Intraindividual Embryo Morphokinetics Are Not Affected by a Switch of the Ovarian Stimulation Protocol Between GnRH Agonist vs. Antagonist Regimens in Consecutive Cycles.

Background: The impact of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) during medically assisted reproduction (MAR) on human embryogenesis is still unclear. Therefore, we investigated if early embryonic development is affected by the type of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analog used to prevent a premature LH surge. We compared embryo morphology and morphokinetics between GnRH agonist and antagonist cycles, both involving human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)-trigger. To reduce possible confounding factors, we used intraindividual comparison of embryo morphokinetics in consecutive treatment cycles of the same patients that underwent a switch in the COS protocol. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed morphokinetics of embryos from patients (n = 49) undergoing a switch in COS protocols between GnRH agonists followed by GnRH antagonists, or vice versa, after culture in a time-lapse incubator (EmbryoScope®, Vitrolife) in our clinic between 06/2011 and 11/2016 (n = 49 GnRH agonist cycles with n = 172 embryos; n = 49 GnRH antagonist cycles with n = 163 embryos). Among time-lapse cycles we included all embryos of the two consecutive cycles before and after a switch in the type of COS in the same patient. In-vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was performed and embryos were imaged up to day 5. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U test or Fisher's exact test. The significance level was set to p = 0.05. Patients with preimplantation genetic screening cycles were excluded. Results: The mean age (years ± standard deviation) of patients at the time of treatment was 35.7 ± 4.3 (GnRH agonist) and 35.8 ± 4.0 (GnRH antagonist) (p = 0.94). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of oocytes collected or the fertilization rate. The numbers of top quality embryos (TQE), good-quality embryos (GQE), or poor-quality embryos (PQE) were also not different in GnRH agonist vs. antagonist cycles. We found no statistically significant difference between the analyzed morphokinetic parameters between the study groups. Conclusions: Our finding supports the flexible use of GnRH analogs to optimize patient treatment for COS without affecting embryo morphokinetics.

Relative Morphokinetics Assessed by Time-Lapse Imaging Are Altered in Embryos From Patients With Endometriosis.

INTRODUCTION: Time-lapse technology allows almost continuous noninvasive assessment of embryonic development. It was shown previously that relative kinetics defining cleavage synchronicity are better predictors of blastocyst quality than absolute time points. This study aims to compare relative kinetics in embryos from patients with and without endometriosis. METHODS: Time-lapse data were collected retrospectively from 596 patients undergoing infertility treatment for in vitro fertilization from January 2011 to July 2016. Four hundred twenty-eight patients with confounding comorbidities (ie, polycystic ovary syndrome, pathological spermiogram in the included cycle, numerical/structural genetic abnormalities, preimplantation genetic screening performed) or incomplete data sets were excluded. Of the 168 included patients, 72 (42.9%) had endometriosis. Indications for in vitro fertilization of controls were tubal factor, unexplained infertility, or prolonged infertility. Relative kinetics were calculated as defined previously: cleavage synchronicity (CS)2-8=((t3-t2) + (t5-t4))/(t8-t2), CS4-8=(t8-t5)/(t8-t4), CS2-4=(t4-t3)/(t4-t2), DNA replication time ratio (DR)=(t3-t2)/(t5-t3). In women with more than one embryo, the median time was analyzed. RESULTS: Median age, body mass index, smoking status, and AMH levels were similar in both groups. Embryos from patients with endometriosis showed poorer relative kinetics. The relative time CS2-8 was decreased in embryos from patients with endometriosis (0.7 [0.0-0.93] vs 0.8 [0.0-0.94], P < .05) and CS4-8 was increased (0.4 [0.0-1.0] vs 0.3 [0.0-1.0], P < .05). The less powerful diagnostic relative kinetic parameters (CS2-4 and DR) were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Embryos from patients with endometriosis presented with altered relative kinetics suggesting poorer embryo quality. These findings support recently published data demonstrating reduced oocyte quality in patients with endometriosis which is one possible explanation for their poor response to fertility treatment.

The Wilms tumor protein Wt1 contributes to female fertility by regulating oviductal proteostasis.

Although the zinc finger transcription factor Wt1 has been linked to female fertility, its precise role in this process has not yet been understood. We have sequenced the WT1 exons in a panel of patients with idiopathic infertility and have identified a missense mutation in WT1 in one patient out of eight. This mutation leads to an amino acid change within the zinc finger domain and results in reduced DNA binding. We utilized Wt1+/- mice as a model to mechanistically pinpoint the consequences of reduced Wt1 levels for female fertility. Our results indicate that subfertility in Wt1+/- female mice is a maternal effect caused by the Wt1-dependent de-regulation of Prss29, encoding a serine protease. Notably, blocking Prss29 activity was sufficient to rescue subfertility in Wt1+/- mice indicating Prss29 as a critical factor in female fertility. Molecularly, Wt1 represses expression of Prss29. De-repression and precocious expression of Prss29 in the oviduct of Wt1+/- mice interferes with pre-implantation development. Our study reveals a novel role for Wt1 in early mammalian development and identifies proteases as critical mediators of the maternal-embryonic interaction. Our data also suggest that the role of Wt1 in regulating fertility is conserved in mammals.