Cleavage-stage or blastocyst-stage embryo biopsy has no impact on growth and health in children up to 2 years of age.

BACKGROUND: Studies show conflicting results on neonatal outcomes following embryo biopsy for PGT, primarily due to small sample sizes and/or heterogeneity in the timing of embryo biopsy (day 3; EBD3 or day 5/6; EBD5) and type of embryo transfer. Even fewer data exist on the impact on children's health beyond the neonatal period. This study aimed to explore outcomes in children born after EBD3 or EBD5 followed by fresh (FRESH) or frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET). METHODS: This single-centre cohort study compared birth data of 630 children after EBD3, of 222 EBD5 and of 1532 after non-biopsied embryo transfers performed between 2014 and 2018. Follow-up data on growth were available for 426, 131 and 662 children, respectively. RESULTS: Embryo biopsy, either at EBD3 or EBD5 in FET and FRESH cycles did not negatively affect anthropometry at birth, infancy or childhood compared to outcomes in non-biopsied FET and FRESH cycles. While there was no adverse effect of the timing of embryo biopsy (EBD3 versus EBD5), children born after EBD3 followed by FET had larger sizes at birth, but not thereafter, than children born after EBD3 followed by FRESH. Reassuringly, weight and height gain, proportions of major congenital malformations, developmental problems, hospital admissions and surgical interventions were similar between comparison groups. CONCLUSION: Our study indicated that neither EBD3 nor EBD5 followed by FRESH or FET had a negative impact on anthropometry and on health outcomes up to 2 years of age.

PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC TESTING: Clinical experience of preimplantation genetic testing.

Thirty years of rapid technological advances in the field of genetic testing and assisted reproduction have reshaped the procedure of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). The development of whole genome amplification and genome-wide testing tools together with the implementation of optimal hormonal stimulation protocols and more efficient cryopreservation methods have led to more accurate diagnoses and improved clinical outcomes. In addition, the shift towards embryo biopsy at day 5/6 has changed the timeline of a typical PGT clinical procedure. In this paper, we present an up-to-date overview of the different steps in PGT from patient referral to baby follow-up.

Multiple vitrification-warming and biopsy procedures on human embryos: clinical outcome and neonatal follow-up of children.

STUDY QUESTION: Does double vitrification and warming of human blastocysts having undergone biopsy once or twice have an impact on the clinical outcome? SUMMARY ANSWER: The clinical pregnancy rate obtained with double vitrification single biopsy blastocysts was comparable to that obtained with single vitrification single biopsy blastocysts in our center in the same time period (46%; 2016-2018), whereas that obtained with double-vitrified double-biopsied blastocysts seemed lower and will need further study. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Genetic testing on cryopreserved unbiopsied embryos involves two cryopreservation procedures. Retesting of failed/inconclusive-diagnosed blastocysts inevitably involves a second round of biopsy and a second round of vitrification as well. To what extent this practice impacts on the developmental potential of blastocysts has been studied to a limited extent so far and holds controversy. Additionally, the obstetrical/perinatal outcome after the transfer of double-vitrified/single or double-biopsied blastocysts is poorly documented. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This retrospective observational study included 97 cycles of trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) on vitrified-warmed embryos followed by a second round of vitrification between March 2015 and December 2019. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: In 36 warming cycles, no biopsy was performed on the embryos before the first vitrification (single biopsy group). In 61 warming cycles, the embryos had been biopsied on Day 3 (n = 4) or on Day 5/6 (n = 57) before the first vitrification (double biopsy group). A second biopsy was mostly indicated in cycles of failed or inconclusive diagnosis at the first biopsy. Two cycles involved a more specific mutation test for X-linked diseases on male embryos and one cycle involved testing for a second monogenic indication supplementary to a previously tested reciprocal translocation. Post-warming suitability for biopsy, availability of genetically transferable embryos and clinical outcome of subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles were reported. Neonatal follow-up of the children was included. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In total, 91 cleavage-stage embryos and 154 blastocysts were warmed, of which 34 (37.4%) and 126 (81.8%), respectively, were of sufficient quality to undergo trophectoderm biopsy and were subsequently vitrified for a second time. Out of these, 92 underwent biopsy for the first time (single biopsy), whereas 68 underwent a second biopsy (double biopsy). After diagnosis, 77 blastocysts (48.1%) were revealed to be genetically transferable (44 in the single biopsy group and 33 in the double biopsy group). In 46 warming cycles, 51 blastocysts were warmed and 49 survived this second warming procedure (96.0%). Subsequently, there were 45 FET cycles resulting in 27 biochemical pregnancies and 18 clinical pregnancies with fetal heartbeat (40.0% per FET cycle: 44.0% in the single biopsy group and 35.0% in the double biopsy group, P = 0.54). Thirteen singletons were born (eight in the single biopsy group and five in the double biopsy group), while three pregnancies were ongoing. A total of 26 embryos (13 in each group) remain vitrified and have the potential to increase the final clinical pregnancy rate. The neonatal follow-up of the children born so far is reassuring. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This is a small retrospective cohort, thus, the implantation potential of double vitrification double biopsy blastocysts, as compared to double vitrification single biopsy blastocysts and standard PGT (single vitrification, single biopsy), certainly needs further investigation. Although one could speculate on birthweight being affected by the number of biopsies performed, the numbers in this study are too small to compare birthweight standard deviation scores in singletons born after single or double biopsy. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: PGT on vitrified-warmed embryos, including a second vitrification-warming step, results in healthy live birth deliveries, for both single- and double-biopsied embryos. The neonatal follow-up of the 13 children born so far did not indicate any adverse effect. The present study is important in order to provide proper counseling to couples on their chance of a live birth per initial warming cycle planned and concerning the safety issue of rebiopsy and double vitrification. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Is genetic fatherhood within reach for all azoospermic Klinefelter men?

