Confirmation and pathogenicity of small copy number variations incidentally detected via a targeted next-generation sequencing-based PGT-A platform.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the technical accuracy, inheritance, and pathogenicity of small copy number variants (CNVs) detected by a targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based PGT-A platform. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study performed between 2020-2022. SUBJECTS: 12,157 patients who underwent clinical PGT-A performed by targeted NGS for whole chromosome and large segmental aneuploidies. EXPOSURE: An incidental finding was reported when a CNV gain/loss of at least three consecutive amplicons appeared in at least two embryos from the same IVF cycle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were the specificity, incidence, inheritance, and pathogenicity of small CNVs detected by the PGT-A platform. Accuracy of the PGT-A platform CNV calls was assessed via concordance with the CNV calls (size and genomic location) on chromosomal microarray of the gamete provider(s). Parental origin of the CNV and pathogenicity classifications were also reported. RESULTS: In 75 of 12,157 unique PGT-A patients (0.62%;95%CI:0.5-0.8%), an incidental finding that met reporting criteria was identified. Chromosomal microarray follow-up was requested for all cases and results were received for one or both members of 65 reproductive couples. In all cases, one of the gamete providers was confirmed to have the CNV identified in the embryos (100.0%: N=65/65 95%CI:94.5-100). The identified CNV was of maternal origin in 34 cases (52.3%) and of paternal origin in 31 cases (47.7%). A significant correlation was identified between PGT-A-predicted CNV sizes and chromosomal microarray detected sizes (r=0.81) and genomic coordinates on parental DNA. Twenty-six (40%) of the CNVs were classified as benign/likely benign, 30 (46.2%) as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), and 9 (13.8%) as pathogenic/likely pathogenic. CONCLUSION: Certain PGT-A platforms may enable the detection of inherited, small CNVs with extremely high specificity without prior knowledge of parental status. The majority of CNVs in this data set were confirmed to be benign/likely benign or a VUS; however, pathogenic/likely pathogenic CNVs associated with a broad range of phenotypic features may also be detected, although a reliable negative predictive value for small CNVs with current PGT-A technologies is unknown due to the many technical challenges.

In vitro fertilization and perinatal outcomes of patients with advanced maternal age after single frozen euploid embryo transfer: a propensity score-matched analysis of autologous and donor cycles.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate in vitro fertilization (IVF) and perinatal outcomes of donor egg and autologous cycles in patients with advanced reproductive age after undergoing single frozen euploid embryo transfer. DESIGN: A multicenter, retrospective, cohort study. SETTING: University-affiliated and private IVF centers. PATIENT(S): Patients aged 39-46 years who underwent IVF with intracytoplasmic sperm injection and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy using whole-chromosome sequencing with donor (n = 278) or autologous (n = 278) oocytes between October 2017 and October 2021. INTERVENTION(S): Single frozen euploid embryo transfer with donor or autologous euploid embryo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The main outcome measure was the live birth rate (LBR) after the first embryo transfer, calculated per embryo transfer. The secondary outcomes included the implantation rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, and gestational age and birth weight at the time of delivery. RESULT(S): Patients using donor or autologous oocytes had a similar likelihood of implantation (57.91% [51.87-63.78] vs. 57.19% [51.15-63.09]) and LBR (41.01% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 35.17-47.04] vs. 42.45% [95% CI, 36.56-48.49]). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the ectopic pregnancy rate (0.72% [0.09-2.57] vs. 0.36% [0.01-1.99]), miscarriage rate (16.19% [12.06-21.05] vs. 14.39% [95% CI, 10.48-19.08]), gestational age (38.50 [38.08-38.92] vs. 39.16 [38.25-40.07] weeks), or birth weight of infants (2,982.25 [2,606.69-3,357.81] vs. 3,128.24 [2,962.30-3,294.17] kg). The univariate analysis showed no association between advanced maternal age and the LBR (relative risk, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.84-1.25]). Multivariate analysis using putative confounders for embryo competency found no associations with LBR (adjusted relative risk, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.75-1.98]). CONCLUSION(S): Patients with euploid blastocysts derived from donor or autologous oocytes did not reveal statistically significant differences in the LBR, implantation rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, duration of gestation, or infant birth weight. These findings suggest that age-related reproductive decline and/or poor IVF outcomes associated with women with advanced reproductive age undergoing IVF are heavily driven by embryonic aneuploidy.

An ESHG-ESHRE survey on the current practice of expanded carrier screening in medically assisted reproduction.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the current practice and views on (expanded) carrier screening ((E)CS) among healthcare professionals in medically assisted reproductive (MAR) practices in Europe? SUMMARY ANSWER: The findings show a limited support for ECS with less than half of the respondents affiliated to centres offering ECS, and substantial variation in practice between centres in Europe. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The availability of next-generation sequencing, which enables testing for large groups of genes simultaneously, has facilitated the introduction and expansion of ECS strategies, currently offered particularly in the private sector in the context of assisted reproduction. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional survey evaluating practice and current views among professionals working in MAR practice in different European countries was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool. The web-based questionnaire included questions on general information regarding the current practice of (E)CS in MAR and questions on what is offered, to whom the test is offered, and how it is offered. It consisted mostly of multiple-choice questions with comment boxes, but also included open questions on the respondents' attitudes/concerns relevant to (E)CS practice, and room to upload requested files (e.g. guidelines and gene panels). In total, 338 responses were collected from 8 February 2022 to 11 April 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The online survey was launched with an invitation email from the ESHRE central office (n = 4889 emails delivered) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) central office (n = 1790 emails delivered) sent to the ESHRE and ESHG members, and by social media posts. The survey was addressed to European MAR centres or gamete banks and to centres located in non-European countries participating in the European IVF-monitoring Consortium. Two reminder emails were sent. After exclusion of 39 incomplete responses received (e.g. only background information), 299 respondents from 40 different countries were included for analyses. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Overall, 42.5% (127/299) of respondents were affiliated to centres offering ECS. The perceived responsibility to enable prospective parents to make informed reproductive decisions and preventing suffering/burden for parents were the main reasons to offer ECS. A single ECS panel is offered by nearly 45% (39/87 received answers) of the centres offering ECS, 25.3% (22/87) of those centres offer a selection of ECS panels, and 29.9% (26/87) offer whole exome sequencing and a large in silico panel. Different ranges of panel sizes and conditions were included in the ECS panel(s) offered. Most of the respondents (81.8%; 72/88 received answers) indicated that the panels they offer are universal and target the entire population. Pathogenic variants (89.7%; 70/78 received answers), and to a lesser extent, likely pathogenic variants (64.1%%; 50/78 received answers), were included in the ECS report for individuals and couples undergoing MAR with their own gametes. According to 87.9% (80/91 received answers) of the respondents, patients have to pay to undergo an ECS test. Most respondents (76.2%; 61/80 received answers) reported that counselling is provided before and after the ECS test. Preimplantation genetic testing, the use of donor gametes, and prenatal diagnostic testing were the three main reproductive options discussed with identified carrier couples. The main reason, according to the respondents, for not offering ECS in their centre, was the lack of professional recommendations supporting ECS (52.5%; 73/139 received answers) and the high cost for couples or reimbursement not being available (49.6%; 69/139). The challenges and moral dilemmas encountered by the respondents revolved mainly around the content of the offer, including the variants classification and the heterogeneity of the panels, the counselling, and the cost of the test. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Although the total number of respondents was acceptable, the completion rate of the survey was suboptimal. In addition, the heterogeneity of answers to open-ended questions and the ambiguity of some of the answers, along with incomplete responses, posed a challenge in interpreting survey results. It is also plausible that some questions were not easily understood by the respondents. For this reason, response and non-response bias are acknowledged as further limitations of the survey. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The results of this survey could aid in identifying potential challenges or areas for improvement in the current practice of ECS in the MAR field and contribute to the discussion on how to address them. The results underline the need to stimulate a more knowledge-based debate on the complexity and the pros and cons of a possible implementation of ECS in MAR. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): All costs relating to the development process were covered from European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and European Society of Human Genetics funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. A.C. is full-time employee of Juno Genetics. L.H. declared receiving a research grant during the past 36 months from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. She has also participated in a Health Council report of the Netherlands on preconception carrier screening and collaborated with the VSOP Dutch Genetic Alliance (patient umbrella organization on rare and genetic disorders). L.H. and C.v.E. are affiliated with Amsterdam University Medical Centre, a hospital that offers ECS in a non-commercial setting. R.V. received honoraria for presentations from Merck Academy and is unpaid board member of the executive committee of the Spanish Fertility Society. The other authors had nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Screening embryos for polygenic disease risk: a review of epidemiological, clinical, and ethical considerations.

BACKGROUND: The genetic composition of embryos generated by in vitro fertilization (IVF) can be examined with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). Until recently, PGT was limited to detecting single-gene, high-risk pathogenic variants, large structural variants, and aneuploidy. Recent advances have made genome-wide genotyping of IVF embryos feasible and affordable, raising the possibility of screening embryos for their risk of polygenic diseases such as breast cancer, hypertension, diabetes, or schizophrenia. Despite a heated debate around this new technology, called polygenic embryo screening (PES; also PGT-P), it is already available to IVF patients in some countries. Several articles have studied epidemiological, clinical, and ethical perspectives on PES; however, a comprehensive, principled review of this emerging field is missing. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: This review has four main goals. First, given the interdisciplinary nature of PES studies, we aim to provide a self-contained educational background about PES to reproductive specialists interested in the subject. Second, we provide a comprehensive and critical review of arguments for and against the introduction of PES, crystallizing and prioritizing the key issues. We also cover the attitudes of IVF patients, clinicians, and the public towards PES. Third, we distinguish between possible future groups of PES patients, highlighting the benefits and harms pertaining to each group. Finally, our review, which is supported by ESHRE, is intended to aid healthcare professionals and policymakers in decision-making regarding whether to introduce PES in the clinic, and if so, how, and to whom. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for PubMed-indexed articles published between 1/1/2003 and 1/3/2024 using the terms 'polygenic embryo screening', 'polygenic preimplantation', and 'PGT-P'. We limited the review to primary research papers in English whose main focus was PES for medical conditions. We also included papers that did not appear in the search but were deemed relevant. OUTCOMES: The main theoretical benefit of PES is a reduction in lifetime polygenic disease risk for children born after screening. The magnitude of the risk reduction has been predicted based on statistical modelling, simulations, and sibling pair analyses. Results based on all methods suggest that under the best-case scenario, large relative risk reductions are possible for one or more diseases. However, as these models abstract several practical limitations, the realized benefits may be smaller, particularly due to a limited number of embryos and unclear future accuracy of the risk estimates. PES may negatively impact patients and their future children, as well as society. The main personal harms are an unindicated IVF treatment, a possible reduction in IVF success rates, and patient confusion, incomplete counselling, and choice overload. The main possible societal harms include discarded embryos, an increasing demand for 'designer babies', overemphasis of the genetic determinants of disease, unequal access, and lower utility in people of non-European ancestries. Benefits and harms will vary across the main potential patient groups, comprising patients already requiring IVF, fertile people with a history of a severe polygenic disease, and fertile healthy people. In the United States, the attitudes of IVF patients and the public towards PES seem positive, while healthcare professionals are cautious, sceptical about clinical utility, and concerned about patient counselling. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: The theoretical potential of PES to reduce risk across multiple polygenic diseases requires further research into its benefits and harms. Given the large number of practical limitations and possible harms, particularly unnecessary IVF treatments and discarded viable embryos, PES should be offered only within a research context before further clarity is achieved regarding its balance of benefits and harms. The gap in attitudes between healthcare professionals and the public needs to be narrowed by expanding public and patient education and providing resources for informative and unbiased genetic counselling.

Healthy live birth following embryo transfer of a blastocyst of tetrapronuclear (4PN) origin: a case report.

During IVF treatments, normal fertilization is generally evidenced by the appearance of two pronuclei, one arising from the oocyte and the other from the male gamete. Embryos derived from zygotes with a pronuclei number other than two are assumed to possess a ploidy abnormality and their transfer is usually avoided owing to increased risk of implantation failure, miscarriage, and molar pregnancies. Nonetheless, the inclusion of genotyping data in preimplantation genetic testing has revealed that a normal diploid configuration is possible in embryos deriving from zygotes with an abnormal pronuclei number such as tripronuclear and one pronucleus. Here, we present a one-of-a-kind transfer of a tetrapronuclear-derived embryo that was discovered to be diploid and negative for other whole chromosome or segmental aneuploidies during preimplantation genetic testing using a targeted next-generation sequencing approach. The transfer resulted in the live birth of a healthy infant who is now 4 years old and has no apparent health or developmental impairments.

Implementing preconception expanded carrier screening in a universal health care system: A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis.

PURPOSE: The limited evidence available on the cost-effectiveness (CE) of expanded carrier screening (ECS) prevents its widespread use in most countries, including Italy. Herein, we aimed to estimate the CE of 3 ECS panels (ie, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics [ACMG] Tier 1 screening, "Focused Screening," testing 15 severe, highly penetrant conditions, and ACMG Tier 3 screening) compared with no screening, the health care model currently adopted in Italy. METHODS: The reference population consisted of Italian couples seeking pregnancy with no increased personal/familial genetic risk. The CE model was developed from the perspective of the Italian universal health care system and was based on the following assumptions: 100% sensitivity of investigated screening strategies, 77% intervention rate of at-risk couples (ARCs), and no risk to conceive an affected child by risk-averse couples opting for medical interventions. RESULTS: The incremental CE ratios generated by comparing each genetic screening panel with no screening were: -14,875 ± 1,208 €/life years gained (LYG) for ACMG1S, -106,863 ± 2,379 €/LYG for Focused Screening, and -47,277 ± 1,430 €/LYG for ACMG3S. ACMG1S and Focused Screening were dominated by ACMG3S. The parameter uncertainty did not significantly affect the outcome of the analyses. CONCLUSION: From a universal health care system perspective, all the 3 ECS panels considered in the study would be more cost-effective than no screening.

Opening the black box: why do euploid blastocysts fail to implant? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A normal chromosomal constitution defined through PGT-A assessing all chromosomes on trophectoderm (TE) biopsies represents the strongest predictor of embryo implantation. Yet, its positive predictive value is not higher than 50-60%. This gap of knowledge on the causes of euploid blastocysts' reproductive failure is known as 'the black box of implantation'. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: Several embryonic, maternal, paternal, clinical, and IVF laboratory features were scrutinized for their putative association with reproductive success or implantation failure of euploid blastocysts. SEARCH METHODS: A systematic bibliographical search was conducted without temporal limits up to August 2021. The keywords were '(blastocyst OR day5 embryo OR day6 embryo OR day7 embryo) AND (euploid OR chromosomally normal OR preimplantation genetic testing) AND (implantation OR implantation failure OR miscarriage OR abortion OR live birth OR biochemical pregnancy OR recurrent implantation failure)'. Overall, 1608 items were identified and screened. We included all prospective or retrospective clinical studies and randomized-controlled-trials (RCTs) that assessed any feature associated with live-birth rates (LBR) and/or miscarriage rates (MR) among non-mosaic euploid blastocyst transfer after TE biopsy and PGT-A. In total, 41 reviews and 372 papers were selected, clustered according to a common focus, and thoroughly reviewed. The PRISMA guideline was followed, the PICO model was adopted, and ROBINS-I and ROB 2.0 scoring were used to assess putative bias. Bias across studies regarding the LBR was also assessed using visual inspection of funnel plots and the trim and fill method. Categorical data were combined with a pooled-OR. The random-effect model was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Between-study heterogeneity was addressed using I2. Whenever not suitable for the meta-analysis, the included studies were simply described for their results. The study protocol was registered at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (registration number CRD42021275329). OUTCOMES: We included 372 original papers (335 retrospective studies, 30 prospective studies and 7 RCTs) and 41 reviews. However, most of the studies were retrospective, or characterized by small sample sizes, thus prone to bias, which reduces the quality of the evidence to low or very low. Reduced inner cell mass (7 studies, OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.27-0.52, I2 = 53%), or TE quality (9 studies, OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.43-0.67, I2 = 70%), overall blastocyst quality worse than Gardner's BB-grade (8 studies, OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.24-0.67, I2 = 83%), developmental delay (18 studies, OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.49-0.63, I2 = 47%), and (by qualitative analysis) some morphodynamic abnormalities pinpointed through time-lapse microscopy (abnormal cleavage patterns, spontaneous blastocyst collapse, longer time of morula formation I, time of blastulation (tB), and duration of blastulation) were all associated with poorer reproductive outcomes. Slightly lower LBR, even in the context of PGT-A, was reported among women ≥38 years (7 studies, OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.75-1.00, I2 = 31%), while obesity was associated with both lower LBR (2 studies, OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55-0.79, I2 = 0%) and higher MR (2 studies, OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.08-2.99, I2 = 52%). The experience of previous repeated implantation failures (RIF) was also associated with lower LBR (3 studies, OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.55-0.93, I2 = 0%). By qualitative analysis, among hormonal assessments, only abnormal progesterone levels prior to transfer were associated with LBR and MR after PGT-A. Among the clinical protocols used, vitrified-warmed embryo transfer was more effective than fresh transfer (2 studies, OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.05-2.33, I2 = 23%) after PGT-A. Lastly, multiple vitrification-warming cycles (2 studies, OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.22-0.77, I2 = 50%) or (by qualitative analysis) a high number of cells biopsied may slightly reduce the LBR, while simultaneous zona-pellucida opening and TE biopsy allowed better results than the Day 3 hatching-based protocol (3 studies, OR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.18-1.69, I2 = 0%). WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Embryo selection aims at shortening the time-to-pregnancy, while minimizing the reproductive risks. Knowing which features are associated with the reproductive competence of euploid blastocysts is therefore critical to define, implement, and validate safer and more efficient clinical workflows. Future research should be directed towards: (i) systematic investigations of the mechanisms involved in reproductive aging beyond de novo chromosomal abnormalities, and how lifestyle and nutrition may accelerate or exacerbate their consequences; (ii) improved evaluation of the uterine and blastocyst-endometrial dialogue, both of which represent black boxes themselves; (iii) standardization/automation of embryo assessment and IVF protocols; (iv) additional invasive or preferably non-invasive tools for embryo selection. Only by filling these gaps we may finally crack the riddle behind 'the black box of implantation'.

