Ranking and selection of MII oocytes in human ICSI cycles using gene expression levels from associated cumulus cells
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STUDY QUESTION: Can the ranked expression levels of a cohort of cumulus cell (CC) genes be used to select MII oocytes with a potential for blastocyst development and live birth? SUMMARY ANSWER: A ranking method containing four (HAS2, FSHR, VCAN, PR) of the eight genes evaluated in this study for identifying good quality MII oocytes provides a significantly better outcome compared with random selection and is equally as good as using all oocytes for ICSI. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Recent evidence has identified a number of candidate genes in CC that have the potential to serve as markers of oocyte quality; however, a reliable method for selecting MII oocytes with blastocyst and live birth potential remains a challenge. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A group of 25 patients (<38 years old) underwent rFSH-stimulated ICSI treatment with single embryo replacement (SET). A total of 270 cumulus cell-oocyte complexes (COCs) were recovered and assessed. MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Expression levels of eight candidate genes (HAS2, FSHR, SLC2A4, ALCAM, SFRP2, VCAN, NRP1 and PR), corrected for RPL19, were measured in individual CC masses using multiplex QPCR. Expression levels of individual CC masses were assessed and ranked in relation to oocyte developmental indicators (blastocyst formation and live birth). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: From the 25 women, 19 (76%) had achieved a successful live birth delivery following SET. In this population, the selection of MII oocytes according to relative ranking levels of a subset of CC-expressed genes provided a significantly higher chance of identifying a good quality oocyte compared with selecting MII oocytes randomly (blastocyst: 1× MII oocyte: 52 versus 23%, P = 0.008; 3× MII oocytes: 80 versus 52%, P = 0.002; live birth: 1× MII oocyte: 31 versus 15%, P<0.05, 3× MII oocytes: 60 versus 38%, P < 0.05) and a similar chance to that of using all oocytes available after recovery (blastocyst: 80% versus 96%, P = 0.085, live birth: 60% versus 76%, P = 0.206). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The present method was validated only for young (<38 years) women, with male infertility, who had no signs of androgenicity, PCOS or endometriosis and were free of any chronic disease. This is a retrospective study that requires further validation in an unselected population. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Results presented in this study could be used to assist the selection of oocytes with high blastocyst developmental potential in frozen oocyte cycles and for the selection of embryos with high developmental potential as early as 18 h after ICSI (2PN stage) in fresh human IVF cycles. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Funding was provided by Fertility Associates Ltd and the New Zealand Government. The authors declare there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».