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary management of Klinefelter cases is now considered good clinical practice in order to ensure optimal quality of life. Reproductive performance of Klinefelter men is an important issue however literature in this domain is limited and prone to bias. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective longitudinal cohort study performed at a tertiary referral University Centre for Reproductive Medicine and Genetics. One hundred thirty-eight non-mosaic azoospermic Klinefelter patients undergoing their first testicular biopsy (TESE) between 1994 and 2013, followed by intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with fresh or frozen-thawed testicular sperm in the female partner, were followed-up longitudinally. The main outcome measure was cumulative live birth rate per Klinefelter patient embarking on TESE-ICSI. FINDINGS: In forty-eight men (48/138) sperm were successfully retrieved at the first TESE (34.8%). The mean age of the patients was 32.4 years. Younger age at first TESE was associated with a higher sperm retrieval rate (p<0.001). Overall 39 couples underwent 62 ICSI cycles and 13 frozen embryo transfer cycles resulting in in 20 pregnancies and 14 live birth deliveries (16 children). The mean age of the female partner was 28.1 years. The crude cumulative delivery rate after four ICSI cycles was 35.9%. Per intention-to-treat however, only 10.1% (14/138) of the Klinefelter men starting treatment succeeded in having their biologically own child(ren). CONCLUSION: Non-mosaic Klinefelter patients with azoospermia seeking treatment by TESE-ICSI should be counseled that by intention-to-treat the chance of retrieving sperm is fair, however only a minority will eventually father genetically own children.

Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone Agonists or Antagonists for Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD)? A Prospective Randomised Trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of GnRH analogue medication is essential in reproductive medicine to avoid premature ovulation by pituitary suppression for the duration of ovarian stimulation by gonadotrophins. The type of pituitary suppression by either GnRH agonist analogues versus GnRH antagonist analogues may result in different embryological hence clinical results. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis is a subtype of IVF in which embryos are created for genetic diagnosis of hereditary disorders in order to avoid genetically affected children. Embryological quality hence ovarian stimulation in preimplantation genetic diagnosis is crucial as genetic selection will reduce the number of available embryos to a fraction of the total. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist treatment for pituitary suppression in ovarian stimulation for PGD, by proxy of number and quality of embryos at cleavage stage available for biopsy. METHOD: We conducted a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing pituitary suppression by GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist in ovarian stimulation for PGD. The primary outcome measure was the number of embryos of sufficient quality for biopsy at cleavage stage. Secondary outcome parameters were the number of blastocysts available of top quality, and clinical pregnancy rate. RESULTS: There was no difference in number of oocytes retrieved, embryos at cleavage stage available for biopsy or embryo quality. The clinical pregnancy rate was higher in the GnRH agonist group; however the sample size was insufficient to allow conclusions. CONCLUSION: The use of GnRH agonist versus antagonist treatment does not result in differences in a number of oocytes, embryos or embryo quality in ovarian stimulation for preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists.

