., Sifer, C., Cedrin-Durnerin, I., and Hugues, J. N. (2013). Cryopréservation de la cohorte embryonnaire en cas de risque d’hyperstimulation: prévention et efficacité. Gynécologie Obs. Fertil. 41, 365–371.
Munné, S., Lee, A., Rosenwaks, Z., Grifo, J., and Cohen, J. (1993). Diagnosis of major chromosome aneuploidies in human preimplantation embryos. Hum. Reprod. 8, 2185–2191.
| Diagnosis of major chromosome aneuploidies in human preimplantation embryos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Özgür, K., Berkkanoğlu, M., Bulut, H., Isikli, A., and Coetzee, K. (2015). Higher clinical pregnancy rates from frozen–thawed blastocyst transfers compared to fresh blastocyst transfers: a retrospective matched-cohort study. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 32, 1483–1490.
| Higher clinical pregnancy rates from frozen–thawed blastocyst transfers compared to fresh blastocyst transfers: a retrospective matched-cohort study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Roque, M., Lattes, K., Serra, S., Solà, I., Geber, S., Carreras, R., and Checa, M. A. (2013). Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil. Steril. 99, 156–162.
| Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schoolcraft, W. B., Fragouli, E., Stevens, J., Munne, S., Katz-Jaffe, M. G., and Wells, D. (2010). Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil. Steril. 94, 1700–1706.
| Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Scott, R. T., Tao, X., Taylor, D., Ferry, K. M., and Treff, N. R. (2010). A prospective randomized controlled trial demonstrating significantly increased clinical pregnancy rates following 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening: biopsy and analysis on Day 5 with fresh transfer. Fertil. Steril. 94, S2.
| A prospective randomized controlled trial demonstrating significantly increased clinical pregnancy rates following 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening: biopsy and analysis on Day 5 with fresh transfer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shapiro, B. S., Daneshmand, S. T., Garner, F. C., Aguirre, M., Hudson, C., and Thomas, S. (2011). Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen–thawed embryo transfers in high responders. Fertil. Steril. 96, 516–518.
| Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen–thawed embryo transfers in high responders.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tan, Y., Yin, X., Zhang, S., Jiang, H., Tan, K., Li, J., Xiong, B., Gong, F., Zhang, C., Pan, X., Chen, F., Chen, S., Gong, C., Lu, C., Luo, K., Gu, Y., Zhang, X., Wang, W., Xu, X., Vajta, G., Bolund, L., Yang, H., Lu, G., Du, Y., and Lin, G. (2014). Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing. Gigascience 3, 30.
| Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Treff, N. R., Fedick, A., Tao, X., Devkota, B., Taylor, D., and Scott, R. T. (2013). Evaluation of targeted next-generation sequencing–based preimplantation genetic diagnosis of monogenic disease. Fertil. Steril. 99, 1377–1384.e6.
| Evaluation of targeted next-generation sequencing–based preimplantation genetic diagnosis of monogenic disease.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wang, L., Cram, D. S., Shen, J., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Song, Z., Xu, G., Li, N., Fan, J., Wang, S., Luo, Y., Wang, J., Yu, L., Liu, J., and Yao, Y. (2014). Validation of copy number variation sequencing for detecting chromosome imbalances in human preimplantation embryos. Biol. Reprod. 91, 37.
| Validation of copy number variation sequencing for detecting chromosome imbalances in human preimplantation embryos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wells, D., Kaur, K., Grifo, J., Glassner, M., Taylor, J. C., Fragouli, E., and Munne, S. (2014). Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation. J. Med. Genet. 51, 553–562.
| Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wennerholm, U. B., Soderstrom-Anttila, V., Bergh, C., Aittomaki, K., Hazekamp, J., Nygren, K.-G., Selbing, A., and Loft, A. (2009). Children born after cryopreservation of embryos or oocytes: a systematic review of outcome data. Hum. Reprod. 24, 2158–2172.
| Children born after cryopreservation of embryos or oocytes: a systematic review of outcome data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wu, M. Y., Chao, K. H., Chen, C. D., Chang, L. J., Chen, S. U., and Yang, Y. S. (2014). Current status of comprehensive chromosome screening for elective single-embryo transfer. Obstet. Gynecol. Int. 2014, 581783.
| Current status of comprehensive chromosome screening for elective single-embryo transfer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Yang, Z., Lin, J., Zhang, J., Fong, W. I., Li, P., Zhao, R., Liu, X., Podevin, W., Kuang, Y., and Liu, J. (2015). Randomized comparison of next-generation sequencing and array comparative genomic hybridization for preimplantation genetic screening: a pilot study. BMC Med. Genomics 8, 30.
| Randomized comparison of next-generation sequencing and array comparative genomic hybridization for preimplantation genetic screening: a pilot study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Yin, X., Tan, K., Vajta, G., Jiang, H., Tan, Y., Zhang, C., Chen, F., Chen, S., Zhang, C., Pan, X., Gong, C., Li, X., Lin, C., Gao, Y., Liang, Y., Yi, X., Mu, F., Zhao, L., Peng, H., Xiong, B., Zhang, S., Cheng, D., Lu, G., Zhang, X., Lin, G., and Wang, W. (2013). Massively parallel sequencing for chromosomal abnormality testing in trophectoderm cells of human blastocysts. Biol. Reprod. 88, 69.
| Massively parallel sequencing for chromosomal abnormality testing in trophectoderm cells of human blastocysts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zheng, H., Jin, H., Liu, L., Liu, J., and Wang, W.-H. (2015). Application of next-generation sequencing for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of human preimplantation embryos. Mol. Cytogenet. 8, 38.
| Application of next-generation sequencing for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of human preimplantation embryos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
