Key metrics and processes for validating embryo diagnostics

Non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: is the promise real?

Recent advances in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) have significantly enhanced its application in ART, providing critical insights into embryo viability, and potentially reducing both the time spent in fertility treatments and the risk of pregnancy loss. With the integration of next-generation sequencing, PGT-A now offers greater diagnostic precision, although challenges related to segmental aneuploidies and mosaicism remain. The emergence of non-invasive PGT-A (niPGT-A), which analyzes DNA in spent embryo culture media, promises a simpler aneuploidy screening method. This mini review assesses the methodological criteria for test validation, the current landscape of PGT-A, and the potential of niPGT-A, while evaluating its advantages and potential pitfalls. It underscores the importance of a robust three-phase validation process to ensure the clinical reliability of PGT-A. Despite initial encouraging data, niPGT-A not only confronts issues of DNA amplification failure and diagnostic inaccuracies but also has yet to meet the three-prong criteria required for appropriate test validation, necessitating further research for its clinical adoption. The review underscores that niPGT-A, like traditional PGT-A, must attain the high standards of precision and reliability expected of any genetic testing platform used in clinical settings before it can be adopted into routine ART protocols.

A pilot study to investigate the clinically predictive values of copy number variations detected by next-generation sequencing of cell-free deoxyribonucleic acid in spent culture media

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the positive predictive value and false positive risk of copy number variations (CNV's) detected in cell free deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) from spent culture media for nonviable or aneuploid embryos.

DESIGN

Diagnostic/prognostic accuracy study.

PATIENT(S)

Patients aged 35 and younger with an indication for IVF-ICSI and elective single frozen embryo transfer at a single, private IVF center.

INTERVENTION

Embryo selection was performed according to the conventional grading, blinded to noninvasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (niPGT-A) results. After clinical outcomes were established, spent culture media samples were analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prognostic accuracy of CNVs according to niPGT-A results to predict nonviability or clinical aneuploidy.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty patients completed the study. Interpretations of next-generation sequencing (NGS) profiles were as follows: 7.5% (n = 9) failed quality control; 62.5% (n = 75) no CNVs detected; and 30% (n = 36) abnormal copy number detected. Stratification of abnormal NGS profiles was as follows: 15% (n = 18) whole chromosome and 15% (n = 18) uncertain reproductive potential. An intermediate CNV was evident in 27.8% (n = 5) of the whole chromosome abnormalities. The negative predictive value for samples with no detected abnormality was 57.3% (43/75). Whole chromosome abnormality was associated with a positive predictive value of 94.4% (17/18), lower sustained implantation rate (5.6%, 1/18), and higher relative risk (RR) for nonviability compared with no detected abnormalities (RR 2.21, 95% CI: 1.66-2.94). No other CNVs were associated with significant differences in the sustained implantation or RRs for nonviability. Unequal sex chromosome proportions suggested that maternal contamination was not uncommon. A secondary descriptive analysis of 705 supernumerary embryos revealed proportions of NGS profile interpretations similar to the transferred cohort. Significant median absolute pairwise differences between certain subcategories of CNV abnormalities were apparent.

CONCLUSION

Whole chromosome abnormalities were associated with a high positive predictive value and significant RR for nonviability. Embryos associated with other CNVs had sustained implantation rates similar to those with no abnormalities detected. Further studies are required to validate the clinical applicability of niPGT-A.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04732013).

Clinical management of mosaic results from preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy of blastocysts: a committee opinion

This revised document incorporates a growing number of published studies about mosaic embryo transfer and provides current evidence-based considerations for the clinical management of embryos with mosaic results on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. This document replaces the document titled "Clinical management of mosaic results from preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) of blastocysts: a committee opinion," published in 2020 (Fertil Steril 2020;114:246-54).