STUDY QUESTION: We wanted to probe the opinions and current practices on preimplantation genetic screening (PGS), and more specifically on PGS in its newest form: PGS 2.0? STUDY FINDING: Consensus is lacking on which patient groups, if any at all, can benefit from PGS 2.0 and, a fortiori, whether all IVF patients should be offered PGS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: It is clear from all experts that PGS 2.0 can be defined as biopsy at the blastocyst stage followed by comprehensive chromosome screening and possibly combined with vitrification. Most agree that mosaicism is less of an issue at the blastocyst stage than at the cleavage stage but whether mosaicism is no issue at all at the blastocyst stage is currently called into question. STUDY DESIGN, SAMPLES/MATERIALS, METHODS: A questionnaire was developed on the three major aspects of PGS 2.0: the Why, with general questions such as PGS 2.0 indications; the How, specifically on genetic analysis methods; the When, on the ideal method and timing of embryo biopsy. Thirty-five colleagues have been selected to address these questions on the basis of their experience with PGS, and demonstrated by peer-reviewed publications, presentations at meetings and participation in the discussion. The first group of experts who were asked about 'The Why' comprised fertility experts, the second group of molecular biologists were asked about 'The How' and the third group of embryologists were asked about 'The When'. Furthermore, the geographical distribution of the experts has been taken into account. Thirty have filled in the questionnaire as well as actively participated in the redaction of the current paper. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The 30 participants were from Europe (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, UK) and the USA. Array comparative genome hybridization is the most widely used method amongst the participants, but it is slowly being replaced by massive parallel sequencing. Most participants offering PGS 2.0 to their patients prefer blastocyst biopsy. The high efficiency of vitrification of blastocysts has added a layer of complexity to the discussion, and it is not clear whether PGS in combination with vitrification, PGS alone, or vitrification alone, followed by serial thawing and eSET will be the favoured approach. The opinions range from in favour of the introduction of PGS 2.0 for all IVF patients, over the proposal to use PGS as a tool to rank embryos according to their implantation potential, to scepticism towards PGS pending a positive outcome of robust, reliable and large-scale RCTs in distinct patient groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Care was taken to obtain a wide spectrum of views from carefully chosen experts. However, not all invited experts agreed to participate, which explains a lack of geographical coverage in some areas, for example China. This paper is a collation of current practices and opinions, and it was outside the scope of this study to bring a scientific, once-and-for-all solution to the ongoing debate. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This paper is unique in that it brings together opinions on PGS 2.0 from all different perspectives and gives an overview of currently applied technologies as well as potential future developments. It will be a useful reference for fertility specialists with an expertise outside reproductive genetics. LARGE SCALE DATA: none. STUDY FUNDING AND COMPETING INTERESTS: No specific funding was obtained to conduct this questionnaire.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and reproduction: an observational study on the suitability of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for both asymptomatic carriers and breast cancer survivors.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a reproductive option for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers wishing to avoid transmission of the predisposition for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) to their offspring. Embryos obtained by in vitro fertilisation (IVF/ICSI) are tested for the presence of the mutation. Only BRCA-negative embryos are transferred into the uterus. The suitability and outcome of PGD for HBOC are evaluated in an observational cohort study on treatments carried out in two of Western-Europe's largest PGD centres from 2006 until 2012. Male carriers, asymptomatic female carriers and breast cancer survivors were eligible. If available, PGD on embryos cryopreserved before chemotherapy was possible. Generic PGD-PCR tests were developed based on haplotyping, if necessary combined with mutation detection. 70 Couples underwent PGD for BRCA1/2. 42/71 carriers (59.2 %) were female, six (14.3 %) of whom have had breast cancer prior to PGD. In total, 145 PGD cycles were performed. 720 embryos were tested, identifying 294 (40.8 %) as BRCA-negative. Of fresh IVF/PGD cycles, 23.9 % resulted in a clinical pregnancy. Three cycles involved PGD on embryos cryopreserved before chemotherapy; two of these women delivered a healthy child. Overall, 38 children were liveborn. Two BRCA1 carriers were diagnosed with breast cancer shortly after PGD treatment, despite negative screening prior to PGD. PGD for HBOC proved to be suitable, yielding good pregnancy rates for asymptomatic carriers as well as breast cancer survivors. Because of two cases of breast cancer shortly after treatment, maternal safety of IVF(PGD) in female carriers needs further evaluation.

PGD and HLA matching: not a quick fix.

Kahraman et al. (2011) publish the largest series of consecutive preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) cycles associated with human leucocyte antigen (HLA) matching. This technique can now be offered as an alternative to prenatal diagnosis in an attempt to treat and cure children affected by a hereditary haematological condition that can be cured by haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Multidisciplinary preparation of an HLA-matching treatment is required in order to assess the need and the urgency of this treatment for the affected child. Alternative treatment options such as transplantation with unrelated or lower-level HLA-matched donors need to be considered. The parents as well as both the affected and unaffected children need psychological guidance and the follow-up of these families is essential.

A novel method of luteal supplementation with recombinant luteinizing hormone when a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist is used instead of human chorionic gonadotropin for ovulation triggering: a randomized prospective proof of concept study.

This pilot study investigates the role of luteal supplementation with recombinant LH in an attempt to reverse the poor reproductive outcome previously noticed after GnRH-agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation for IVF. Similar implantation rates were achieved with the novel recombinant LH luteal supplementation scheme compared with the standard luteal P protocol (25.0% vs. 26.7%, respectively). No cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) were noticed in either group.

No relationship between the type of pituitary suppression for IVF and chromosomal abnormality rates of blastomeres: an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the incidence of chromosomally abnormal blastomeres is related to the type of pituitary suppression used in ovarian stimulation. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENT(S): The study involved 694 consecutive cycles; 320 belonged to agonist group and 374 to antagonist group, of patients' ≤ 37 years of age who underwent preimplantation genetic screening between October 1, 1992 until December 31, 2006. All of them (and their partners) had normal karyotyping results. Only the data of patients who had at least one embryo biopsy were analyzed. INTERVENTION(S): Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome measure was detection of abnormal blastomeres on the total number of embryos analyzed. RESULT(S): The total abnormal ratio was statistically similar between the embryos of the two study groups (49.9 ± 28.1 vs. 50.2 ± 26.6). Likewise, a multivariate (linear regression) analysis indicated that the total abnormality ratio was not influenced by the type of stimulation when simultaneously adjusting for age, rank of trials, indication for preimplantation genetic screening, total gonadotropin amount, number of cumulus-oocyte complexes, and number of two pronuclear oocytes embryos. No difference was observed in ongoing pregnancy rates between agonists and antagonists (26.6% vs. 23.3%, respectively). CONCLUSION(S): Based on our findings there is no difference in the proportion of abnormal blastomeres either when using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist, or antagonist protocol.

The experience of two European preimplantation genetic diagnosis centres on human leukocyte antigen typing.

BACKGROUND: Two European centres report on human leukocyte antigen (HLA) typing of preimplantation embryos for haematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation: 'UZ Brussel' in Brussels and 'Genoma' in Rome. Both centres have 6 years' experience with technical and clinical aspects of this type of genetic analysis on single blastomeres. METHODS: Both centres apply a similar technique for preimplantation HLA typing using short tandem repeats linked to the HLA locus in multiplex PCR for haplotyping. RESULTS: At present, a conclusive HLA diagnosis could be assured in 92.8% and 90.3% of the embryos at UZ Brussel and at Genoma, respectively. The implantation rates were 32.4% and 28.2%, respectively, and the birth rates per cycle were 9.4% and 18.6%, respectively. The HLA programme at UZ Brussel and at Genoma resulted in the birth of 9 babies and 3 successful HSC transplantations, and 42 babies and 7 successful HSC transplantations, respectively, so far. CONCLUSIONS: Drastic embryo selection for preimplantation HLA typing (in theory 1/4 for HLA, 1/8 for HLA in combination with sexing for X-linked recessive diseases, 3/16 for HLA in combination with autosomal recessive disorders) resulted overall in the birth of 51 babies (15.9% live birth rate per started cycle) in two European centres.

Prospectively randomized controlled trial of PGS in IVF/ICSI patients with poor implantation.

This randomized, controlled trial verifies whether patients with recurrent failed implantation benefit from preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy, as compared with conventional assisted reproduction treatment procedures. Two hundred patients with recurrent failed implantation were randomized into two groups. A total of 139 patients underwent ovarian stimulation, and preimplantation genetic screening was performed in 72 patients. Analysis of chromosomes X, Y, 13, 16, 18, 21 and 22 was carried out using fluorescence in-situ hybridization in blastomeres of day-3 cleavage-stage embryos in the study group. The primary endpoint was implantation rate. Secondary endpoints were embryonic morphology and chromosomal status, number of transferred embryos and clinical pregnancy rate. With regard to the implantation rate, there was no significant difference between the study group (21.4%) and the control group (25.3%). The number of embryos transferred was significantly lower in the study group, namely 1.4 (SD 1.0) versus 2.1 (SD 1.0) in the control group (P < 0.05). The clinical pregnancy rate was not significantly different between the groups (25.0% in the study group versus 40.3% in the control group). It can be concluded that preimplantation genetic screening does not increase the implantation rates after IVF-intracytoplasmic sperm injection in women with repeated implantation failure.

