Moving from peripheral blood to local uterine immunophenotype analysis in patients with poor reproductive history: pilot study of a novel technique.

BACKGROUND: A complete reproductive immunophenotype is poorly described, with most focus on peripheral blood natural killer cells rather than uterine populations. There is debate regarding normal endometrial levels, with no consensus, and much controversy on correlation with implantation/miscarriage. AIMS: Development and validation of a rapid endometrial assessment flow cytometry (FCM) technique, allowing determination of local lymphocyte subset ranges, comparison to peripheral blood, and patient subgroup analysis. METHODS: Prospective pilot, assessing patients with prior implantation, failure offered endometrial biopsy before subsequent ART cycle, functioning as therapeutic scratch. HRT regime administered to standardise environment, and progesterone-primed mid-luteal biopsy (five completed days progestogen, P+5) analysed using comprehensive flow panel to identify lymphocyte subsets. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were recruited in a tertiary university-affiliated ART centre. FCM identified differing lymphocyte ranges between peripheral blood and biopsy. Uterine/decidual natural killer cells are the dominant endometrial subtype. Patients with repeated implantation failure had higher uNK levels (52.4 vs 43.7%, p = 0.01). Conversely, B lymphocytes (0.87 vs 0.72%, p = 0.032), pNK (1.21 vs 0.8%, p = 0.041), and NK-T (2.68 vs 2.26, p = 0.031) cells were higher in recurrent pregnancy loss. CONCLUSION: FCM is widely used to assess cellular populations, but not typically employed for endometrial evaluation. FCM provides a rapid, detailed, and quantitative analysis and reduces inter-observer subjectivity bias. Detailed understanding of the normal endometrial immunophenotype, and associated deviations, may provide insight into the aetiology of infertile patients labelled "unexplained". Failure despite transfer of high grade, or proven euploid blastocysts, is a difficult problem, and endometrial profiling may help identify research areas to determine potential future therapeutic interventions for this difficult to treat population.

Ovarian dysgenesis associated with an unbalanced X;6 translocation: first characterisation of reproductive anatomy and cytogenetic evaluation in partial trisomy 6 with breakpoints at Xq22 and 6p23.

The aim of this study was to describe the clinical and laboratory findings associated with a previously unreported unbalanced X;6 translocation. Physical examination, reproductive history and cytogenetic techniques were used to characterise a novel chromosomal anomaly associated with gonadal dysgenesis. A healthy non-dysmorphic 23 year-old phenotypic female with primary amenorrhea and infertility presented for reproductive endocrinology evaluation. No discrete ovarian tissue was identified on transvaginal ultrasound, although the uterus appeared essentially normal. BMI was 19 kg/m2. Serum FSH and oestradiol were 111 mIU/ml and 15 pmol/l, respectively. TSH, prolactin and all infectious serologies were all normal. The karyotype of 46,X,der(X)t(X;6)(q22;p23) was determined following cytogenetic analysis of peripheral blood lymphocytes via fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) with whole chromosome paint for chromosome 6, and a separate FISH analysis using a 6p subtelomeric probe. The patient was continued on hormone replacement therapy and underwent genetic counselling; the patient subsequently enrolled as a recipient in an anonymous donor oocyte IVF treatment. Translocations involving autosomes and chromosome X are rare. While female carriers of balanced X;autosome translocations are generally phenotypically normal, the impact of unbalanced X;autosome translocations can be severe. This is the first known report of an unbalanced translocation involving X;6. This abnormality was associated with ovarian dysgenesis, but an otherwise normal female phenotype. From this investigation, the observed developmental impact of the unbalanced translocation with breakpoints at Xq22 and 6p23 appears to be limited to ovarian failure.

Bivariate analysis of basal serum anti-Müllerian hormone measurements and human blastocyst development after IVF.

BACKGROUND: To report on relationships among baseline serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) measurements, blastocyst development and other selected embryology parameters observed in non-donor oocyte IVF cycles. METHODS: Pre-treatment AMH was measured in patients undergoing IVF (n = 79) and retrospectively correlated to in vitro embryo development noted during culture. RESULTS: Mean (+/- SD) age for study patients in this study group was 36.3 ± 4.0 (range = 28-45) yrs, and mean (+/- SD) terminal serum estradiol during IVF was 5929 +/- 4056 pmol/l. A moderate positive correlation (0.49; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.65) was noted between basal serum AMH and number of MII oocytes retrieved. Similarly, a moderate positive correlation (0.44) was observed between serum AMH and number of early cleavage-stage embryos (95% CI 0.24 to 0.61), suggesting a relationship between serum AMH and embryo development in IVF. Of note, serum AMH levels at baseline were significantly different for patients who did and did not undergo blastocyst transfer (15.6 vs. 10.9 pmol/l; p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: While serum AMH has found increasing application as a predictor of ovarian reserve for patients prior to IVF, its roles to estimate in vitro embryo morphology and potential to advance to blastocyst stage have not been extensively investigated. These data suggest that baseline serum AMH determinations can help forecast blastocyst developmental during IVF. Serum AMH measured before treatment may assist patients, clinicians and embryologists as scheduling of embryo transfer is outlined. Additional studies are needed to confirm these correlations and to better define the role of baseline serum AMH level in the prediction of blastocyst formation.

Recipient screening in IVF: first data from women undergoing anonymous oocyte donation in Dublin.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for safe gamete donation have emphasised donor screening, although none exist specifically for testing oocyte recipients. Pre-treatment assessment of anonymous donor oocyte IVF treatment in Ireland must comply with the European Union Tissues and Cells Directive (Directive 2004/23/EC). To determine the effectiveness of this Directive when applied to anonymous oocyte recipients in IVF, we reviewed data derived from selected screening tests performed in this clinical setting. METHODS: Data from tests conducted at baseline for all women enrolling as recipients (n = 225) in the anonymous oocyte donor IVF programme at an urban IVF referral centre during a 24-month period were analysed. Patient age at programme entry and clinical pregnancy rate were also tabulated. All recipients had at least one prior negative test for HIV, Hepatitis B/C, chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis performed by her GP or other primary care provider before reproductive endocrinology consultation. RESULTS: Mean (±SD) age for donor egg IVF recipients was 40.7 ± 4.2 yrs. No baseline positive chlamydia, gonorrhoea or syphilis screening results were identified among recipients for anonymous oocyte donation IVF during the assessment interval. Mean pregnancy rate (per embryo transfer) in this group was 50.5%. CONCLUSION: When tests for HIV, Hepatitis B/C, chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis already have been confirmed to be negative before starting the anonymous donor oocyte IVF sequence, additional (repeat) testing on the recipient contributes no new clinical information that would influence treatment in this setting. Patient safety does not appear to be enhanced by application of Directive 2004/23/EC to recipients of anonymous donor oocyte IVF treatment. Given the absence of evidence to quantify risk, this practice is difficult to justify when applied to this low-risk population.