Limits imposed by the experimental design of a large prospective non-inferiority study on PGT-A invalidate many of the conclusions

The New England Journal of Medicine recently published a large study addressing the efficacy of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). The 14-centre randomized control non-inferiority trial used cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) as a clinical endpoint to examine the value of PGT-A and concluded that conventional IVF was not inferior to IVF with PGT-A. Unfortunately, the experimental design was highly flawed; and in fact, the data generated in the study do not support the major conclusions presented in the publication. The embryos in each patient's three-embryo pool, which were available for transfer, were selected solely by morphology. The investigators then randomized patients to either the PGT-A group or the control group. It is important to note that PGT-A screening in the study group was done only after the embryos were selected. PGT-A was not really used in a meaningful way, which would have been for the PGT-A results to help in selecting which embryos would be in the three-embryo group. Thus, the outcomes were wholly determined prior to the study intervention. The ultimate delivery rate for each group of three embryos was determined when they were selected by morphology. The randomization, which occurred after embryo selection, would assure equal distribution of those cohorts destined to deliver and those destined to fail to the two study groups, the PGT-A and control groups. Thus, there was no potential for PGT-A to enhance selection and thus no possible way to improve the cumulative outcomes. Since there was no possible way for the control group to be inferior, the experimental design precluded any chance of evaluating the primary endpoint of the study. The primary question of the study was never evaluated. Another serious flaw was that the study was initiated prior to knowing how to interpret the data provided in the PGT-A analytical result. Specifically, the design excluded mosaic embryos from transfer despite the literature demonstrating the significant reproductive potential for these embryos. When accounting for the lost deliveries induced by this non-evidence-based decision, the expected delivery rates in the two groups become virtually identical. That is an important issue because the data from the study actually demonstrate the safety of PGT-A without diminution in outcomes from the impact of trophectoderm biopsy or the discarding of competent embryos which had wrongfully been considered aneuploid. A final serious flaw in the experimental design and interpretation of the data surrounding the issue of the miscarriage rate. The investigators noted that the miscarriage rate was lower in the PGT-A group but stated that its impact was insufficient to alter the CLBR. Of course, by design, the CLBRs were limited to being equivalent. There was no potential for enhanced outcomes in the PGT-A group and thus no possibility that the lower risk of miscarriage in the PGT-A group would raise the CLBR. The benefit of a lower miscarriage rate is real and significant. Its relevance should not be diminished based on the lack of a change in the CLBR since that was never possible in this study. The investigators of the study concluded that the CLBR with conventional ART is equivalent to that with PGT-A, but a simple review of the experiment reassigns their genuine findings to those of a safety study. Significantly, the data in the study demonstrate that the intervention of PGT-A is safe. This study neither supports nor refutes the efficacy of clinical PGT-A.

The chances of obtaining a euploid embryo and subsequent live birth remain consistent with national age-based rates after an in vitro fertilization cycle that produced only aneuploid embryos

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prognosis of patients who were only able to obtain aneuploid embryos in their first in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle if they attempted a second cycle.

DESIGN

Case series and retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A single, large fertility center.

PATIENT(S)

All patients who obtained only aneuploid embryos after IVF with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy during the initial cycle and returned for a second cycle.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The percentage of patients who obtained a euploid embryo and live birth rates in the second cycle, stratified by Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology-defined age groups, was compared with that of controls from the same period.

RESULT(S)

A total of 538 patients with only aneuploid embryos in their first cycle were included. Three hundred (56%) patients obtained euploid blastocysts in the second cycle, with younger women having a higher chance of obtaining at least 1 euploid embryo (81% in women aged <35 years vs. 25% in women aged >42 years). The cumulative live birth rates were 71%, 62%, 46%, 27%, and 13% for the age groups <35, 35-37, 38-40, 41-42, and >42 years, respectively. The live birth rates per first embryo transfer were >57% across all the age groups and similar to those of the controls in the same age groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

Patients who obtained only aneuploid embryos during their initial IVF cycle retained favorable prognosis in their second cycle, with outcomes comparable with the national age-based standards. Younger women and those who had more embryos available for biopsy had the highest chance of success. These women should receive age-appropriate counseling and should not be discouraged from a second IVF attempt based on the results of their first cycle.

