Cargando…
Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results
BACKGROUND: Several randomized controlled trials have not shown a benefit from preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) biopsy of cleavage-stage embryos and assessment of up to 10 chromosomes for aneuploidy. Therefore, a proof-of-principle study was planned to determine the reliability of alternative...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21908463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der294 |
_version_ | 1782214246050824192 |
---|---|
author | Geraedts, Joep Montag, Markus Magli, M. Cristina Repping, Sjoerd Handyside, Alan Staessen, Catherine Harper, Joyce Schmutzler, Andreas Collins, John Goossens, Veerle van der Ven, Hans Vesela, Katerina Gianaroli, Luca |
author_facet | Geraedts, Joep Montag, Markus Magli, M. Cristina Repping, Sjoerd Handyside, Alan Staessen, Catherine Harper, Joyce Schmutzler, Andreas Collins, John Goossens, Veerle van der Ven, Hans Vesela, Katerina Gianaroli, Luca |
author_sort | Geraedts, Joep |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Several randomized controlled trials have not shown a benefit from preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) biopsy of cleavage-stage embryos and assessment of up to 10 chromosomes for aneuploidy. Therefore, a proof-of-principle study was planned to determine the reliability of alternative form of PGS, i.e. PGS by polar body (PB) biopsy, with whole genome amplification and microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) analysis. METHODS: In two centres, all mature metaphase II oocytes from patients who consented to the study were fertilized by ICSI. The first and second PBs (PB1and PB2) were biopsied and analysed separately for chromosome copy number by array CGH. If either or both of the PBs were found to be aneuploid, the corresponding zygote was then also processed by array CGH for concordance analysis. RESULTS: Both PBs were biopsied from a total of 226 zygotes from 42 cycles (average 5.5 per cycle; range 1–15) in 41 couples with an average maternal age of 40.0 years. Of these, the ploidy status of the zygote could be predicted in 195 (86%): 55 were euploid (28%) and 140 were aneuploid (72%). With only one exception, there was at least one predicted aneuploid zygote in each cycle and in 19 out of 42 cycles (45%), all zygotes were predicted to be aneuploid. Fresh embryos were transferred in the remaining 23 cycles (55%), and one frozen transfer was done. Eight patients had a clinical pregnancy of which seven were evolutive (ongoing pregnancy rates: 17% per cycle and 30% per transfer). The ploidy status of 156 zygotes was successfully analysed by array CGH: 38 (24%) were euploid and 118 (76%) were aneuploid. In 138 cases complete information was available on both PBs and the corresponding zygotes. In 130 (94%), the ploidy status of the zygote was concordant with the ploidy status of the PBs and in 8 (6%), the results were discordant. CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-principle study indicates that the ploidy of the zygote can be predicted with acceptable accuracy by array CGH analysis of both PBs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3196878 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31968782011-10-19 Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results Geraedts, Joep Montag, Markus Magli, M. Cristina Repping, Sjoerd Handyside, Alan Staessen, Catherine Harper, Joyce Schmutzler, Andreas Collins, John Goossens, Veerle van der Ven, Hans Vesela, Katerina Gianaroli, Luca Hum Reprod Original Articles BACKGROUND: Several randomized controlled trials have not shown a benefit from preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) biopsy of cleavage-stage embryos and assessment of up to 10 chromosomes for aneuploidy. Therefore, a proof-of-principle study was planned to determine the reliability of alternative form of PGS, i.e. PGS by polar body (PB) biopsy, with whole genome amplification and microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) analysis. METHODS: In two centres, all mature metaphase II oocytes from patients who consented to the study were fertilized by ICSI. The first and second PBs (PB1and PB2) were biopsied and analysed separately for chromosome copy number by array CGH. If either or both of the PBs were found to be aneuploid, the corresponding zygote was then also processed by array CGH for concordance analysis. RESULTS: Both PBs were biopsied from a total of 226 zygotes from 42 cycles (average 5.5 per cycle; range 1–15) in 41 couples with an average maternal age of 40.0 years. Of these, the ploidy status of the zygote could be predicted in 195 (86%): 55 were euploid (28%) and 140 were aneuploid (72%). With only one exception, there was at least one predicted aneuploid zygote in each cycle and in 19 out of 42 cycles (45%), all zygotes were predicted to be aneuploid. Fresh embryos were transferred in the remaining 23 cycles (55%), and one frozen transfer was done. Eight patients had a clinical pregnancy of which seven were evolutive (ongoing pregnancy rates: 17% per cycle and 30% per transfer). The ploidy status of 156 zygotes was successfully analysed by array CGH: 38 (24%) were euploid and 118 (76%) were aneuploid. In 138 cases complete information was available on both PBs and the corresponding zygotes. In 130 (94%), the ploidy status of the zygote was concordant with the ploidy status of the PBs and in 8 (6%), the results were discordant. CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-principle study indicates that the ploidy of the zygote can be predicted with acceptable accuracy by array CGH analysis of both PBs. Oxford University Press 2011-11 2011-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3196878/ /pubmed/21908463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der294 Text en © The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Geraedts, Joep Montag, Markus Magli, M. Cristina Repping, Sjoerd Handyside, Alan Staessen, Catherine Harper, Joyce Schmutzler, Andreas Collins, John Goossens, Veerle van der Ven, Hans Vesela, Katerina Gianaroli, Luca Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results |
title | Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results |
title_full | Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results |
title_fullStr | Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results |
title_full_unstemmed | Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results |
title_short | Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results |
title_sort | polar body array cgh for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. part i: clinical results |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21908463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der294 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT geraedtsjoep polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT montagmarkus polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT maglimcristina polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT reppingsjoerd polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT handysidealan polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT staessencatherine polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT harperjoyce polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT schmutzlerandreas polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT collinsjohn polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT goossensveerle polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT vandervenhans polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT veselakaterina polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults AT gianaroliluca polarbodyarraycghforpredictionofthestatusofthecorrespondingoocyteparticlinicalresults |