MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4381612330 · doi:10.1093/humrep/dead093.626

P-268 Artificial intelligence (AI) image analysis outperforms patient age as a surrogate marker for oocyte quality, demonstrating an increased accuracy in predicting blastocyst development

2023· article· en· W4381612330 sur OpenAlexaff
N Mercuri, J Fjeldstad, Mansooreh Jaberipour, N Siddique, Dan Nayot

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueReproductive Biology and Fertility
Établissements canadiensCReATe Fertility Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBlastocystOocyteAndrologyCohortFertilityMedicineBiologyGynecologyEmbryogenesisEmbryoInternal medicinePopulationGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Study question Can an AI image analysis tool (VIOLET) provide better predictions of oocyte potential than the current standard, patient age, as it relates to blastocyst development? Summary answer While increasing patient age slightly correlates with decreases in blastocyst development, VIOLET provides personalized assessments of individual oocytes correlated to blastocyst development with improved accuracy. What is known already Increasing patient age correlates to decreases in oocyte competency, leading to greater challenges in successful fertility treatment. Clinically, patient age is used to estimate probabilities of success based on national databases. Such as the case in oocyte cryopreservation cycles, considering only age and number of mature oocytes vitrified. However, oocyte quality may vary widely between patients of the same age, and even within each cohort of oocytes. VIOLET is an AI tool that assesses images of mature denuded oocytes to provide an analysis shown to significantly correlate with subsequent blastocyst development and quality, consistently outperforming embryologists in this task. Study design, size, duration This large-scale retrospective study assessed 9,120 mature denuded oocytes retrieved during 2014-2022, representing 1,384 patients between ages 19-49, attending 7 fertility clinics across 5 countries. The VIOLET prediction model is based on image analysis of mature denuded oocytes, without incorporating clinical variables, such as age. Patient age was used to build a separate predictive model of blastocyst development (10,947 training and 3,750 validation samples) to assess the predictive value of age in comparison to VIOLET. Participants/materials, setting, methods Blastocyst development was determined by embryos achieving a Gardner grade by Day5/6 post-ICSI. Blastocyst rates per oocyte cohort were calculated by number of blastocysts divided by total number of mature oocytes retrieved. Various machine learning techniques were trialed to build the predictive model strictly using age; with Random Forest model providing the best-balanced performance. VIOLET and the age model assessed the images and age of 9,120 mature denuded oocytes, respectively, providing predictions of blastocyst development. Main results and the role of chance Blastocyst development was significantly different between patients <35 years old compared to those ≥35 years old [47% vs 42%; p < 0.05 by Two Proportion Z-test]; however, not when the older age group was stratified further. On a patient level, the cohort of oocytes was evaluated by the blastocyst development ratio. Among four age groups (<35, 35-37, 37-40, >40), the blastocyst development ratios per cohort were very similar, with overlapping distributions of 84-94% using Kernel Density estimates. Thus, patient age group does not provide enough information to explain blastocyst development success for an individual oocyte or within an oocyte cohort. In comparison, VIOLET probability is significantly correlated to blastocyst development (p < 0.05; Welch’s Two sample t-test). And blastocyst development rates display a stepwise positive correlation that is significantly different between VIOLET probability quartiles [24% vs 39% vs 47% vs 53%; p < 0.05 by Two Proportion Z-test], providing meaningful information on individual oocytes. Additionally, the predictive model built with age as the only feature had poor ability to predict blastocyst success of an individual oocyte with a limited area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.5—unable to separate positive and negative classes. This was outperformed by VIOLET, which displayed an AUC of 0.62 on the same unseen dataset. Limitations, reasons for caution Increasing maternal age causes increased chromosomal abnormalities in oocytes, which translates to lower efficacy with treatment outcomes; therefore, further research to assess VIOLET correlation with PGT-A and implantation outcomes is needed and underway. Wider implications of the findings Patient age correlates with blastocyst development on a general level; however, it does not provide meaningful insights to distinguish rates of blastocyst success on an individual oocyte or oocyte cohort level. VIOLET augments oocyte understanding over the current standard of care, which can be utilized to support personalized clinical decision-making. Trial registration number Not applicable.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,365
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,958

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,097
Tête enseignante GPT0,397
Écart entre enseignants0,300 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetReproductive Biology and FertilityTravaux en français237 207