The concordance rates of an initial trophectoderm biopsy with the rest of the embryo using PGTseq, a targeted next-generation sequencing platform for preimplantation genetic testing-aneuploidy

OBJECTIVE

To determine how often the results of a single trophectoderm (TE) biopsy tested by PGTseq, a targeted next-generation sequencing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy technology, reflect the biology of the rest of the embryo.

DESIGN

Blinded prospective cohort study.

SETTING

University-affiliated private practice.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 300 blastocysts were donated; 113 of these embryos were euploid; 163 embryos possessed at least one whole chromosome aneuploidy; and 24 embryos were negative for whole chromosome aneuploidy but possessed at least one secondary finding on initial TE biopsy.

INTERVENTION(S)

All blastocysts underwent rebiopsy and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy on the PGTseq platform.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Partial concordance rate per embryo, total concordance rate per embryo, and total concordance rate per chromosomal event.

RESULT(S)

An initial TE biopsy result of euploidy or whole chromosome aneuploidy was reconfirmed in >99% of rebiopsied samples, affirming that meiotic errors are manifested in almost the entire embryo. In contrast, results of whole chromosome or segmental mosaicism were confirmed in 15%-18% of subsequent rebiopsies, suggesting that mitotic events are only sporadically seen throughout the embryo. Segmental aneuploidy was confirmed in 56.6% of rebiopsied samples, identifying a mixed meiotic and mitotic etiology for such abnormalities.

CONCLUSION(S)

A euploid or aneuploid result on the PGTseq platform is highly concordant with the rest of the embryo's ploidy status. The rarer confirmation of whole chromosome mosaic and segmental mosaic results suggest that these mosaics are suitable for embryo transfer. Segmental aneuploidy, with higher concordance rates throughout the embryo, may represent a different biologic etiology compared to mosaic embryos.

A review of the pathophysiology of recurrent implantation failure

Implantation is a critical step in human reproduction. The success of this step is dependent on a competent blastocyst, receptive endometrium, and successful cross talk between the embryonic and maternal interfaces. Recurrent implantation failure is the lack of implantation after the transfer of several embryo transfers. As the success of in vitro fertilization has increased and failures have become more unacceptable for patients and providers, the literature on recurrent implantation failure has increased. While this clinical phenomenon is often encountered, there is not a universally agreed-on definition-something addressed in an earlier portion of this Views and Reviews. Implantation failure can result from several different factors. In this review, we discuss factors including the maternal immune system, genetics of the embryo and parents, anatomic factors, hematologic factors, reproductive tract microbiome, and endocrine milieu, which factors into embryo and endometrial synchrony. These potential causes are at various stages of research and not all have clear implications or immediately apparent treatment.

The "mosaic" embryo: misconceptions and misinterpretations in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) remains one of the most controversial topics in reproductive medicine. With more than 40% of in vitro fertilization cycles in the United States reportedly involving PGT, both those in favor of and those opposed to PGT-A have significant interest in the efficacy of PGT-A. Ongoing issues include what patient population, if any, benefits from PGT-A, the true frequency of chromosomal mosaicism, whether embryonic aneuploidies self-correct, and how practitioners manage embryos designated as "mosaic." This review addresses several misconceptions and misinterpretations of data surrounding the genetic analysis and prediction of mosaicism in the preimplantation embryo.

The morphokinetic signature of mosaic embryos: evidence in support of their own genetic identity

OBJECTIVE

To provide full morphokinetic characterization of embryos ranked with different degrees of chromosomal mosaicism.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

University-affiliated private in vitro fertilization clinic.

