Transfer of the fittest: using preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy to select embryo(s) most likely to lead to live birth

Jenna S. Hynes M.D., Eric J. Forman M.D.
{"title":"Transfer of the fittest: using preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy to select embryo(s) most likely to lead to live birth","authors":"Jenna S. Hynes M.D.,&nbsp;Eric J. Forman M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.xfss.2022.12.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy<span><span> (PGT-A) was developed to identify euploid embryos from a cohort of embryos with unknown ploidy produced during an in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. In recent years, the ability of PGT-A to improve IVF outcomes has come into question. The goal of this review was to summarize the major </span>randomized controlled trials<span><span> (RCTs) and nonselection studies evaluating the benefit of PGT-A to improve the live birth rates (LBRs). We argue that the LBR per transfer is more relevant to the individual patient than the cumulative LBR as a means to minimize the burden of IVF by reducing futile transfers, pregnancy losses, and ongoing aneuploidy. The early RCTs demonstrate improved implantation rates and LBRs with PGT-A for embryo selection vs. traditional morphology. However, these studies are limited by the small sample size and a bias toward good-prognosis patients. Further studies using next-generation sequencing found more variable results but did confirm an improvement in the LBRs per transfer in an older population with a higher baseline risk of aneuploidy. The largest RCT to date showed similar cumulative LBRs in the PGT-A and control groups after biopsy and sequential transfer of up to 3 </span>blastocysts with a significant reduction in the cumulative clinical pregnancy loss rate in the PGT-A group. Nonselection studies evaluating pregnancy outcomes after transfer of euploid vs. aneuploid embryos demonstrate near-perfect negative predictive value for an aneuploid result to predict live birth. Putative mosaic embryos had similar LBRs compared with euploid embryos. The available RCTs and nonselection studies support the practice of using PGT-A to identify euploid embryos for transfer, especially in an older population, while simultaneously selecting against aneuploid embryos, without negative impact on the total reproductive potential of the cycle.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":73012,"journal":{"name":"F&S science","volume":"4 2","pages":"Pages 2-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F&S science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666335X23000010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) was developed to identify euploid embryos from a cohort of embryos with unknown ploidy produced during an in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. In recent years, the ability of PGT-A to improve IVF outcomes has come into question. The goal of this review was to summarize the major randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonselection studies evaluating the benefit of PGT-A to improve the live birth rates (LBRs). We argue that the LBR per transfer is more relevant to the individual patient than the cumulative LBR as a means to minimize the burden of IVF by reducing futile transfers, pregnancy losses, and ongoing aneuploidy. The early RCTs demonstrate improved implantation rates and LBRs with PGT-A for embryo selection vs. traditional morphology. However, these studies are limited by the small sample size and a bias toward good-prognosis patients. Further studies using next-generation sequencing found more variable results but did confirm an improvement in the LBRs per transfer in an older population with a higher baseline risk of aneuploidy. The largest RCT to date showed similar cumulative LBRs in the PGT-A and control groups after biopsy and sequential transfer of up to 3 blastocysts with a significant reduction in the cumulative clinical pregnancy loss rate in the PGT-A group. Nonselection studies evaluating pregnancy outcomes after transfer of euploid vs. aneuploid embryos demonstrate near-perfect negative predictive value for an aneuploid result to predict live birth. Putative mosaic embryos had similar LBRs compared with euploid embryos. The available RCTs and nonselection studies support the practice of using PGT-A to identify euploid embryos for transfer, especially in an older population, while simultaneously selecting against aneuploid embryos, without negative impact on the total reproductive potential of the cycle.

适者移植:使用植入前非整倍体基因检测来选择最有可能导致活产的胚胎
非整倍体植入前基因检测(PGT-A)是为了从体外受精(IVF)周期中产生的具有未知倍体的胚胎队列中鉴定整倍体胚胎。近年来,PGT-A改善体外受精结果的能力受到了质疑。本综述的目的是总结主要的随机对照试验(RCT)和非选择性研究,评估PGT-A对提高活产率(LBR)的益处。我们认为,每次转移的LBR比累积的LBR与个体患者更相关,这是一种通过减少无效转移、妊娠损失和持续的非整倍体来最大限度地减少试管婴儿负担的方法。早期随机对照试验表明,与传统形态学相比,PGT-A用于胚胎选择的植入率和LBR有所提高。然而,这些研究受到样本量小和对预后良好患者的偏见的限制。使用下一代测序的进一步研究发现了更多可变的结果,但确实证实了在非整倍体基线风险较高的老年人群中,每次转移的LBR有所改善。迄今为止最大的随机对照试验显示,在活检和连续转移多达3个胚泡后,PGT-A组和对照组的累积LBR相似,PGT-A组的累积临床妊娠损失率显著降低。评估整倍体与非整倍体胚胎移植后妊娠结果的非选择性研究表明,非整倍性结果预测活产具有近乎完美的阴性预测价值。与整倍体胚胎相比,假定的马赛克胚胎具有相似的LBR。现有的随机对照试验和非选择研究支持使用PGT-A鉴定整倍体胚胎进行移植的做法,尤其是在老年人群中,同时对非整倍体胚进行选择,而不会对周期的总生殖潜力产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
F&S science
F&S science Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Urology
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
51 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信