Noemie Ranisavljevic1, Mathilde Hess2, Christel Castelli3,4, Marjolene Willems5, Alice Ferrieres-Hoa6, Anne Girardet7, Tal Anahory2. 1. Department of Reproductive Medicine - Gynecology, CHU and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. n-ranisavljevic@chu-montpellier.fr. 2. Department of Reproductive Medicine - Gynecology, CHU and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. 3. UPRES EA 2415, Laboratory of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Clinical Research and Health Economics, Clinical Research University Institute, Montpellier University, Montpellier, France. 4. Department of clinical Research, Beausoleil Clinic, Montpellier, France. 5. Department of Medical Genetics, CHU and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. 6. Department of Reproductive Medicine - Biology, CHU and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. 7. Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, CHU and University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess if the ovarian response of FMR1 premutated women undergoing preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for Fragile X syndrome is lower compared with fully mutated patients, due to their frequent premature ovarian failure. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study from January 2009 to March 2019, we compared PGT outcomes in 18 FMR1 premutated women and 12 fully mutated women and aimed to identify predictive factors of stimulation outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-six IVF/PGT-M cycles for FMR1 PGT were analyzed. Premutation and full mutation patients were comparable in terms of age, body mass index (BMI), basal FSH, antral follicular count, and cycle length. However, premutation carriers had significantly lower AMH (1.9 versus 4.0 ng/mL, p = 0.0167). Premutated patients required higher doses of FSH (2740 versus 1944 IU, p = 0.0069) but had similar numbers of metaphase II oocytes (7.1 versus 6.6, p = 0.871) and embryos (5.6 versus 4.9, p = 0. 554). Pregnancy rates (37.1% versus 13.3%, p = 0.1076) were not statistically different in both groups. CONCLUSION: In spite of lower ovarian reserve and thanks to an increased total dose of FSH, FMR1 premutated selected patients seem to have similar ovarian response as fully mutated patients. Neither the number of CGG repeats in FMR1 gene nor FMR1 mutation status was good predictors of the number of retrieved oocytes.
PURPOSE: To assess if the ovarian response of FMR1 premutated women undergoing preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for Fragile X syndrome is lower compared with fully mutated patients, due to their frequent premature ovarian failure. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study from January 2009 to March 2019, we compared PGT outcomes in 18 FMR1 premutated women and 12 fully mutated women and aimed to identify predictive factors of stimulation outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-six IVF/PGT-M cycles for FMR1 PGT were analyzed. Premutation and full mutation patients were comparable in terms of age, body mass index (BMI), basal FSH, antral follicular count, and cycle length. However, premutation carriers had significantly lower AMH (1.9 versus 4.0 ng/mL, p = 0.0167). Premutated patients required higher doses of FSH (2740 versus 1944 IU, p = 0.0069) but had similar numbers of metaphase II oocytes (7.1 versus 6.6, p = 0.871) and embryos (5.6 versus 4.9, p = 0. 554). Pregnancy rates (37.1% versus 13.3%, p = 0.1076) were not statistically different in both groups. CONCLUSION: In spite of lower ovarian reserve and thanks to an increased total dose of FSH, FMR1 premutated selected patients seem to have similar ovarian response as fully mutated patients. Neither the number of CGG repeats in FMR1 gene nor FMR1 mutation status was good predictors of the number of retrieved oocytes.
Authors: A Girardet; A Ishmukhametova; M Willems; C Coubes; S Hamamah; T Anahory; M Des Georges; M Claustres Journal: Clin Genet Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 4.438
Authors: C E Schwartz; J Dean; P N Howard-Peebles; M Bugge; M Mikkelsen; N Tommerup; C Hull; R Hagerman; J J Holden; R E Stevenson Journal: Am J Med Genet Date: 1994-07-15
Authors: Y H Fu; D P Kuhl; A Pizzuti; M Pieretti; J S Sutcliffe; S Richards; A J Verkerk; J J Holden; R G Fenwick; S T Warren Journal: Cell Date: 1991-12-20 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: A Girardet; S Hamamah; T Anahory; H Déchaud; P Sarda; B Hédon; J Demaille; M Claustres Journal: Mol Hum Reprod Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 4.025
Authors: R A M Buijsen; J A Visser; P Kramer; E A W F M Severijnen; M Gearing; N Charlet-Berguerand; S L Sherman; R F Berman; R Willemsen; R K Hukema Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 6.918