PATIENT(S)

We analyzed 1,511 embryos from 424 intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles by culturing embryos in a time-lapse imaging system and performing next-generation sequencing. We assessed 106 mosaic embryos.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Comparison of chromosomal, morphological, and morphokinetic characteristics of blastocysts classified as euploid, aneuploid, low-degree mosaic (30% to <50% aneuploid cells in trophectoderm biopsy), and high-degree mosaic (50% to <70% aneuploid cells in trophectoderm biopsy). Statistical analysis was performed using χ2, Kruskal-Wallis, or analysis of variance tests according to data type and distribution. A two-way random effects model was used to calculate interoperator correlation of annotations, and a logistic mixed effects model was performed to evaluate the effect of confounders on morphokinetic timing.

RESULT(S)

The mosaicism rate was ∼7% regardless of parental age. Mosaicism and uniform aneuploidies were not evenly distributed across chromosomes. The percentage of high-quality blastocysts significantly decreased from euploid (66.9%) to mosaic (52.8%) and aneuploid (47.7%). Aneuploid blastocysts significantly delayed development compared with euploid blastocysts in start of compaction (median, 84.72 hours postmicroinjection [hpm], interquartile range [IQR], 13.2; vs. median, 82.10 hpm, IQR, 11.5), start of blastulation (median, 101 hpm; IQR, 11.7; vs. median, 98.29 hpm, IQR, 10.5), and timing of blastocyst (median, 108.04 hpm, IQR, 11.50; vs. median, 104.71 hpm, IQR, 11.35). However, embryo morphokinetics were not correlated to the degree of mosaicism or to a mosaicism configuration that was apt for embryo transfer.

CONCLUSION(S)

Morphokinetic timing of mosaic embryos overlaps with that of euploid and aneuploid embryos, which may reflect their unique genetic and developmental identity. Although this suggests mosaic embryos are not simply a misdiagnosis by-product, further studies are needed to reveal the true identity of this particular type of embryo.

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: A review of published blastocyst reanalysis concordance data

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT‐A) reduces miscarriage risk, increases the success of IVF, shortens time to pregnancy, and reduces multiple gestation rates without compromising outcomes. The progression of PGT‐A has included common application of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) from single nucleotide polymorphism microarray, quantitative real‐time PCR, and array comparative hybridization platforms of analysis. Additional putative advances in PGT‐A capability include classifying embryos as mosaic and predicting the presence of segmental imbalance. A critical component in the process of technical validation of these advancements involves evaluation of concordance between reanalysis results and initial testing results. While many independent studies have investigated the concordance of results obtained from the remaining embryo with the original PGT‐A diagnosis, compilation and systematic analysis of published data has not been performed. Here, we review results from 26 primary research articles describing concordance in 1271 human blastocysts from 2260 pairwise comparisons. Results illustrate significantly higher discordance from PGT‐A methods which utilize NGS and include prediction of mosaicism or segmental imbalance. These results suggest caution when considering new iterations PGT‐A.

Why are multiple pregnancy rates and single embryo transfer rates so different globally, and what do we do about it?

In the early years of in vitro fertilization, overall pregnancy rates were low, and it was considered necessary to transfer more than one embryo to increase the chances of pregnancy. It was not until advances in assisted reproductive technologies resulting in increased pregnancy rates that the concept of transferring just one embryo was considered possible. A consequence of improvements in implantation rates was also an increase in multiple pregnancies when more than one embryo was transferred. Although some countries have reduced the number of embryos transferred, international data show that in many parts of the world high twin and higher order multiple pregnancy rates still exist. Even in developed countries these problems persist depending on clinical practice, funding of health services, and patient demands. Perinatal and other outcomes are significantly worse with twins compared with singleton pregnancies and there is an urgent need to reduce multiple pregnancy rates to at least 10%. This has been achieved in several countries and clinics by introducing single embryo transfer but there are many barriers to the introduction of this technique in most clinics worldwide. We discuss the background to the high multiple rate in assisted reproduction and the factors that contribute to its persistence even in excellent clinics and in high-quality health services. Practices that may promote single embryo transfer are discussed.