在单基因疾病患者中,与仅使用PGT-M相比,使用Haploseek联合PGT-M和PGT-A的P-567周期结果

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
M Youngster, N Sharon, I Granot, A Kedem, E Aizenman Fridman, P Renbaum, D Zeevi, M Baum, G Altarescu, E Maman, A Hourvitz
{"title":"在单基因疾病患者中,与仅使用PGT-M相比,使用Haploseek联合PGT-M和PGT-A的P-567周期结果","authors":"M Youngster, N Sharon, I Granot, A Kedem, E Aizenman Fridman, P Renbaum, D Zeevi, M Baum, G Altarescu, E Maman, A Hourvitz","doi":"10.1093/humrep/deaf097.873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Study question Is there a difference in cycle outcomes when embryos are tested solely for monogenic diseases (PGT-M) or a combination of PGT-M and chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A)? Summary answer The Haploseek combining PGT-M & PGT-A resulted in higher pregnancy rates per transfer with no difference in cumulative live birth rates (CLBR). What is known already The goal of PGT-M in patients with monogenic diseases is to avoid pregnancy with an affected embryo. Combining testing for chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A) provides the chance to shorten time to pregnancy (TTP) and reduce miscarriage rates, while avoiding additional invasive procedures and added costs. However, concerns have been raised that healthy embryos may be excluded due to mis-diagnostic results thus affecting CLBR. The Haploseek is a low-cost, user-friendly, and accurate, next-generation sequencing-based, validated method, for single-cell gene variant detection combined with comprehensive chromosome screening in a 24-hour workflow protocol. Study design, size, duration A retrospective single-center cohort-study (2021-2023) including patients≤42 years, undergoing IVF for a single monogenic disease, having at least one available blastocyst for biopsy. The study group underwent Haploseek testing, combining PGT-A and PGT-M. Patients in the control group underwent PGT-M using Short Tandem Repeat linkage only. Genetics and clinical outcomes were calculated. Participants/materials, setting, methods Analysis was performed following stratification into three groups: 1. Per retrieval–all retrieval cycles, with a main outcome of number of embryos per transfer. 2. Per Embryo transfer–all transfers, with pregnancy and live birth rates included in the clinical outcomes. 3. Per informative retrieval–all retrievals in which either the patient became pregnant or completed transfer of all available embryos with a main outcome of CLBR. Main results and the role of chance Seventy-three patients (34.2±4.3 years) undergoing 128 retrieval cycles were included in the study group. 93 cycles had an AD (72.7%) and 35 AR mutation (27.3%). The control group consisted of 54 patients (33.4±4.5 years; p = 0.57) undergoing 84 retrievals, with 63 (75.0%) AD and 21 (25.0%) AR mutation. The number of embryos available for biopsy per retrieval was similar between the study and control groups (3.99±3.10 vs 3.75±4.14; p = 0.63) as were number of transferable embryos per retrieval (1.27±1.49 (31.9%) vs.1.69±2.37 (45.1%); p = 0.11). Analysis per transfer revealed significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (45/73 (61.6%) vs. 24/61 (39.3%); p = 0.01), and LBR (41/73 (56.2%) vs. 22/61 (36.1%); p = 0.02) in the study group. There was no difference in early miscarriage rates (6/51 (11.8%) vs. 4/28 (14.3%); p = 0.73). Clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates per informative retrieval were similar between groups as was the CLBR (41/100 (41%) vs. 22/72 (30.6%); p = 0.19). TTP of patients with a live birth was 130.6 + 74.4 days in the study group compared to 141.0 + 93.1 days in the control group (p = 0.63). Limitations, reasons for caution A retrospective study with a relatively small sample size, limiting our ability to address potential differences in miscarriage rate and TTP. Wider implications of the findings The Haploseek is an accurate and rapid validated method of evaluating both PGT-M and PGT-A from the same biopsy, for women undergoing fertility treatment due to monogenic diseases. Implementing this method may result in higher LBR per transfer, without reducing CLBR. Trial registration number No","PeriodicalId":13003,"journal":{"name":"Human reproduction","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"P-567 Cycle outcomes using Haploseek combining PGT-M and PGT-A compared to PGT-M only in patients tested for monogenic diseases\",\"authors\":\"M Youngster, N Sharon, I Granot, A Kedem, E Aizenman Fridman, P Renbaum, D Zeevi, M Baum, G Altarescu, E Maman, A Hourvitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/humrep/deaf097.873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Study question Is there a difference in cycle outcomes when embryos are tested solely for monogenic diseases (PGT-M) or a combination of PGT-M and chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A)? Summary answer The Haploseek combining PGT-M & PGT-A resulted in higher pregnancy rates per transfer with no difference in cumulative live birth rates (CLBR). What is known already The goal of PGT-M in patients with monogenic diseases is to avoid pregnancy with an affected embryo. Combining testing for chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A) provides the chance to shorten time to pregnancy (TTP) and reduce miscarriage rates, while avoiding additional invasive procedures and added costs. However, concerns have been raised that healthy embryos may be excluded due to mis-diagnostic results thus affecting CLBR. The Haploseek is a low-cost, user-friendly, and accurate, next-generation sequencing-based, validated method, for single-cell gene variant detection combined with comprehensive chromosome screening in a 24-hour workflow protocol. Study design, size, duration A retrospective single-center cohort-study (2021-2023) including patients≤42 years, undergoing IVF for a single monogenic disease, having at least one available blastocyst for biopsy. The study group underwent Haploseek testing, combining PGT-A and PGT-M. Patients in the control group underwent PGT-M using Short Tandem Repeat linkage only. Genetics and clinical outcomes were calculated. Participants/materials, setting, methods Analysis was performed following stratification into three groups: 1. Per retrieval–all retrieval cycles, with a main outcome of number of embryos per transfer. 2. Per Embryo transfer–all transfers, with pregnancy and live birth rates included in the clinical outcomes. 3. Per informative retrieval–all retrievals in which either the patient became pregnant or completed transfer of all available embryos with a main outcome of CLBR. Main results and the role of chance Seventy-three patients (34.2±4.3 years) undergoing 128 retrieval cycles were included in the study group. 93 cycles had an AD (72.7%) and 35 AR mutation (27.3%). The control group consisted of 54 patients (33.4±4.5 years; p = 0.57) undergoing 84 retrievals, with 63 (75.0%) AD and 21 (25.0%) AR mutation. The number of embryos available for biopsy per retrieval was similar between the study and control groups (3.99±3.10 vs 3.75±4.14; p = 0.63) as were number of transferable embryos per retrieval (1.27±1.49 (31.9%) vs.1.69±2.37 (45.1%); p = 0.11). Analysis per transfer revealed significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (45/73 (61.6%) vs. 24/61 (39.3%); p = 0.01), and LBR (41/73 (56.2%) vs. 22/61 (36.1%); p = 0.02) in the study group. There was no difference in early miscarriage rates (6/51 (11.8%) vs. 4/28 (14.3%); p = 0.73). Clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates per informative retrieval were similar between groups as was the CLBR (41/100 (41%) vs. 22/72 (30.6%); p = 0.19). TTP of patients with a live birth was 130.6 + 74.4 days in the study group compared to 141.0 + 93.1 days in the control group (p = 0.63). Limitations, reasons for caution A retrospective study with a relatively small sample size, limiting our ability to address potential differences in miscarriage rate and TTP. Wider implications of the findings The Haploseek is an accurate and rapid validated method of evaluating both PGT-M and PGT-A from the same biopsy, for women undergoing fertility treatment due to monogenic diseases. Implementing this method may result in higher LBR per transfer, without reducing CLBR. Trial registration number No\",\"PeriodicalId\":13003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human reproduction\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human reproduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaf097.873\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaf097.873","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究问题:当胚胎单独检测单基因疾病(PGT-M)或PGT-M和染色体异常(PGT-A)的组合时,周期结果有差异吗?结合PGT-M &;PGT-A导致每次移植的妊娠率更高,累积活产率(CLBR)没有差异。在单基因疾病患者中使用PGT-M的目的是避免与受影响的胚胎怀孕。结合染色体异常检测(PGT-A)提供了缩短妊娠时间(TTP)和降低流产率的机会,同时避免了额外的侵入性手术和额外的费用。然而,人们担心健康胚胎可能因误诊结果而被排除在外,从而影响CLBR。Haploseek是一种低成本,用户友好,准确,基于测序的新一代验证方法,用于单细胞基因变异检测,结合24小时工作流程的全面染色体筛选。研究设计、规模、持续时间一项回顾性单中心队列研究(2021-2023),纳入年龄≤42岁、因单一单基因疾病接受体外受精、至少有一个可用囊胚活检的患者。研究组接受单倍寻体检测,结合PGT-A和PGT-M。对照组患者仅使用短串联重复连锁进行PGT-M。计算遗传学和临床结果。受试者/材料、环境、方法按分层分为三组进行分析:每次取出-所有取出周期,主要结果是每次移植的胚胎数量。2. 每个胚胎移植-所有移植,妊娠率和活产率包括在临床结果中。3. 根据信息检索-所有检索中,患者怀孕或完成所有可用胚胎移植,主要结果为CLBR。研究组共纳入73例患者(34.2±4.3岁),共128个检索周期。AD突变93个周期(72.7%),AR突变35个周期(27.3%)。对照组54例(33.4±4.5岁;p = 0.57)进行了84次检索,其中63例(75.0%)AD和21例(25.0%)AR突变。每次取出可用于活检的胚胎数量在研究组和对照组之间相似(3.99±3.10 vs 3.75±4.14;P = 0.63),每次取出可移植胚胎数(1.27±1.49 (31.9%)vs 1.69±2.37 (45.1%);P = 0.11)。临床妊娠率(45/73 (61.6%)vs. 24/61 (39.3%);p = 0.01), LBR(41/73(56.2%)与22/61 (36.1%);P = 0.02)。两组早期流产率无差异(6/51 (11.8%)vs 4/28 (14.3%);P = 0.73)。每次信息检索的临床和持续妊娠率在两组之间相似,CLBR (41/100 (41%) vs 22/72 (30.6%);P = 0.19)。研究组活产患者的TTP为130.6 + 74.4天,对照组为141.0 + 93.1天(p = 0.63)。局限性,谨慎的原因一项样本量相对较小的回顾性研究限制了我们解决流产率和TTP潜在差异的能力。对于因单基因疾病而接受生育治疗的女性来说,Haploseek是一种准确、快速、有效的方法,可以从同一活检中评估PGT-M和PGT-A。实现这种方法可以提高每次传输的LBR,而不会降低CLBR。试验注册号
