Update on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and outcomes of embryos with mosaic results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) is used as a frequent add-on for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) to improve clinical outcomes. The purpose is to select a euploid embryo following chromosomal testing on embryo biopsies. The current practice includes comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) technology applied on trophectoderm (TE) biopsies. Despite its widespread use, PGT-A remains a controversial topic mainly because all of the RCTs comprised only good prognosis patients with 2 or more blastocysts available; hence the results are not generalizable to all groups of patients. Furthermore, with the introduction of the highly-sensitive platforms into clinical practice (i.e. next-generation sequencing [NGS]), a result consistent with intermediate copy number surfaced and is termed "Mosaic," consistent with a mixture of euploid and aneuploid cells within the biopsy sample. The optimal disposition and management of embryos with mosaic results is still an open question, as many 'mosaics' generated healthy live births with no identifiable congenital anomalies. The present article provides a complete and comprehensive up-to-date review on PGT-A. It discusses in detail the findings of all the published RCTs on PGT-A with CCS, comments on the subject of "mosaicism" and its current management, and describes the latest technique of non-invasive PGT-A.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".