MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4381885240 · doi:10.1093/humrep/dead093.237

O-196 Evidence-based management of mosaic embryos - a single Centre experience from prospective transfer and birth outcomes of 565 mosaic embryos

2023· article· en· W4381885240 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Mitko Madjunkov, Hanna Bałakier, Rina Abramov, S Chen, N. Logan, Arlene B. Baratz, Karen Glass, Pooja Sharma, Svetlana Madjunkova, C.L. Librach

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Établissements canadiensCReATe Fertility CentreSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMosaicEmbryo transferEmbryoPregnancyProspective cohort studyLive birthObstetricsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyGynecologyBiologyGeneticsInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Study question What are the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of prospective transfer of 565 mosaic embryos and what are the key determinants influencing the outcome? Summary answer Mosaic (diploid/aneuploid) embryos have a significant developmental potential with good neonatal outcomes allowing personalized management and evidence based prioritization of embryos for transfer. What is known already Since the first report of healthy babies born after mosaic transfer, the gradual accumulation of knowledge on mosaic embryo transfers in the International Registry of Mosaic Embryo Transfers provided the necessary reassurance for clinical management of mosaic embryos. Large and comprehensive data from single centres with consistent clinical genetic counselling and laboratory practices for preimplantation and prenatal testing offer valuable contribution to the current practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes after mosaic embryo transfers and to evaluate for associations between embryo genetic aberrations, static morphology and specific outcomes. Study design, size, duration This is a retrospective cohort study that took place in a single academic IVF centre (The CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Canada), where we analysed the results from high resolution PGT-A, embryo morphologic features and pregnancy outcomes of 3529 frozen embryo transfers from 2016-2022. Associated patient demographic data, transfer outcome and neonatal outcome of 2964 euploid and 565 mosaic embryo transfers were analyzed. Participants/materials, setting, methods All patients received genetic counselling prior to frozen embryo transfer. High resolution NGS PGT-A was performed using the Illumina platform and BluGnome and NxClinical for data analysis. Clinically relevant findings were aberrations >10Mb and mosaicism from 25%-75%. Comparison of clinical and morphological characteristics of euploid, low-level mosaic (25%-<50% aneuploid cells in trophectoderm biopsy), and high-level mosaics (50% -75%) was performed with R-statistical package, Mathlab and SSPS software. p < 0.05 with CI 95% was considered significant. Main results and the role of chance Of the total 565 mosaic embryos transferred 77.1% had mosaicism levels ≥25%-<50% (Group1-n=436): 54.8% had segmental chromosome mosaic (SCM)gain/loss, 45.2% had whole chromosome mosaicism(WCM)(trisomy/monosomy); and 22.9% had mosaic levels of ≥ 50-<70% (Group2-n=129)(50.4% with SCM and 49.6% with WCM). The overall ongoing pregnancy rate(OPR) for mosaic embryos was 33% and the miscarriage rate was 6%. Compared with euploid embryos, mosaic embryos have significantly lower implantation (p = 0,OD0.62-CI[0.5-0.7]) and OPR(p = 0,OD0.5-CI[0.4-0.6]). Pregnancy outcomes are determined by level of mosaicism: Group1 have better implantation(p = 0.005,OD1.8-CI[1.18-2.78]) and OPR compared to Group2. High level of mosaicism independently affected the OPR of SCM(p = 0.003) and WCM(p = 0.02) embryos. WCM had lower implantation rates compared to SCM (p = 0.005,OD1.6-CI[1.15-2.27]). Mosaic monosomies had the lowest impanation and OPR of all mosaic embryos (14% and 8%,respectively). Within Group1 and Group2 good static morphology was associated with higher OPR for SCM and WCM embryos. Birth outcomes were available for 118 babies from mosaic-FET and from 802 euploid-FET. There is no difference in duration of pregnancy and birth weight between mosaic and euploid-FET. No gross-fetal anomalies were reported in the mosaic group at birth. There was one termination<20GW due to fetal anomalies and one stillbirth. For euploid transfers, 11 had fetal anomalies, there were 7-terminations and 2-stillbirths. Limitations, reasons for caution Although this is the largest single centre study to date that evaluated genomic, morphology and outcome data of mosaic transfers, the numbers are still low to analyze the impact of specific chromosomal aberrations on pregnancy outcome. Wider implications of the findings Mosaic embryos should be considered for transfer and prioritized based on the level of mosaicism, type of chromosomal aberration and static morphology. The implantation potential is lower than euploid embryos however established pregnancies result in healthy babies born at term and normal birth weight. Trial registration number CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Canada

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
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 enseignants0,049
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,573

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
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 Opus0,052
Tête enseignante GPT0,296
Écart entre enseignants0,243 · 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

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsTravaux en français237 207