The use of copy number loads to designate mosaicism in blastocyst stage PGT-A cycles: fewer is better.

STUDY QUESTION: How well can whole chromosome copy number analysis from a single trophectoderm (TE) biopsy predict true mosaicism configurations in human blastocysts? SUMMARY ANSWER: When a single TE biopsy is tested, wide mosaicism thresholds (i.e. 20-80% of aneuploid cells) increase false positive calls compared to more stringent ones (i.e. 30-70% of aneuploid cells) without improving true detection rate, while binary classification (aneuploid/euploid) provides the highest diagnostic accuracy. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Next-generation sequencing-based technologies for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) allow the identification of intermediate chromosome copy number alterations potentially associated with chromosomal mosaicism in TE biopsies. Most validation studies are based on models mimicking mosaicism, e.g. mixtures of cell lines, and cannot be applied to the clinical interpretation of TE biopsy specimens. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The accuracy of different mosaicism diagnostic thresholds was assessed by comparing chromosome copy numbers in multiple samples from each blastocyst. Enrolled embryos were donated for research between June 2019 and September 2020. The Institutional Review Board at the Near East University approved the study (project: YDU/2019/70-849). Embryos showing euploid/aneuploid mosaicism (n = 53), uniform chromosomal alterations (single or multiple) (n = 25), or uniform euploidy (n = 39) in their clinical TE biopsy were disaggregated into five portions: the inner cell mass (ICM) and four TE segments. Collectively, 585 samples from 117 embryos were analysed. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Donated blastocysts were warmed, allowed to re-expand, and disaggregated in TE portions and ICM. PGT-A analysis was performed using Ion ReproSeq PGS kit and Ion S5 sequencer (ThermoFisher). Sequencing data were blindly analysed with Ion Reporter software to estimate raw chromosome copy numbers. Intra-blastocyst comparison of copy number data was performed employing different thresholds commonly used for mosaicism detection. From copy number data, different case scenarios were created using more stringent (30-70%) or less stringent criteria (20-80%). Categorical variables were compared using the two-sample z test for proportions. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: When all the five biopsies from the same embryo were analysed with 30-70% thresholds, only 8.4% (n = 14/166) of patterns abnormal in the original analysis revealed a true mosaic configuration, displaying evidence of reciprocal events (3.6%, n = 6/166) or confirmation in additional biopsies (4.8%, n = 8/166), while most mosaic results (87.3% of total predicted mosaic patterns) remained confined to a single TE specimen. Conversely, uniform whole chromosome aneuploidies (28.3% of total patterns, n = 47/166) were confirmed in all subsequent biopsies in 97.9% of cases (n = 46/47). When 20-80% thresholds were employed (instead of 30-70%), the overall mosaicism rate per biopsy increased from 20.2% (n = 114/565) to 40.2% (n = 227/565). However, the use of a wider threshold range did not contribute to the detection of additional true mosaic patterns, while significantly increasing false positive mosaic patterns from 57.8% to 79.5% (n = 96/166; 95% CI = 49.9-65.4 vs n = 271/341; 95% CI = 74.8-83.6, respectively) (P < 0.00001). Moreover, the shift of the aneuploid cut-off from 70% to 80% of aneuploid cells resulted in mosaicism overcalling in the high range (50-80% of aneuploid cells), impacting the accuracy of uniform aneuploid classification. Parametric analysis of thresholds, based on multifocal analysis, revealed that a binary classification scheme with a single cut-off at a 50% level provided the highest sensitivity and specificity rates. Further analysis on technical noise distribution at the chromosome level revealed a greater impact on smaller chromosomes. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: While enrolment of a population enriched in embryos showing intermediate chromosome copy numbers enhanced the evaluation of the mosaicism category compared with random sampling such study population selection is likely to lead to an overall underestimation of PGT-A accuracy compared to a general assessment of unselected clinical samples. This approach involved the analysis of aneuploidy chromosome copy number thresholds at the embryo level; future studies will need to evaluate these criteria in relation to clinical predictive values following embryo transfers for different PGT-A assays. Moreover, the study lacked genotyping-based confirmation analysis. Finally, aneuploid embryos with known meiotic partial deletion/duplication were not included. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Current technologies can detect low-intermediate chromosome copy numbers in preimplantation embryos but their identification is poorly correlated with consistent propagation of the anomaly throughout the embryo or with negative clinical consequences when transferred. Therefore, when a single TE biopsy is analysed, diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism should be evaluated carefully. Indeed, the use of wider mosaicism thresholds (i.e. 20-80%) should be avoided as it reduces the overall PGT-A diagnostic accuracy by increasing the risk of false positive mosaic classification and false negative aneuploid classification. From a clinical perspective, this approach has negative consequences for patients as it leads to the potential deselection of normal embryos for transfer. Moreover, a proportion of uniform aneuploid embryos may be inaccurately categorized as high-level mosaic, with a consequent negative outcome (i.e. miscarriage) when inadvertently selected for transfer. Clinical outcomes following PGT-A are maximized when a 50% threshold is employed as it offers the most accurate diagnostic approach. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was supported by Igenomix. The authors not employed by Igenomix have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Investigating the significance of segmental aneuploidy findings in preimplantation embryos.

