O-237 An image-based Artificial Intelligence (AI) model trained to predict blastocyst development from oocyte images correlates with key embryonic developmental parameters in a large dataset
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Study question Does MAGENTA, an AI model built to predict blastocyst development from mature oocyte images, correlate with indicators of embryonic development? Summary answer Higher MAGENTA scores correlate with blastulation and key parameters of embryonic development progression—day-3 embryo fragmentation rate, blastocyst morphology and usage fate. What is known already The oocyte is the major contributor of cytoplasmic organelles, cell membranes, and maternal mRNA that support early embryonic development. Despite the oocyte’s vital contributions to the developmental potential of blastocysts, non-invasive and objective oocyte evaluation methods are lacking. MAGENTA is a non-invasive AI tool that assesses metaphase II(MII) oocyte images, providing a score of 0-10 with higher scores indicating a higher potential for blastocyst development. While MAGENTA was only trained to predict blastulation, its scores have shown correlation with other indicators of embryo development, highlighting the contribution of oocyte quality to the success of embryonic development and the overall cycle. Study design, size, duration This validation study included a dataset of 15,521 images of fresh denuded MII oocytes immediately post-ICSI (6964 donor, 8557 patient oocytes; age: 18-48 years from a Spanish fertility clinic. 7734 oocytes developed into blastocysts while 7787 oocytes did not (2458 non-fertilized, 611 abnormally fertilized). Oocyte images and accompanying clinical parameters were assessed by MAGENTA to produce scores (0-10), indicating chances of blastocyst development, which were also divided into four groups (0-2.5,2.6-5, 5.1-7.5, 7.6-10) for analysis. Participants/materials, setting, methods MAGENTA scores were compared to true blastocyst development outcomes and analyzed for correlation with key embryo development parameters—day-3 fragmentation percentage, blastocyst development, blastocyst quality, and blastocyst usage fate as decided by embryologists. Embryologist-assigned Gardner grading included 1079 excellent-quality (ICM and TE=A), 4940 good-quality (ICM/TE=B), 1264 fair-quality (ICM/TE=C), and 376 poor-quality (ICM/TE=D) blastocysts. Correlation analyses were assessed by Welch’s t-test, One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s post-hoc pairwise comparisons, or Two Proportions z-test. Main results and the role of chance Oocyte MAGENTA scores decreased significantly in a stepwise manner with higher day-3 embryo fragmentation rates(p < 0.01), except between 11-25% and 26-35% groups(p = 0.99) (≤10%[6.5, n = 10286], 11-25%[5.5, n = 1696], 26-35%[5.6, n = 178], >35%[4.5, n = 149]). A similar relationship was found when assessing only oocytes that developed into blastocysts(≤10%[6.9, n = 6907], 11-25%[6.2, n = 716], 26-35%[6.7, n = 48], >35%[4.1, n = 22])(p < 0.01), except between 11-25% and 26-35% groups(p = 0.64). Oocytes that developed into blastocysts also had significantly higher MAGENTA scores than those that did not(6.9 vs. 5.1, p < 0.0001), with a stepwise increase in the proportion of blastocysts developed within each sequential MAGENTA score group (26%[n = 3058], 44%[n = 2855], 52%[n = 3323], 63%[n = 6285]). Subgroup analysis revealed an increase in oocyte MAGENTA scores with increasing blastocyst quality: Non-blastocysts vs. Poor (5.1 vs. 6, p < 0.0001), Poor vs. Fair (6 vs. 6.2, p = 0.62), Fair vs. Good (6.2 vs. 6.9, p < 0.0001), Good vs. Excellent (6.9 vs. 7.5, p < 0.0001). Similarly, there was a significant stepwise increase in the proportion of Excellent blastocysts (2.1%, 4%, 7%, 11%; p < 0.0001) and Good blastocysts (15%, 28%, 34%, 41%; p < 0.0001) within sequentially increasing MAGENTA score groups. Additionally, MAGENTA scores correlated with blastocyst usage decisions by embryologists, with significantly higher MAGENTA scores for oocyte that became embryos selected for transfer(7.2,n=407) or cryopreservation (6.9,n=6733) than those discarded (5.2,n=8379; both p < 0.0001). Limitations, reasons for caution Analysis of day-3 embryo fragmentation was limited by small sample sizes of 26-35% and >35% groups. Poor-quality sample size was limited compared to other quality groups. Additional data is needed to further elucidate any quality differences between oocytes that develop into embryos chosen for fresh transfers and for cryopreservation. Wider implications of the findings MAGENTA’s oocyte assessments correlate with key parameters of embryonic development, such as fragmentation, blastocyst development, quality, and utilization, which are linked to implantation potential. These results highlight the critical role of oocytes in driving embryonic development and MAGENTA’s potential to offer valuable insights into cycle potential from the oocyte stage. Trial registration number No
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 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».