Tianxiang Ni1, Jing Li1, Hong Chen1, Yuan Gao1,2,3, Xuan Gao1,2,3, Junhao Yan4,5,6, Zi-Jiang Chen1,2,3,7,8. 1. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Jingliu Road 157, Jinan, 250021, China. 2. National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics, Jinan, 250021, China. 3. The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, 250021, China. 4. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Jingliu Road 157, Jinan, 250021, China. yyy306@126.com. 5. National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics, Jinan, 250021, China. yyy306@126.com. 6. The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, 250021, China. yyy306@126.com. 7. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. 8. Shanghai Key Laboratory for Assisted Reproduction and Reproductive Genetics, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Chromosomal polymorphisms are associated with infertility, but their effects on assisted reproductive outcomes are still quite conflicting, especially after IVF treatment. This study evaluated the role of chromosomal polymorphisms of different genders in IVF pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: Four hundred and twenty-five infertile couples undergoing IVF treatment were divided into three groups: 214 couples with normal chromosomes (group A, control group), 86 couples with female polymorphisms (group B), and 125 couples with male polymorphisms (group C). The pregnancy outcomes after the first and cumulative transfer cycles were analyzed, and the main outcome measures were live birth rate (LBR) after the first transfer cycle and cumulative LBR after a complete IVF cycle. RESULTS: Comparison of pregnancy outcomes after the first transfer cycle within group A, group B, and group C demonstrated a similar LBR as well as other rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy, early miscarriage, and ongoing pregnancy (P > 0.05). However, the analysis of cumulative pregnancy outcomes indicated that compared with group A, group C had a significantly lower LBR per cycle (80.4 vs 68.00%), for a rate ratio of 1.182 (95% CI 1.030 to 1.356, P = 0.01) and a significantly higher cumulative early miscarriage rate (EMR) among clinical pregnancies (7.2 vs 14.7%), for a rate ratio of 0.489 (95% CI 0.248 to 0.963, P = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Couples with chromosomal polymorphisms in only male partners have poor pregnancy outcomes after IVF treatment manifesting as high cumulative EMR and low LBR after a complete cycle.
PURPOSE: Chromosomal polymorphisms are associated with infertility, but their effects on assisted reproductive outcomes are still quite conflicting, especially after IVF treatment. This study evaluated the role of chromosomal polymorphisms of different genders in IVF pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: Four hundred and twenty-five infertile couples undergoing IVF treatment were divided into three groups: 214 couples with normal chromosomes (group A, control group), 86 couples with female polymorphisms (group B), and 125 couples with male polymorphisms (group C). The pregnancy outcomes after the first and cumulative transfer cycles were analyzed, and the main outcome measures were live birth rate (LBR) after the first transfer cycle and cumulative LBR after a complete IVF cycle. RESULTS: Comparison of pregnancy outcomes after the first transfer cycle within group A, group B, and group C demonstrated a similar LBR as well as other rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy, early miscarriage, and ongoing pregnancy (P > 0.05). However, the analysis of cumulative pregnancy outcomes indicated that compared with group A, group C had a significantly lower LBR per cycle (80.4 vs 68.00%), for a rate ratio of 1.182 (95% CI 1.030 to 1.356, P = 0.01) and a significantly higher cumulative early miscarriage rate (EMR) among clinical pregnancies (7.2 vs 14.7%), for a rate ratio of 0.489 (95% CI 0.248 to 0.963, P = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Couples with chromosomal polymorphisms in only male partners have poor pregnancy outcomes after IVF treatment manifesting as high cumulative EMR and low LBR after a complete cycle.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chromosomal polymorphisms; Cumulative live birth rate; IVF; Miscarriage
Authors: S J Humphray; K Oliver; A R Hunt; R W Plumb; J E Loveland; K L Howe; T D Andrews; S Searle; S E Hunt; C E Scott; M C Jones; R Ainscough; J P Almeida; K D Ambrose; R I S Ashwell; A K Babbage; S Babbage; C L Bagguley; J Bailey; R Banerjee; D J Barker; K F Barlow; K Bates; H Beasley; O Beasley; C P Bird; S Bray-Allen; A J Brown; J Y Brown; D Burford; W Burrill; J Burton; C Carder; N P Carter; J C Chapman; Y Chen; G Clarke; S Y Clark; C M Clee; S Clegg; R E Collier; N Corby; M Crosier; A T Cummings; J Davies; P Dhami; M Dunn; I Dutta; L W Dyer; M E Earthrowl; L Faulkner; C J Fleming; A Frankish; J A Frankland; L French; D G Fricker; P Garner; J Garnett; J Ghori; J G R Gilbert; C Glison; D V Grafham; S Gribble; C Griffiths; S Griffiths-Jones; R Grocock; J Guy; R E Hall; S Hammond; J L Harley; E S I Harrison; E A Hart; P D Heath; C D Henderson; B L Hopkins; P J Howard; P J Howden; E Huckle; C Johnson; D Johnson; A A Joy; M Kay; S Keenan; J K Kershaw; A M Kimberley; A King; A Knights; G K Laird; C Langford; S Lawlor; D A Leongamornlert; M Leversha; C Lloyd; D M Lloyd; J Lovell; S Martin; M Mashreghi-Mohammadi; L Matthews; S McLaren; K E McLay; A McMurray; S Milne; T Nickerson; J Nisbett; G Nordsiek; A V Pearce; A I Peck; K M Porter; R Pandian; S Pelan; B Phillimore; S Povey; Y Ramsey; V Rand; M Scharfe; H K Sehra; R Shownkeen; S K Sims; C D Skuce; M Smith; C A Steward; D Swarbreck; N Sycamore; J Tester; A Thorpe; A Tracey; A Tromans; D W Thomas; M Wall; J M Wallis; A P West; S L Whitehead; D L Willey; S A Williams; L Wilming; P W Wray; L Young; J L Ashurst; A Coulson; H Blöcker; R Durbin; J E Sulston; T Hubbard; M J Jackson; D R Bentley; S Beck; J Rogers; I Dunham Journal: Nature Date: 2004-05-27 Impact factor: 49.962