MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4400297942 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deae108.004

O-004 Oocyte image assessment by novel artificial intelligence (AI) model predicts blastocyst PGT-A results, outperforming age as a predictor

2024· article· en· W4400297942 sur OpenAlexaffabout
N Mercuri, Mansooreh Jaberipour, A Krivoi, Dan Nayot, J Fjeldstad

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueReproductive Biology and Fertility
Établissements canadiensCReATe Fertility Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBlastocystOocyteArtificial intelligenceAndrologyComputer scienceMachine learningBiologyMedicineGeneticsEmbryo

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Study question Can a non-invasive, image analysis artificial intelligence (AI) model be built to predict the likelihood that a mature oocyte will develop into a euploid blastocyst? Summary answer A novel AI model was developed to assess images of mature oocytes, predicting chromosomal ploidy status of the developed blastocyst with an AUC of 0.71. What is known already The genetic status of blastocysts greatly impacts implantation and cycle success; therefore, PGT-A has become widely adopted as routine to aid in blastocyst selection for transfer and aims to decrease the time to pregnancy. Most chromosomal abnormalities arising in a blastocyst embryo are of maternal meiotic origin–indicating that the oocyte may have valuable information to be harnessed at the earliest stage in the process. Gaining insights into the potential genetic status of a blastocyst at the oocyte stage in a non-invasive manner would provide critical information to the overall fertility cycle. Study design, size, duration This study included a labeled dataset—9,260 images of mature denuded oocytes, immediately post-ICSI—from 3 clinics (Canada, United States (US), Spain) with euploid or aneuploid trophectoderm biopsy results (excluding mosaic/inconclusive embryos, n = 980). The labeled dataset was split into training (60%), validation (20%), and test (20%). An unlabeled dataset was also included—34,709 oocyte images (2 clinics; Canada, US)—and utilized in training. An external dataset (n = 473) from a separate US clinic was assessed for model generalization. Participants/materials, setting, methods Fully-supervised and semi-supervised machine learning models were experimented to predict blastocyst PGT-A from oocyte images. The labeled data were utilized in both methods. The semi-supervised method integrates unlabeled data using the well-known Mixmatch algorithm—learning important features from augmented images (with pseudo labels) that were then utilized in the supervised phase to predict outcomes. Age was incorporated into the models, therefore, a model only using age to predict ploidy was developed to act as a comparison. Main results and the role of chance Following various experiments, the fully-supervised model displayed an AUC 0.61, sensitivity 0.41, specificity 0.76, and accuracy 0.62 on the test set. The semi-supervised model displayed a performance of AUC 0.71, sensitivity 0.63, specificity 0.67, and accuracy 0.65–notably higher AUC and balanced performance on the positive/negative classes. The semi-supervised method benefits from both labeled and augmented unlabeled data for enhanced learning efficacy. The model utilizing age only to predict ploidy was extremely imbalanced in performance on the test set with AUC 0.63, sensitivity 1, specificity 0, and accuracy 0.48, confirming the importance of image features. Performance of the semi-supervised model was assessed by clinic. On Clinic 1 (n = 364; 40% euploid) it displayed AUC 0.61, sensitivity 0.60, specificity 0.56, and accuracy 0.58; on Clinic 2 (n = 675; 52% euploid) it displayed AUC 0.64, sensitivity 0.56, specificity 0.65, and accuracy of 0.60; on Clinic 3 (n = 466; 50% euploid) it displayed significantly better performance with AUC 0.85, sensitivity 0.76, specificity 0.79, and accuracy 0.77–warranting further investigation into model generalizability. On the external dataset (n = 473, 58% euploid), the semi-supervised model displayed improved performance (AUC 0.62, sensitivity 0.61, specificity 0.61, accuracy 0.60) in comparison to the age only model (AUC 0.59, sensitivity 1, specificity 0, accuracy 0.58). Limitations, reasons for caution This dataset includes oocytes that developed into blastocysts and underwent PGT-A. Datasets including oocytes that did not reach the blastocyst stage must also be assessed to validate the model’s clinical utility. Despite utilizing diverse data, advancing the generalizability of the model requires additional investigations to ensure balanced performance across clinics. Wider implications of the findings Utilizing images of mature oocytes, an AI model predicts the ploidy status of resulting blastocysts, providing a powerful tool for assessing oocyte quality and genetic integrity. These preliminary findings are promising for those undergoing oocyte cryopreservation by striving to elucidate genetic potential at the earliest phase of the IVF process. 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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
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 enseignants0,239
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
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 recherche0,0000,001
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 Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,362
Écart entre enseignants0,303 · 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.

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'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetReproductive Biology and FertilityTravaux en français237 207