Cargando…

Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing

BACKGROUND: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is now being used for detecting chromosomal abnormalities in blastocyst trophectoderm (TE) cells from in vitro fertilized embryos. However, few data are available regarding the clinical outcome, which provides vital reference for further application of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tan, Yueqiu, Yin, Xuyang, Zhang, Shuoping, Jiang, Hui, Tan, Ke, Li, Jian, Xiong, Bo, Gong, Fei, Zhang, Chunlei, Pan, Xiaoyu, Chen, Fang, Chen, Shengpei, Gong, Chun, Lu, Changfu, Luo, Keli, Gu, Yifan, Zhang, Xiuqing, Wang, Wei, Xu, Xun, Vajta, Gábor, Bolund, Lars, Yang, Huanming, Lu, Guangxiu, Du, Yutao, Lin, Ge
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4326468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25685330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2047-217X-3-30
_version_ 1782356936443822080
author Tan, Yueqiu
Yin, Xuyang
Zhang, Shuoping
Jiang, Hui
Tan, Ke
Li, Jian
Xiong, Bo
Gong, Fei
Zhang, Chunlei
Pan, Xiaoyu
Chen, Fang
Chen, Shengpei
Gong, Chun
Lu, Changfu
Luo, Keli
Gu, Yifan
Zhang, Xiuqing
Wang, Wei
Xu, Xun
Vajta, Gábor
Bolund, Lars
Yang, Huanming
Lu, Guangxiu
Du, Yutao
Lin, Ge
author_facet Tan, Yueqiu
Yin, Xuyang
Zhang, Shuoping
Jiang, Hui
Tan, Ke
Li, Jian
Xiong, Bo
Gong, Fei
Zhang, Chunlei
Pan, Xiaoyu
Chen, Fang
Chen, Shengpei
Gong, Chun
Lu, Changfu
Luo, Keli
Gu, Yifan
Zhang, Xiuqing
Wang, Wei
Xu, Xun
Vajta, Gábor
Bolund, Lars
Yang, Huanming
Lu, Guangxiu
Du, Yutao
Lin, Ge
author_sort Tan, Yueqiu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is now being used for detecting chromosomal abnormalities in blastocyst trophectoderm (TE) cells from in vitro fertilized embryos. However, few data are available regarding the clinical outcome, which provides vital reference for further application of the methodology. Here, we present a clinical evaluation of NGS-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening (PGD/PGS) compared with single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array-based PGD/PGS as a control. RESULTS: A total of 395 couples participated. They were carriers of either translocation or inversion mutations, or were patients with recurrent miscarriage and/or advanced maternal age. A total of 1,512 blastocysts were biopsied on D5 after fertilization, with 1,058 blastocysts set aside for SNP array testing and 454 blastocysts for NGS testing. In the NGS cycles group, the implantation, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates were 52.6% (60/114), 61.3% (49/80) and 14.3% (7/49), respectively. In the SNP array cycles group, the implantation, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates were 47.6% (139/292), 56.7% (115/203) and 14.8% (17/115), respectively. The outcome measures of both the NGS and SNP array cycles were the same with insignificant differences. There were 150 blastocysts that underwent both NGS and SNP array analysis, of which seven blastocysts were found with inconsistent signals. All other signals obtained from NGS analysis were confirmed to be accurate by validation with qPCR. The relative copy number of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) for each blastocyst that underwent NGS testing was evaluated, and a significant difference was found between the copy number of mtDNA for the euploid and the chromosomally abnormal blastocysts. So far, out of 42 ongoing pregnancies, 24 babies were born in NGS cycles; all of these babies are healthy and free of any developmental problems. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first evaluation of the clinical outcomes of NGS-based pre-implantation genetic diagnosis/screening, and shows the reliability of this method in a clinical and array-based laboratory setting. NGS provides an accurate approach to detect embryonic imbalanced segmental rearrangements, to avoid the potential risks of false signals from SNP array in this study. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/2047-217X-3-30) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4326468
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43264682015-02-14 Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing Tan, Yueqiu Yin, Xuyang Zhang, Shuoping Jiang, Hui Tan, Ke Li, Jian Xiong, Bo Gong, Fei Zhang, Chunlei Pan, Xiaoyu Chen, Fang Chen, Shengpei Gong, Chun Lu, Changfu Luo, Keli Gu, Yifan Zhang, Xiuqing Wang, Wei Xu, Xun Vajta, Gábor Bolund, Lars Yang, Huanming Lu, Guangxiu Du, Yutao Lin, Ge Gigascience Research BACKGROUND: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is now being used for detecting chromosomal abnormalities in blastocyst trophectoderm (TE) cells from in vitro fertilized embryos. However, few data are available regarding the clinical outcome, which provides vital reference for further application of the methodology. Here, we present a clinical evaluation of NGS-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening (PGD/PGS) compared with single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array-based PGD/PGS as a control. RESULTS: A total of 395 couples participated. They were carriers of either translocation or inversion mutations, or were patients with recurrent miscarriage and/or advanced maternal age. A total of 1,512 blastocysts were biopsied on D5 after fertilization, with 1,058 blastocysts set aside for SNP array testing and 454 blastocysts for NGS testing. In the NGS cycles group, the implantation, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates were 52.6% (60/114), 61.3% (49/80) and 14.3% (7/49), respectively. In the SNP array cycles group, the implantation, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates were 47.6% (139/292), 56.7% (115/203) and 14.8% (17/115), respectively. The outcome measures of both the NGS and SNP array cycles were the same with insignificant differences. There were 150 blastocysts that underwent both NGS and SNP array analysis, of which seven blastocysts were found with inconsistent signals. All other signals obtained from NGS analysis were confirmed to be accurate by validation with qPCR. The relative copy number of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) for each blastocyst that underwent NGS testing was evaluated, and a significant difference was found between the copy number of mtDNA for the euploid and the chromosomally abnormal blastocysts. So far, out of 42 ongoing pregnancies, 24 babies were born in NGS cycles; all of these babies are healthy and free of any developmental problems. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first evaluation of the clinical outcomes of NGS-based pre-implantation genetic diagnosis/screening, and shows the reliability of this method in a clinical and array-based laboratory setting. NGS provides an accurate approach to detect embryonic imbalanced segmental rearrangements, to avoid the potential risks of false signals from SNP array in this study. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/2047-217X-3-30) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4326468/ /pubmed/25685330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2047-217X-3-30 Text en © Tan et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Tan, Yueqiu
Yin, Xuyang
Zhang, Shuoping
Jiang, Hui
Tan, Ke
Li, Jian
Xiong, Bo
Gong, Fei
Zhang, Chunlei
Pan, Xiaoyu
Chen, Fang
Chen, Shengpei
Gong, Chun
Lu, Changfu
Luo, Keli
Gu, Yifan
Zhang, Xiuqing
Wang, Wei
Xu, Xun
Vajta, Gábor
Bolund, Lars
Yang, Huanming
Lu, Guangxiu
Du, Yutao
Lin, Ge
Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
title Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
title_full Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
title_fullStr Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
title_full_unstemmed Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
title_short Clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
title_sort clinical outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening using next generation sequencing
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4326468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25685330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2047-217X-3-30
work_keys_str_mv AT tanyueqiu clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT yinxuyang clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT zhangshuoping clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT jianghui clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT tanke clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT lijian clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT xiongbo clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT gongfei clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT zhangchunlei clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT panxiaoyu clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT chenfang clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT chenshengpei clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT gongchun clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT luchangfu clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT luokeli clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT guyifan clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT zhangxiuqing clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT wangwei clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT xuxun clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT vajtagabor clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT bolundlars clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT yanghuanming clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT luguangxiu clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT duyutao clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing
AT linge clinicaloutcomeofpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosisandscreeningusingnextgenerationsequencing