Insights into the utility of preimplantation genetic testing from data collected by the HFEA

Systematic review and meta-analysis: does pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy at the blastocyst stage improve live birth rate?

PURPOSE

To establish if preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) at the blastocyst stage improves the composite outcome of live birth rate and ongoing pregnancy rate per embryo transfer compared to conventional morphological assessment.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane database from 1st March 2000 until 1st March 2022. Studies comparing reproductive outcomes following in vitro fertilisation using comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) at the blastocyst stage with traditional morphological methods were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 1307 citations identified, six randomised control trials (RCTs) and ten cohort studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The pooled data identified a benefit between PGT-A and control groups in the composite outcome of live birth rate and ongoing pregnancy per embryo transfer in both the RCT (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16) and cohort studies (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.28-1.76). Euploid embryos identified by CCS were more likely to be successfully implanted amongst the RCT (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.10-1.31) and cohort (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.29-2.21) studies. The rate of miscarriage per clinical pregnancy is also significantly lower when CCS is implemented (RCT: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.96 and cohort: RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

CCS-based PGT-A at the blastocyst biopsy stage increases the composite outcome of live births and ongoing pregnancies per embryo transfer and reduces the rate of miscarriage compared to morphological assessment alone. In view of the limited number of studies included and the variation in methodology between studies, future reviews and analyses are required to confirm these findings.

Does PGT-A improve assisted reproduction treatment success rates: what can the UK Register data tell us?

PURPOSE

To show how naïve analyses of aggregated UK ART Register data held by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority to estimate the effects of PGT-A can be severely misleading and to indicate how it may be possible to do a more credible analysis. Given the limitations of the Register, we consider the extent to which such an analysis has the potential to answer questions about the real-world effectiveness of PGT-A.

METHODS

We utilise the publicly available Register datasets and construct logistic regression models for live birth events (LBE) which adjust for confounding. We compare all PGT-A cycles to control groups of cycles that could have had PGT-A, excluding cycles that did not progress to having embryos for biopsy.

RESULTS

The primary model gives an odds ratio for LBE of 0.82 (95% CI 0.68-1.00) suggesting PGT-A may be detrimental rather than beneficial. However, due to limitations in the availability of important variables in the public dataset, this cannot be considered a definitive estimate. We outline the steps required to enable a credible analysis of the Register data.

CONCLUSION

If we compare like with like groups, we obtain estimates of the effect of PGT-A that suggest an overall modest reduction in treatment success rates. These are in direct contrast to an invalid comparison of crude success rates. A detailed analysis of a fuller dataset is warranted, but it remains to be demonstrated whether the UK Register data can provide useful estimates of the impact of PGT-A when used as a treatment add-on.

Combining PGT-A with PGT-M risks trying to do too much

The primary objective of preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M) is to avoid having a child with a serious monogenic disease. Combining testing for unrelated sporadic chromosomal abnormalities (PGT-A) and excluding embryos with chromosomally abnormal results from transfer proffers the chance to mitigate the risk of miscarriage and to reduce the number of embryo transfers, but also risks excluding healthy embryos from transfer due to abnormal test results that do not reflect the true potential of the embryo. The theoretical utility of combining PGT-M with PGT-A is explored in this communication. It is concluded that PGT-M without PGT-A is preferred to achieve an unaffected live birth. Since PGT-M is mostly undertaken by couples where the female partner is younger than 35 years, PGT-A is likely to marginally mitigate the risk of miscarriage. Experimental non-selection studies are needed to assess the potential detrimental effect of combining PGT-M with PGT-A in a clinical setting.