Cargando…

Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA

PURPOSE: To evaluate the use of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) and live birth rates (LBR) in the USA from 2014 to 2017 and to understand how PGT is being used at a clinic and state level. METHODS: This study accessed SART data for 2014 to 2017 to determine LBR and the CDC for years 2016 and 2...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roche, Kaitlyn, Racowsky, Catherine, Harper, Joyce
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8190209/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33904009
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02078-4
_version_ 1783705643331354624
author Roche, Kaitlyn
Racowsky, Catherine
Harper, Joyce
author_facet Roche, Kaitlyn
Racowsky, Catherine
Harper, Joyce
author_sort Roche, Kaitlyn
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate the use of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) and live birth rates (LBR) in the USA from 2014 to 2017 and to understand how PGT is being used at a clinic and state level. METHODS: This study accessed SART data for 2014 to 2017 to determine LBR and the CDC for years 2016 and 2017 to identify PGT usage. Primary cycles included only the first embryo transfer within 1 year of an oocyte retrieval; subsequent cycles included transfers occurring after the first transfer or beyond 1 year of oocyte retrieval. RESULTS: In the SART data, the number of primary PGT cycles showed a significant monotonic annual increase from 18,805 in 2014 to 54,442 in 2017 (P = 0.042) and subsequent PGT cycles in these years increased from 2946 to 14,361 (P = 0.01). There was a significant difference in primary PGT cycle use by age, where younger women had a greater percentage of PGT treatment cycles than older women. In both PGT and non-PGT cycles, the LBR per oocyte retrieval decreased significantly from 2014 to 2017 (P<0001) and younger women had a significantly higher LBR per oocyte retrieval compared to older women (P < 0.001). The CDC data revealed that in 2016, just 53 (11.4%) clinics used PGT for more than 50% of their cycles, which increased to 99 (21.4%) clinics in 2017 (P< 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A growing number of US clinics are offering PGT to their patients. These findings support re-evaluation of the application for PGT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10815-021-02078-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8190209
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81902092021-06-11 Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA Roche, Kaitlyn Racowsky, Catherine Harper, Joyce J Assist Reprod Genet Assisted Reproduction Technologies PURPOSE: To evaluate the use of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) and live birth rates (LBR) in the USA from 2014 to 2017 and to understand how PGT is being used at a clinic and state level. METHODS: This study accessed SART data for 2014 to 2017 to determine LBR and the CDC for years 2016 and 2017 to identify PGT usage. Primary cycles included only the first embryo transfer within 1 year of an oocyte retrieval; subsequent cycles included transfers occurring after the first transfer or beyond 1 year of oocyte retrieval. RESULTS: In the SART data, the number of primary PGT cycles showed a significant monotonic annual increase from 18,805 in 2014 to 54,442 in 2017 (P = 0.042) and subsequent PGT cycles in these years increased from 2946 to 14,361 (P = 0.01). There was a significant difference in primary PGT cycle use by age, where younger women had a greater percentage of PGT treatment cycles than older women. In both PGT and non-PGT cycles, the LBR per oocyte retrieval decreased significantly from 2014 to 2017 (P<0001) and younger women had a significantly higher LBR per oocyte retrieval compared to older women (P < 0.001). The CDC data revealed that in 2016, just 53 (11.4%) clinics used PGT for more than 50% of their cycles, which increased to 99 (21.4%) clinics in 2017 (P< 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A growing number of US clinics are offering PGT to their patients. These findings support re-evaluation of the application for PGT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10815-021-02078-4. Springer US 2021-04-26 2021-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8190209/ /pubmed/33904009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02078-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Assisted Reproduction Technologies
Roche, Kaitlyn
Racowsky, Catherine
Harper, Joyce
Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA
title Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA
title_full Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA
title_fullStr Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA
title_full_unstemmed Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA
title_short Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA
title_sort utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the usa
topic Assisted Reproduction Technologies
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8190209/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33904009
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02078-4
work_keys_str_mv AT rochekaitlyn utilizationofpreimplantationgenetictestingintheusa
AT racowskycatherine utilizationofpreimplantationgenetictestingintheusa
AT harperjoyce utilizationofpreimplantationgenetictestingintheusa