Preimplantation genetic screening of blastocysts by multiplex qPCR followed by fresh embryo transfer: validation and verification

Molecular Cytogenetics

Ming Chen⁸  Tsung-Hsien Lee²  Horng-Der Tsai⁵  Cheng-Hsuan Wu⁵  Feng-Po Tsai⁴  Chi-Fang Lin¹  Wen-Hsiang Lin⁷  Gwo-Chin Ma⁶  Hsin-Fu Chen³  Shun-Ping Chang⁷  Yu-Shih Yang¹ 

[1] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan;Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chung-Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan;Graduate Institute of Medical Genomics and Proteomics, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan;Poyuan Women Clinic, Changhua, Taiwan;Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan;Institute of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan;Department of Genomic Medicine, and Center for Medical Genetics, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan;Department of Life Sciences, Tunghai University, Taichung, Taiwan

关键词: qPCR;    PGS;    Fresh embryo transfer;    Blastocyst;    Aneuploidy;   

Others  :  1221572
DOI  :  10.1186/s13039-015-0140-9

 received in 2015-02-11, accepted in 2015-05-07,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Aneuploidy is an important etiology of implantation failure and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) seems a promising preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) technology to detect aneuploidies. This verification study aimed at verifying the impact on reproductive outcomes in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles using fresh embryo transfer (FET) in which the embryos were selected by blastocyst biopsy with qPCR-based PGS in our settings.

Results

A total of 13 infertile couples with more than once failed in vitro fertilization were enrolled during July to October of 2014. PGS was conducted by qPCR with selectively amplified markers to detect common aneuploidies (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X, and Y). The design of the qPCR molecular markers adopted the locked nucleic acid (LNA) strategy. The blastocyst biopsy was performed on Day 5/6 and the PGS was done on the same day, which enabled FET. A total of 72 blastocysts were biopsied. Successful diagnoses were established in all embryos and the rate of successful diagnosis was 100 %. The aneuploidy rate was 38.9 % (28/72). 28 embryos were transferred. The clinical pregnancy rate was 61.5 % (8/13) per cycle. Early first trimester abortion was encountered in 1 and the ongoing pregnancy rate was 53.8 % (7/13) per cycle.

Conclusion

This study verified the favorable outcome of adopting PGS with qPCR + FET in our own setting. Expanding the repertoire of aneuploidies being investigated (from a limited set to all 24 chromosomes) is underway and a randomized study by comparing qPCR and other PGS technologies is warranted.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Yang et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Treff NR, Scott RT. Methods for comprehensive chromosome screening of oocytes and embryos: capabilities, limitations, and evidence of validity. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012; 29(5):381-90.
• [2]Harton GL, Munne S, Surrey M, Grifo J, Kaplan B, McCulloh DH et al.. Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(6):1695-703.
• [3]Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR et al.. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. New Engl J Med. 2007; 357(1):9-17.
• [4]Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update. 2011; 17(4):454-66.
• [5]Rubio C, Bellver J, Rodrigo L, Bosch E, Mercader A, Vidal C, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening using fluorescence in situ hybridization in patients with repetitive implantation failure and advanced maternal age: two randomized trials. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(5):1400–7.a
• [6]Braude P. Selecting the 'best' embryos: prospects for improvement. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013; 27(6):244-53.
• [7]Mastenbroek S, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: back to the future. Hum Reprod. 2014; 29(9):1846-50.
• [8]Scott RT, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012; 97(4):870-5.
• [9]Scott KL, Hong KH, Scott RT. Selecting the optimal time to perform biopsy for preimplantation genetic testing. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(3):608-14.
• [10]Scott RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Hong KH, Scott KL, Taylor D et al.. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(3):697-703.
• [11]Handyside AH. 24-chromosome copy number analysis: a comparison of available technologies. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(3):595-602.
• [12]Fiorentino F, Bono S, Biricik A, Nuccitelli A, Cotroneo E, Cottone G et al.. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod. 2014; 29(12):2802-13.
• [13]Wells D, Kaur K, Grifo J, Glassner M, Taylor JC, Fragouli E et al.. Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation. J Med Genet. 2014; 51(8):553-62.
• [14]Capalbo A, Treff NR, Cimadomo D, Tao X, Upham K, Ubaldi FM, et al. Comparison of array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative real-time PCR-based aneuploidy screening of blastocyst biopsies. Eu J Hum Genet. 2014;doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.222(in press).
• [15]Rubio C, Rhodrigo L, Mir P, Mateu E, Peinado V, Milan M, et al. Use of array comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) for embryo assessment: clinical results. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(4):1044–8.b
• [16]Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott RT. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2011; 96(3):638-40.
• [17]Treff NR, Levy B, Su J, Northrop LE, Tao X, Scott RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening is significantly more consistent than FISH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010; 16(8):583-9.
• [18]Treff NR, Tao X, Ferry KM, Su J, Taylor D, Scott RT. Development and validation of an accurate quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay for human blastocyst comprehensive chromosomal aneuploidy screening. Fertil Steril. 2012; 97(4):819-24.
• [19]Vanneste E, Voet T, Le Caignec C, Ampe M, Konings P, Melotte C et al.. Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. Nat Med. 2009; 15(5):577-83.
• [20]Brunet E, Corgnali M, Cannata F, Perrouault L, Giovannangeli C. Targeting chromosomal sites with locked nucleic acid-modified triplex-forming oligonucleotides: study of efficiency dependence on DNA nuclear environment. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006; 34(16):4546-53.
• [21]Wang BT, Chong TP, Boyar FZ, Kopita KA, Ross LP, El-Naggar MM et al.. Abnormalities in spontaneous abortions detected by G-banding and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) at a national reference laboratory. Mol Cytogenet. 2014; 22:7-33.
• [22]Mouritzen P, Nielsen PS, Jacobsen N, Noerholmn M, Lomholt C, Pfundheller HM et al.. The ProbeLibrary—expression profiling 99 % of all human genes usingonly 90 dual-labeled real-time PCR probes. Biotechniques. 2004; 37:492-495.
• [23]Schmittgen TD, Livak KJ. Analyzing real-time PCR data by the comparative CT method. Nat Protoc. 2008; 3:1101-8.
• [24]Tolstrup N, Nielsen PS, Kolberg JG, Frankel AM, Vissing H, Kauppinen S. OligoDesign: optimal design of LNA (lockednucleic acid) oligonucleotide capture probes for gene expression profiling. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003; 31:3758-62.
• [25]Northrop LE, Treff NR, Levy B, Scott RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening demonstrates that cleavage-stage FISH poorly predicts aneuploidy in embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010; 16(8):590-600.
• [26]Forman EJ, Hong KH, Franasiak JM, Scott RT. Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes from the BEST Trial: single embryo transfer with aneuploidy screening improves outcomes after in vitro fertilization without compromising delivery rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 210(2):157.e1-6.
• [27]Chang LJ, Huang CC, Tsai YY, Hung CC, Fang MY, Lin YC et al.. Blastocyst biopsy and vitrification are effective for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of monogenic diseases. Hum Reprod. 2013; 28(5):1435-44.