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
P-567 Cycle outcomes using Haploseek combining PGT-M and PGT-A compared to PGT-M only in patients tested for monogenic diseases
Study question Is there a difference in cycle outcomes when embryos are tested solely for monogenic diseases (PGT-M) or a combination of PGT-M and chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A)? Summary answer The Haploseek combining PGT-M & PGT-A resulted in higher pregnancy rates per transfer with no difference in cumulative live birth rates (CLBR). What is known already The goal of PGT-M in patients with monogenic diseases is to avoid pregnancy with an affected embryo. Combining testing for chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A) provides the chance to shorten time to pregnancy (TTP) and reduce miscarriage rates, while avoiding additional invasive procedures and added costs. However, concerns have been raised that healthy embryos may be excluded due to mis-diagnostic results thus affecting CLBR. The Haploseek is a low-cost, user-friendly, and accurate, next-generation sequencing-based, validated method, for single-cell gene variant detection combined with comprehensive chromosome screening in a 24-hour workflow protocol. Study design, size, duration A retrospective single-center cohort-study (2021-2023) including patients≤42 years, undergoing IVF for a single monogenic disease, having at least one available blastocyst for biopsy. The study group underwent Haploseek testing, combining PGT-A and PGT-M. Patients in the control group underwent PGT-M using Short Tandem Repeat linkage only. Genetics and clinical outcomes were calculated. Participants/materials, setting, methods Analysis was performed following stratification into three groups: 1. Per retrieval–all retrieval cycles, with a main outcome of number of embryos per transfer. 2. Per Embryo transfer–all transfers, with pregnancy and live birth rates included in the clinical outcomes. 3. Per informative retrieval–all retrievals in which either the patient became pregnant or completed transfer of all available embryos with a main outcome of CLBR. Main results and the role of chance Seventy-three patients (34.2±4.3 years) undergoing 128 retrieval cycles were included in the study group. 93 cycles had an AD (72.7%) and 35 AR mutation (27.3%). The control group consisted of 54 patients (33.4±4.5 years; p = 0.57) undergoing 84 retrievals, with 63 (75.0%) AD and 21 (25.0%) AR mutation. The number of embryos available for biopsy per retrieval was similar between the study and control groups (3.99±3.10 vs 3.75±4.14; p = 0.63) as were number of transferable embryos per retrieval (1.27±1.49 (31.9%) vs.1.69±2.37 (45.1%); p = 0.11). Analysis per transfer revealed significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (45/73 (61.6%) vs. 24/61 (39.3%); p = 0.01), and LBR (41/73 (56.2%) vs. 22/61 (36.1%); p = 0.02) in the study group. There was no difference in early miscarriage rates (6/51 (11.8%) vs. 4/28 (14.3%); p = 0.73). Clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates per informative retrieval were similar between groups as was the CLBR (41/100 (41%) vs. 22/72 (30.6%); p = 0.19). TTP of patients with a live birth was 130.6 + 74.4 days in the study group compared to 141.0 + 93.1 days in the control group (p = 0.63). Limitations, reasons for caution A retrospective study with a relatively small sample size, limiting our ability to address potential differences in miscarriage rate and TTP. Wider implications of the findings The Haploseek is an accurate and rapid validated method of evaluating both PGT-M and PGT-A from the same biopsy, for women undergoing fertility treatment due to monogenic diseases. Implementing this method may result in higher LBR per transfer, without reducing CLBR. Trial registration number No
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human reproduction
Human reproduction 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
6.60%
发文量
1369
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Human Reproduction features full-length, peer-reviewed papers reporting original research, concise clinical case reports, as well as opinions and debates on topical issues. Papers published cover the clinical science and medical aspects of reproductive physiology, pathology and endocrinology; including andrology, gonad function, gametogenesis, fertilization, embryo development, implantation, early pregnancy, genetics, genetic diagnosis, oncology, infectious disease, surgery, contraception, infertility treatment, psychology, ethics and social issues.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信