Literature DB >> 32725589

Customized Frozen Embryo Transfer after Identification of the Receptivity Window with a Transcriptomic Approach Improves the Implantation and Live Birth Rates in Patients with Repeated Implantation Failure.

Delphine Haouzi1,2,3, Frida Entezami4,5,6, Antoine Torre7, Charlène Innocenti4,8,9, Yannick Antoine4,8, Charlotte Mauries9, Claire Vincens9, Sophie Bringer-Deutsch9, Anna Gala4,9, Alice Ferrieres-Hoa4,9, Jeanine Ohl10, Beatriz Gonzalez Marti5,6, Sophie Brouillet4,8,9,11, Samir Hamamah4,8,9.   

Abstract

The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate outcome benefits expected in repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients (n = 217) after customized embryo transfer based upon identification of the receptivity window by transcriptomic approach using the Win-Test. In this test, the expression of 11 endometrial genes known to be predictive of endometrial receptivity is assessed by RT-PCR in biopsies collected during the implantation window (6-9 days after the spontaneous luteinizing hormone surge during natural cycles, 5-9 days after progesterone administration during hormone replacement therapy cycles). Then, patients underwent either customized embryo transfer (cET, n = 157 patients) according to the Win-Test results or embryo transfer according to the classical procedure (control group, n = 60). Pregnancy and live birth rates were compared in the two groups. The Win-Test showed that in 78.5% of women, the receptivity window lasted less than 48 h, although it could be shorter (< 24 h, 9.5%) or longer (> 48 h, 12%). This highlighted that only in 20% of patients with RIF the endometrium would have been receptive if the classical embryo transfer protocol was followed. In the other 80% of patients, the receptivity window was delayed by 1-3 days relative to the classical timing. This suggests that implantation failure could be linked to inadequate timing of embryo transfer. In agreement, both implantation (22.7% vs. 7.2%) and live birth rates per patient (31.8% vs. 8.3%) were significantly higher in the cET group than in the control group. cET on the basis of the Win-Test results could be proposed to improve pregnancy and live birth rates.ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04192396; December 5, 2019, retrospectively registered.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Implantation window; Receptivity window; Transcriptome; Win-Test

Year:  2020        PMID: 32725589      PMCID: PMC7782404          DOI: 10.1007/s43032-020-00252-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Sci        ISSN: 1933-7191            Impact factor:   3.060


  36 in total

Review 1.  Insights into human endometrial receptivity from transcriptomic and proteomic data.

Authors:  Delphine Haouzi; Hervé Dechaud; Said Assou; John De Vos; Samir Hamamah
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2011-09-29       Impact factor: 3.828

2.  Development of a new comprehensive and reliable endometrial receptivity map (ER Map/ER Grade) based on RT-qPCR gene expression analysis.

Authors:  M Enciso; J P Carrascosa; J Sarasa; P A Martínez-Ortiz; S Munné; J A Horcajadas; J Aizpurua
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 6.918

3.  The window for embryo transfer in oocyte donation cycles depends on the duration of progesterone therapy.

Authors:  Y Prapas; N Prapas; E E Jones; A J Duleba; D L Olive; A Chatziparasidou; G Vlassis
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 4.  What exactly do we mean by 'recurrent implantation failure'? A systematic review and opinion.

Authors:  Lukasz T Polanski; Miriam N Baumgarten; Siobhan Quenby; Jan Brosens; Bruce K Campbell; Nicholas J Raine-Fenning
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 3.828

5.  Natural cycle is superior to hormone replacement therapy cycle for vitrificated-preserved frozen-thawed embryo transfer.

Authors:  Zhuoni Xiao; Xin Zhou; Wangming Xu; Jing Yang; Qingzhen Xie
Journal:  Syst Biol Reprod Med       Date:  2011-12-30       Impact factor: 3.061

6.  The role of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) in patients who have failed euploid embryo transfers.

Authors:  J Tan; A Kan; J Hitkari; B Taylor; N Tallon; G Warraich; A Yuzpe; G Nakhuda
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Intra-patient variability in the endometrial receptivity assay (ERA) test.

Authors:  Kristy Cho; SeangLin Tan; William Buckett; Michael H Dahan
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  Cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in natural or down-regulated hormonally controlled cycles: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tarek A Gelbaya; Luciano G Nardo; Helen R Hunter; Cheryl T Fitzgerald; Greg Horne; Elizabeth E H Pease; Daniel R Brison; Brian A Lieberman
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Does the endometrial receptivity array really provide personalized embryo transfer?

Authors:  Rawad Bassil; Robert Casper; Nivin Samara; Tzu-Bou Hsieh; Eran Barzilay; Raoul Orvieto; Jigal Haas
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 3.412

10.  Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients.

Authors:  D Haouzi; S Assou; K Mahmoud; S Tondeur; T Rème; B Hedon; J De Vos; S Hamamah
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  6 in total

1.  Live Birth Rate of Frozen-Thawed Single Blastocyst Transfer After 6 or 7 Days of Progesterone Administration in Hormone Replacement Therapy Cycles: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

Authors:  Xinhong Yang; Zhiqin Bu; Linli Hu
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 5.555

2.  The Clinical Efficacy of Personalized Embryo Transfer Guided by the Endometrial Receptivity Array/Analysis on IVF/ICSI Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Zhenteng Liu; Xuemei Liu; Meimei Wang; Huishan Zhao; Shunzhi He; Shoucui Lai; Qinglan Qu; Xinrong Wang; Dongmei Zhao; Hongchu Bao
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 4.755

3.  Transcriptomics of receptive endometrium in women with sonographic features of adenomyosis.

Authors:  Erika Prašnikar; Tanja Kunej; Mario Gorenjak; Uroš Potočnik; Borut Kovačič; Jure Knez
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 5.211

4.  EndoTime: non-categorical timing estimates for luteal endometrium.

Authors:  Julia Lipecki; Andrew E Mitchell; Joanne Muter; Emma S Lucas; Komal Makwana; Katherine Fishwick; Joshua Odendaal; Amelia Hawkes; Pavle Vrljicak; Jan J Brosens; Sascha Ott
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Use of 'omics for endometrial timing: the cycle moves on.

Authors:  John D Aplin; Adam Stevens
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 6.  SARS-CoV-2 and Implantation Window: Gene Expression Mapping of Human Endometrium and Preimplantation Embryo.

Authors:  Delphine Haouzi; Frida Entezami; Edward Tuaillon; Anna Gala; Alice Ferrières-Hoa; Sophie Brouillet; Alain R Thierry; Samir Hamamah
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-10
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.