Literature DB >> 32112203

The reproducibility of trophectoderm biopsies in euploid, aneuploid, and mosaic embryos using independently verified next-generation sequencing (NGS): a pilot study.

Nidhee M Sachdev1,2, David H McCulloh3, Yael Kramer3, David Keefe3, James A Grifo3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy and reliability of comprehensive chromosome screening by next-generation sequencing (NGS) of human trophectoderm (TE) biopsy specimens.
METHODS: The reliability and accuracy of diagnoses made by preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) from TE biopsy were tested. Repeat biopsies of TE and inner cell mass (ICM) samples were obtained from thawed blastocysts previously tested by NGS. To test for the reliability of the NGS assay, biopsy samples were compared with the original PGT-A results. Prior NGS testing classified the TE samples as euploid, aneuploid, or aneuploid-mosaic. The resulting re-biopsied samples underwent SurePlex whole genome amplification followed by NGS via the MiSeq platform, with copy number value (CNV) determined using BlueFuse Multi Software. The primary outcome measure was reliability, defined as concordance between initial TE result and the repeat biopsies. Accuracy was determined by concordance between the TE and ICM samples, and compared between three chromosome types (disomic, aneuploid, and mosaic).
RESULTS: Re-biopsies were performed on 32 embryos with prior PGT-A showing euploidy (10 embryos), aneuploidy of one or two chromosomes (4 embryos), or aneuploid-mosaic with one aneuploid chromosome and one mosaic chromosome (18 embryos). One hundred twenty-nine biopsy samples completed NGS (90 TE and 39 ICM biopsies) and 105 biopsy results were included in the analysis. TE biopsies provide a highly accurate test of the future fetus, with the ICM disomic concordance rate of 97.6%. Clinical concordance rates indicate that TE biopsies provide a reliable test when the result is euploid (99.5%) or aneuploid (97.3%), but less reliable when the result is mosaic (35.2%).
CONCLUSION: TE biopsies predict euploidy or aneuploidy in the ICM with a high degree of accuracy. PGT-A with NGS of TE biopsies is shown to be highly reliable, with clinically relevant concordance rates for aneuploidy and euploidy over 95%. TE biopsies indicating mosaicism were less reliable (35.2%), presumably because mitotic non-disjunction events are not uniformly distributed throughout the blastocyst. However, classification of TE biopsy of PGT-A with NGS results as either aneuploid or euploid provides a highly reliable test.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Inner cell mass; Mosaic; Next-generation sequencing; Trophectoderm biopsy

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32112203      PMCID: PMC7125266          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01720-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  26 in total

Review 1.  Molecular origin of mitotic aneuploidies in preimplantation embryos.

Authors:  Eleni Mantikou; Kai Mee Wong; Sjoerd Repping; Sebastiaan Mastenbroek
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2012-07-03

2.  Healthy Babies after Intrauterine Transfer of Mosaic Aneuploid Blastocysts.

Authors:  Ermanno Greco; Maria Giulia Minasi; Francesco Fiorentino
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage.

Authors:  William B Schoolcraft; Elpida Fragouli; John Stevens; Santiago Munne; Mandy G Katz-Jaffe; Dagan Wells
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  Clinical outcomes after the transfer of blastocysts characterized as mosaic by high resolution Next Generation Sequencing- further insights.

Authors:  Santiago Munné; Francesca Spinella; Jamie Grifo; John Zhang; Monica Parriego Beltran; Elpida Fragouli; Francesco Fiorentino
Journal:  Eur J Med Genet       Date:  2019-08-21       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  An evidence-based scoring system for prioritizing mosaic aneuploid embryos following preimplantation genetic screening.

Authors:  Francesca Romana Grati; Gloria Gallazzi; Lara Branca; Federico Maggi; Giuseppe Simoni; Yuval Yaron
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 6.  Diagnosis and clinical management of embryonic mosaicism.

Authors:  Nidhee M Sachdev; Susan M Maxwell; Andria G Besser; James A Grifo
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Detailed investigation into the cytogenetic constitution and pregnancy outcome of replacing mosaic blastocysts detected with the use of high-resolution next-generation sequencing.