Effects and clinical significance of GnRH antagonist administration for IUI timing in FSH superovulated cycles: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the administration of GnRH antagonist in gonadotropin intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles with cycles where no intervention took place. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of published prospective randomized trials. PATIENTS(S): Five hundred twenty-one patients who were administered a GnRH antagonist and 548 conservatively treated patients who served as control subjects were included in the meta-analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective trials were retrieved from Medline and Cochrane Library (last update October 2006). Random effect analysis was used in this meta-analysis. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Clinical pregnancy rates. RESULT(S): Six comparisons were retrieved including 1,069 patients. Higher pregnancy rates were found in the randomized controlled trials (odds ratio [OR] 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.33) when a GnRH antagonist was added to a gonadotropin superovulated IUI protocol. Early published studies with smaller sample sizes showed stronger associations (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.15-4.63) than later studies (OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.79-2.23). CONCLUSION(S): From the randomized controlled trials of this meta-analysis, it is clear that allowing for follicle growth and avoiding premature LH rise, increased pregnancy rates are observed with GnRH antagonist administration. A parallel trend for multiple pregnancy rates in the GnRH antagonist group was observed, although this did not reach statistical significance. The flexible regimen was widely used. This meta-analysis of early data might enhance further research in this direction.

Diagnostic efficiency, embryonic development and clinical outcome after the biopsy of one or two blastomeres for preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis or screening (PGD, PGS) involves embryo biopsy on Day 3. Opting for one- or two-cell biopsy is a balance between the lowest risk for misdiagnosis on the one hand and the highest chance for a pregnancy on the other hand. METHODS: A prospective controlled trial was designed and 592 ICSI cycles were randomly assigned to the one-cell (group I) or the two-cell group (group II). Primary outcomes were diagnostic efficiency and embryonic development to delivery with live birth (analysed by cycle). The false-positive rate for the PCR cycles is presented as a secondary outcome (analysed by embryo). RESULTS: A strong significant correlation was observed between embryonic developmental stage on Day 3 and post-biopsy in vitro development on Day 5 (P < 0.0001). The influence of the intervention on Day 3 was less significant (P = 0.007): the biopsy of one cell is less invasive than the biopsy of two cells. PCR diagnostic efficiency was 88.6% in group I and 96.4% in group II (P = 0.008). For the fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) PGD cycles no significant difference in efficiency was obtained (98.2 and 97.5% in group I and II, respectively). Similar delivery rates with live birth per started cycle were obtained [58/287 or 20.2% in group I versus 52/303 or 17.2% in group II, P = 0.358; the absolute risk reduction = 3.05%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.24, 9.34]. Post-PGD PCR reanalysis showed six false positives in 97 embryos (6.2%) in group II and none in group I (91 embryos reanalysed). No false negatives were found. CONCLUSIONS: While removal of two blastomeres decreases the likelihood of blastocyst formation, compared with removal of one blastomere, Day 3 in vitro developmental stage is a stronger predictor for Day 5 developmental potential than the removal of one or two cells. The biopsy of only one cell significantly lowers the efficiency of a PCR-based diagnosis, whereas the efficiency of the FISH PGD procedure remains similar whether one or two cells are removed. Delivery rates with live birth per started cycle were not significantly different.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Marfan syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and apply efficient and reliable protocols for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for Marfan syndrome. DESIGN: Two mutation-specific protocols were developed, and the markers D15S1028, D15S992, D15S196, D15S576, D15S123, and D15S143 were used to set up four multiplex polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). SETTING: Research Center Reproduction and Genetics. PATIENT(S): Ten couples carrying mutations in the FBN1 gene. INTERVENTION(S): Six PGD protocols were developed for 10 couples, and 7 of them underwent a total of 16 clinical cycles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Amplification, allele drop-out (ADO), and contamination rates during the preclinical assays. DNA analyses of blastomeres from embryos biopsied during PGD cycles. RESULT(S): Six different protocols were set up, with the main objective being to to use one protocol for several couples. A total of 16 PGD cycles were performed, which resulted in the delivery of an unaffected boy and three ongoing pregnancies. CONCLUSION(S): The development of single-cell multiplex PCRs for linked markers and its use in PGD reduce the workload of the genetic diagnostic laboratory as well as the average waiting time for patients. This approach also allows for the simultaneous and accurate detection of recombination, contamination, and ADO, thereby increasing the reliability of the diagnosis.