Segmental aneuploidies (SAs) are structural imbalances, namely, gains or losses, involving a chromosomal segment. Most preimplantation genetic testing platforms can detect segmental imbalances greater than 5-10 Mb, either full or mosaic; however, questions remain about clinical significance. An in-depth review was performed to determine the accuracy, frequency, and types of SAs detected in preimplantation embryos. A comprehensive search of the literature revealed an incidence of approximately 8.15% in preimplantation embryos, compared with a prevalence of 3.55% in prenatal diagnosis samples. Several studies have used rebiopsy analysis to validate the accuracy and reproducibility of such findings in blastocyst-stage embryos. A comparison of these studies yielded a mean confirmation rate of SAs slightly higher than 30%. This result could be attributed to their mitotic origin as well as to the technical limitations of preimplantation genetic testing. In addition, the few available studies in which embryos with a segmental finding were transferred in utero are analyzed to discuss the reproductive competence of such embryos. Except for 1 study, all outcomes were described for segmental embryos in a mosaic state. As a result, there is still insufficient evidence to provide accurate information about the effect of segmental imbalances on embryonic reproductive competence and to determine gestational and newborn risks.

The human periconceptional maternal-embryonic space in health and disease.

Pregnancy is established during the periconceptional period as a continuum beginning with blastocyst attachment to the endometrial epithelial surface followed by embryo invasion and placenta formation. This period sets the foundation for the child and mother's health during pregnancy. Emerging evidence indicates that prevention of downstream pathologies in both the embryo/newborn and pregnant mother may be possible at this stage. In this review, we discuss current advances in the periconceptional space, including the preimplantation human embryo and maternal endometrium. We also discuss the role of the maternal decidua, the periconceptional maternal-embryonic interface, the dialogue between these elements, and the importance of the endometrial microbiome in the implantation process and pregnancy. Finally, we discuss the myometrium in the periconceptional space and review its role in determining pregnancy health.

Update on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and outcomes of embryos with mosaic results.