Authors:  Santiago Munné; Joshua Blazek; Michael Large; Pedro A Martinez-Ortiz; Haley Nisson; Emmeline Liu; Nicoletta Tarozzi; Andrea Borini; Amie Becker; John Zhang; Susan Maxwell; James Grifo; Dhruti Babariya; Dagan Wells; Elpida Fragouli
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 8.  Detection of mosaicism at blastocyst stage with the use of high-resolution next-generation sequencing.

Authors:  Santiago Munné; Dagan Wells
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Interpreting mosaicism in chorionic villi: results of a monocentric series of 1001 mosaics in chorionic villi with follow-up amniocentesis.

Authors:  Francesca Malvestiti; Cristina Agrati; Beatrice Grimi; Eva Pompilii; Claudia Izzi; Lorenza Martinoni; Elisa Gaetani; Maria Rosaria Liuti; Anna Trotta; Federico Maggi; Giuseppe Simoni; Francesca Romana Grati
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2015-09-11       Impact factor: 3.050

10.  A single trophectoderm biopsy at blastocyst stage is mathematically unable to determine embryo ploidy accurately enough for clinical use.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; Jacob Metzger; Gist Croft; Vitaly A Kushnir; David F Albertini; David H Barad
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 5.211

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  From contemplation to classification of chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos.

Authors:  Igor N Lebedev; Daria I Zhigalina
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  On the reproductive capabilities of aneuploid human preimplantation embryos.

Authors:  Antonio Capalbo; Maurizio Poli; Chaim Jalas; Eric J Forman; Nathan R Treff
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2022-09-01       Impact factor: 11.043

3.  PGT-A: who and when? Α systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs.

Authors:  Mara Simopoulou; Konstantinos Sfakianoudis; Evangelos Maziotis; Petroula Tsioulou; Sokratis Grigoriadis; Anna Rapani; Polina Giannelou; Marilena Asimakopoulou; Georgia Kokkali; Amelia Pantou; Konstantinos Nikolettos; Nikolaos Vlahos; Konstantinos Pantos
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 3.357

4.  Evaluating the application value of NGS-based PGT-A by screening cryopreserved MDA products of embryos from PGT-M cycles with known transfer outcomes.

Authors:  Xiaoting Shen; Dongjia Chen; Chenhui Ding; Yan Xu; Yu Fu; Bing Cai; Yali Wang; Jing Wang; Rong Li; Jing Guo; Jiafu Pan; Han Zhang; Yanhong Zeng; Canquan Zhou
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 3.357

5.  Comparison of chromosomal status in reserved multiple displacement amplification products of embryos that resulted in miscarriages or live births: a blinded, nonselection case-control study.

Authors:  Guoxia Yang; Yan Xu; Yanhong Zeng; Jing Guo; Jiafu Pan; Canquan Zhou; Yanwen Xu
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.063

6.  A novel system based on artificial intelligence for predicting blastocyst viability and visualizing the explanation.

Authors:  Noritoshi Enatsu; Isao Miyatsuka; Le My An; Miki Inubushi; Kunihiro Enatsu; Junko Otsuki; Toshiroh Iwasaki; Shoji Kokeguchi; Masahide Shiotani
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2022-02-07

7.  Chromosomal mosaicism: Origins and clinical implications in preimplantation and prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  Brynn Levy; Eva R Hoffmann; Rajiv C McCoy; Francesca R Grati
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 8.  Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Chromosomal Abnormalities: Aneuploidy, Mosaicism, and Structural Rearrangements.

Authors:  Manuel Viotti
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 4.096

9.  The inconsistency between two major aneuploidy-screening platforms-single-nucleotide polymorphism array and next-generation sequencing-in the detection of embryo mosaicism.

Authors:  Dongjia Chen; Yan Xu; Chenhui Ding; Yali Wang; Yu Fu; Bing Cai; Jing Wang; Rong Li; Jing Guo; Jiafu Pan; Yanhong Zeng; Yiping Zhong; Xiaoting Shen; Canquan Zhou
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 3.969

Review 10.  Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: A review of published blastocyst reanalysis concordance data.

Authors:  Diego Marin; Jia Xu; Nathan R Treff
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2020-10-04       Impact factor: 3.050

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.