MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4400297119 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deae108.251

P-273 Image-based oocyte model predictive of blastocyst development correlates with ploidy status across a broad spectrum of PGT-A indications, accounting for confounding variables

2024· article· en· W4400297119 sur OpenAlexaff
Jonas Malmsten, Nikica Zaninović, N Mercuri, Qi Wang, Mansooreh Jaberipour, Dan Nayot, Zev Rosenwaks, J Fjeldstad

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueReproductive Biology and Fertility
Établissements canadiensCReATe Fertility Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBlastocystConfoundingOocyteBroad spectrumBiologyPloidyAndrologyStatisticsMedicineEmbryoGeneticsMathematicsChemistryEmbryogenesis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Study question Does MAGENTA, an AI assessment of oocyte quality, indicate ploidy potential of the developed blastocysts in the presence of confounding variables? Summary answer MAGENTA correlates to oocytes that develop into euploid embryos across diverse demographics, highlighting its robust ability to assess oocyte quality and genetic potential. What is known already MAGENTA is a non-invasive AI-image analysis tool that assesses images of mature oocytes and provides a score from 0-10, where higher scores indicate higher chances of developing into a blastocyst. MAGENTA has also displayed a correlation to blastocyst morphological quality. The ploidy status of blastocysts plays a significant role in cycle success and is often utilized for the selection of embryos to transfer. Despite the selection of embryos based on their genetic normality, many transfers are unsuccessful. With most chromosomal errors arising in the oocyte, assessment at the gamete level is critical to improving outcomes. Study design, size, duration A retrospective study using CRM Weill Cornell Medicine data included 3,342 mature oocytes that developed into blastocysts and underwent PGT-A in 2021. Blastocysts tested as mosaic (n = 753) or inconclusive (n = 13) were excluded. Images of the oocytes were obtained immediately post-ICSI using EmbryoScope time-lapse incubators (Vitrolife, Sweden). Blastocyst morphological grades were categorized by quality: highest (ICM+TE grade A), high (ICM+TE grade A/B), medium (ICM+TE grade B), or low quality (ICM or TE grade C/D). Participants/materials, setting, methods Data was obtained from 629 patients (females 26-45 years old) with an average of 5.3 blastocysts (range 1-20) with PGT-A results per patient. MAGENTA assessed each oocyte image and provided a score (0-10), with higher scores representing a greater potential to develop into a blastocyst embryo. In this dataset, 1827 (55%) blastocysts were tested as euploid and 1515 (45%) were tested as aneuploid. PGT-A was conducted for various specific and non-specific indications in these patients. Main results and the role of chance MAGENTA was positively associated with oocytes that developed into blastocysts of increasing quality, with significance between highest and high-quality (7.4 vs 7.0,p<0.05) and medium and low-quality (6.9 vs 6.1,p<0.01). Of the blastocysts, the MAGENTA score further displayed significant differences between oocytes that developed into euploid (7.0) compared to aneuploid blastocysts (6.6) (p < 0.001;Welch’s t-test). Although MAGENTA does not predict ploidy, a threshold of 8.8 MAGENTA score was determined to best distinguish between ploidy outcomes with 61% euploidy rate above this threshold compared to 51% below, a significantly different proportion (p < 0.001;Two-Sample Proportions z-test). Therefore, oocytes scored ≥8.8 display a 19.6% relative increase in chance of developing into a euploid blastocyst. To account for female age, subgroup analysis was conducted and found MAGENTA scores to be significantly different between oocytes that developed into euploid and aneuploid blastocysts for patients <35 years old (7.2 vs 6.6, p < 0.01;Welch’s t-test) and ≥35 years old (6.8 vs. 6.5, p < 0.05;Welch’s t-test). Blastocyst morphological grade was also investigated as a confounding factor. No significant differences existed between MAGENTA scores of euploid and aneuploid blastocysts among the low, high, or highest-quality. Significantly, differences were only found within medium quality blastocysts (7.0 vs 6.6,p<0.05), which had the greatest sample size (n = 1854). Limitations, reasons for caution MAGENTA was not trained to predict euploid embryo development from images of mature oocytes. Further data is required to discern the correlation of MAGENTA to chromosomal ploidy status, apart from blastocyst quality. Additionally, investigation into sperm DNA fragmentation as a potential contributor to ploidy determination is warranted. Wider implications of the findings MAGENTA can identify oocytes of better quality that not only have higher chances of blastocyst development and higher morphological grades, but also indicates oocytes that are more likely to become euploid embryos across patients of various PGT-A indications and a broad age demographic. 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)0,001
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: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,304
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,651

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
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 Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,316
Écart entre enseignants0,290 · 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'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
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
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetReproductive Biology and FertilityTravaux en français237 207