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) is used as a frequent add-on for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) to improve clinical outcomes. The purpose is to select a euploid embryo following chromosomal testing on embryo biopsies. The current practice includes comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) technology applied on trophectoderm (TE) biopsies. Despite its widespread use, PGT-A remains a controversial topic mainly because all of the RCTs comprised only good prognosis patients with 2 or more blastocysts available; hence the results are not generalizable to all groups of patients. Furthermore, with the introduction of the highly-sensitive platforms into clinical practice (i.e. next-generation sequencing [NGS]), a result consistent with intermediate copy number surfaced and is termed "Mosaic," consistent with a mixture of euploid and aneuploid cells within the biopsy sample. The optimal disposition and management of embryos with mosaic results is still an open question, as many 'mosaics' generated healthy live births with no identifiable congenital anomalies. The present article provides a complete and comprehensive up-to-date review on PGT-A. It discusses in detail the findings of all the published RCTs on PGT-A with CCS, comments on the subject of "mosaicism" and its current management, and describes the latest technique of non-invasive PGT-A.

ESHRE survey results and good practice recommendations on managing chromosomal mosaicism.

STUDY QUESTION: How should ART/preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) centres manage the detection of chromosomal mosaicism following PGT? SUMMARY ANSWER: Thirty good practice recommendations were formulated that can be used by ART/PGT centres as a basis for their own policy with regards to the management of 'mosaic' embryos. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The use of comprehensive chromosome screening technologies has provided a variety of data on the incidence of chromosomal mosaicism at the preimplantation stage of development and evidence is accumulating that clarifies the clinical outcomes after transfer of embryos with putative mosaic results, with regards to implantation, miscarriage and live birth rates, and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: This document was developed according to a predefined methodology for ESHRE good practice recommendations. Recommendations are supported by data from the literature, a large survey evaluating current practice and published guidance documents. The literature search was performed using PubMed and focused on studies published between 2010 and 2022. The survey was performed through a web-based questionnaire distributed to members of the ESHRE special interest groups (SIG) Reproductive Genetics and Embryology, and the ESHRE PGT Consortium members. It included questions on ART and PGT, reporting, embryo transfer policy and follow-up of transfers. The final dataset represents 239 centres. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: The working group (WG) included 16 members with expertise on the ART/PGT process and chromosomal mosaicism. The recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the expert opinion of the WG, while taking into consideration the published data and results of the survey. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Eighty percent of centres that biopsy three or more cells report mosaicism, even though only 66.9% of all centres have validated their technology and only 61.8% of these have validated specifically for the calling of chromosomal mosaicism. The criteria for designating mosaicism, reporting and transfer policies vary significantly across the centres replying to the survey. The WG formulated recommendations on how to manage the detection of chromosomal mosaicism in clinical practice, considering validation, risk assessment, designating and reporting mosaicism, embryo transfer policies, prenatal testing and follow-up. Guidance is also provided on the essential elements that should constitute the consent forms and the genetic report, and that should be covered in genetic counselling. As there are several unknowns in chromosomal mosaicism, it is recommended that PGT centres monitor emerging data on the topic and adapt or refine their policy whenever new insights are available from evidence. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Rather than providing instant standardized advice, the recommendations should help ART/PGT centres in developing their own policy towards the management of putative mosaic embryos in clinical practice. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This document will help facilitate a more knowledge-based approach for dealing with chromosomal mosaicism in different centres. In addition to recommendations for clinical practice, recommendations for future research were formulated. Following up on these will direct research towards existing research gaps with direct translation to clinical practice. Emerging data will help in improving guidance, and a more evidence-based approach of managing chromosomal mosaicism. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The WG received technical support from ESHRE. M.D.R. participated in the EQA special advisory group, outside the submitted work, and is the chair of the PGT WG of the Belgian society for human genetics. D.W. declared receiving salary from Juno Genetics, UK. A.C. is an employee of Igenomix, Italy and C.R. is an employee of Igenomix, Spain. C.S. received a research grant from FWO, Belgium, not related to the submitted work. I.S. declared being a Co-founder of IVFvision Ltd, UK. J.R.V. declared patents related to 'Methods for haplotyping single-cells' and 'Haplotyping and copy number typing using polymorphic variant allelic frequencies', and being a board member of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS) and International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD). K.S. reported being Chair-elect of ESHRE. The other authors had nothing to disclose. DISCLAIMER: This Good Practice Recommendations (GPR) document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and are based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation.  ESHRE GPRs should be used for information and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care, or be exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, or variations based on locality and facility type.  Furthermore, ESHRE GPRs do not constitute or imply the endorsement, or favouring, of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Considerations on the use of carrier screening testing in human reproduction: comparison between recommendations from the Italian Society of Human Genetics and other international societies.

PURPOSE: Carrier screening (CS) is a term used to describe a genetic test performed on individuals without family history of genetic disorders, to investigate the carrier status for pathogenic variants associated with multiple recessive conditions. The advent of next-generation sequencing enabled simultaneous CS for an increasing number of conditions; however, a consensus on which diseases to include in gene panels and how to best develop the provision of CS is far to be reached. Therefore, the provision of CS is jeopardized and inconsistent and requires solving several important issues. METHODS: In 2020, the Italian Society of Human Genetics (SIGU) established a working group composed of clinical and laboratory geneticists from public and private fields to elaborate a document to define indications and best practice of CS provision for couples planning a pregnancy. RESULTS: Hereby, we present the outcome of the Italian working group's activity and compare it with previously published international recommendations (American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG)). We determine a core message on genetic counseling and nine main subject categories to explore, spanning from goals and execution to technical scientific, ethical, and socio-economic topics. Moreover, a level of agreement on the most critical points is discussed using a 5-point agreement scale, demonstrating a high level of consensus among the four societies. CONCLUSIONS: This document is intended to provide genetic and healthcare professionals involved in human reproduction with guidance regarding the clinical implementation of CS.

On the reproductive capabilities of aneuploid human preimplantation embryos.

In IVF cycles, the application of aneuploidy testing at the blastocyst stage is quickly growing, and the latest reports estimate almost half of cycles in the US undergo preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). Following PGT-A cycles, understanding the predictive value of an aneuploidy result is paramount for making informed decisions about the embryo's fate and utilization. Compelling evidence from non-selection trials strongly supports that embryos diagnosed with a uniform whole-chromosome aneuploidy very rarely result in the live birth of a healthy baby, while their transfer exposes women to significant risks of miscarriage and chromosomally abnormal pregnancy. On the other hand, embryos displaying low range mosaicism for whole chromosomes have shown reproductive capabilities somewhat equivalent to uniformly euploid embryos, and they have comparable clinical outcomes and gestational risks. Therefore, given their clearly distinct biological origin and clinical consequences, careful differentiation between uniform and mosaic aneuploidy is critical in both the clinical setting when counseling individuals and in the research setting when presenting aneuploidy studies in human embryology. Here, we focus on the evidence gathered so far on PGT-A diagnostic predictive values and reproductive outcomes observed across the broad spectrum of whole-chromosome aneuploidies detected at the blastocyst stage to obtain evidence-based conclusions on the clinical management of aneuploid embryos in the quickly growing PGT-A clinical setting.

Maternal exome analysis for the diagnosis of oocyte maturation defects and early embryonic developmental arrest.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a methodology be developed for case selection and whole-exome sequencing (WES) analysis of women who are infertile owing to recurrent oocyte maturation defects (OOMD) and/or preimplantation embryo lethality (PREMBL)? DESIGN: Data were collected from IVF patients attending the Istanbul Memorial Hospital (2015-2021). A statistical methodology to identify infertile endophenotypes (recurrent low oocyte maturation rate, low fertilization rate and preimplantation developmental arrest) was developed using a large IVF dataset (11,221 couples). Twenty-eight infertile women with OOMD/PREMBL were subsequently enrolled for WES on their genomic DNA. Pathogenic variants were prioritized using a custom-made bioinformatic pipeline set to minimize false-positive discoveries through resampling in control cohorts (the Human Genome Diversity Project and 1343 whole-exome sequences from oocyte donors). Individual single-cell RNA sequencing data from 18 human metaphase II (MII) oocytes and antral granulosa cells was used for genome-wide validation. WES and bioinformatics were performed at Igenomix and the National Research Council, Italy. RESULTS: Variant prioritization analysis identified 265 unique variants in 248 genes (average 22.4 per sample). Of the genes harbouring high-impact variants 78% were expressed by MII oocytes and/or antral granulosa cells, significantly higher than for random sample of controls (odds ratio = 5, Fisher's exact P = 0.0004). Seven of the 28 women (25%) were homozygous carriers of missense pathogenic variants in known candidate genes for OOMD/PREMBL, including PATL2, NLRP5 (n = 2),TLE6, PADI6, TUBB8 and TRIP13. Furthermore, novel gene-disease associations were identified. In fact, one woman with a low oocyte maturation rate was a homozygous carrier of high-impact variants in ENSA, an essential gene for prophase I meiotic transition in mice. CONCLUSIONS: This analytical framework could reveal known and new genes associated with isolated recurrent OOMD/PREMBL, providing essential indications for scaling this strategy to larger studies.