The impact of patient, embryo, and translocation characteristics on the ploidy status of young couples undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) by next generation sequencing (NGS).
Adult
Blastocyst
/ metabolism
Chromosomes
/ genetics
Comparative Genomic Hybridization
Embryo Transfer
Female
Fertilization in Vitro
/ trends
Genetic Testing
/ methods
High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing
/ trends
Humans
Male
Ploidies
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Rate
Preimplantation Diagnosis
Retrospective Studies
Translocation, Genetic
/ genetics
Young Adult
Interchromosomal effect
PGT-SR
Structural rearrangement
Journal
Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics
ISSN: 1573-7330
Titre abrégé: J Assist Reprod Genet
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9206495
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2021
Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
20
08
2020
accepted:
28
12
2020
pubmed:
6
1
2021
medline:
1
7
2021
entrez:
5
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the factors that affect the incidence of euploid balanced embryos and interchromosomal effect (ICE) in carriers of different structural rearrangements. This retrospective study includes 95 couples with reciprocal translocations (RecT) and 36 couples with Robertsonian translocations (RobT) undergoing Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Structural Rearrangements (PGT-SR) between March 2016 and July 2019. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was the technique used coupled with trophectoderm (TE) biopsy. Only cases with females under 38 years were included. A total of 532 blastocysts were evaluated. The euploidy rate was similar in RobT when compared with RecT carriers [57/156 (36.5%) vs. 112/376 (29.8%), p = 0.127]. The pure ICE rate was significantly higher in RobT carriers [48/156 (30.8%) vs. 53/376 (14.1%), p < 0.001] than it was in RecT carriers. Female age was the independent factor for the probability of obtaining a euploid embryo in RecT and RobT carriers, and increasing female age decreases the probability of obtaining a euploid embryo. In RecT carriers, no significant differences were observed in euploidy rates, pure ICE, or combined ICE according to the length of the translocated fragment and the chromosome group. However, total ICE was significantly lower when there was a breakpoint in the short chromosome arm together with a breakpoint in the long arm [(44/158 (27.8%) for pq or qp, 51/155 (32.9%) for pp and 30/63 (47.6%) for qq; p = 0.02]. The incidence of euploid/balanced blastocysts was similar in both types of translocations. However, there was a significant increase in pure ICE in RobT compared to RecT carriers. In RecT carriers, the presence of the breakpoints in the long arm of the chromosomes involved in the rearrangement resulted in a higher total ICE.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33398513
doi: 10.1007/s10815-020-02054-4
pii: 10.1007/s10815-020-02054-4
pmc: PMC7884505
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
387-396Références
J Androl. 2007 Mar-Apr;28(2):262-72
pubmed: 17021336
Hum Reprod. 2007 Aug;22(8):2088-92
pubmed: 17573525
Eur J Hum Genet. 2001 Jun;9(6):395-403
pubmed: 11436119
Am J Hum Genet. 1997 Sep;61(3):651-9
pubmed: 9326331
Hum Genet. 1999 Nov;105(5):428-36
pubmed: 10598808
Am J Med Genet A. 2010 Jun;152A(6):1428-33
pubmed: 20503317
Am J Med Genet. 1983 Dec;16(4):535-61
pubmed: 6660248
PLoS Genet. 2012;8(10):e1003025
pubmed: 23133396
Mol Hum Reprod. 2001 May;7(5):483-8
pubmed: 11331672
J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998 May;15(5):290-6
pubmed: 9604762
Eur J Hum Genet. 2013 Oct;21(10):1035-41
pubmed: 23386032
Hum Reprod. 2004 Jun;19(6):1345-51
pubmed: 15117905
Hum Reprod. 2001 Jun;16(6):1155-64
pubmed: 11387286
Prenat Diagn. 2004 Jul;24(7):556-61
pubmed: 15300749
Pediatrics. 1963 Sep;32:326-37
pubmed: 14063510
Reprod Biomed Online. 2005 Aug;11(2):219-25
pubmed: 16168220
Fertil Steril. 2002 Nov;78(5):1127-30
pubmed: 12414006
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007 Sep;24(9):406-11
pubmed: 17653848
Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2019 Feb;65(1):12-19
pubmed: 29952660
Reprod Biomed Online. 2015 Jul;31(1):79-88
pubmed: 25985997
Fertil Steril. 2000 Jun;73(6):1209-18
pubmed: 10856485
Reproduction. 2003 Dec;126(6):701-11
pubmed: 14748689
Cytogenet Cell Genet. 1998;83(3-4):275-80
pubmed: 10072603
Hum Genet. 2000 May;106(5):500-5
pubmed: 10914679
Eur J Hum Genet. 2014 Jun;22(6):748-53
pubmed: 24129433
Reprod Biomed Online. 2005 Mar;10(3):363-9
pubmed: 15820044
Hum Reprod. 2000 Jul;15(7):1490-8
pubmed: 10875855
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014 Jul;31(7):843-50
pubmed: 24771116
Hum Genet. 2000 May;106(5):517-24
pubmed: 10914681
Mol Cytogenet. 2009 Dec 01;2:24
pubmed: 19951420
Hum Genet. 1998 Apr;102(4):446-51
pubmed: 9600242
Fertil Steril. 2004 Mar;81(3):682-5
pubmed: 15037421
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Oct;35(10):938-44
pubmed: 26243475
Cytogenet Cell Genet. 1995;71(3):240-6
pubmed: 7587385
Balkan J Med Genet. 2013 Dec;16(2):23-8
pubmed: 24778559
Reprod Biomed Online. 2006 Dec;13(6):869-74
pubmed: 17169213
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 May;299(5):1487-1493
pubmed: 30737585
Biol Reprod. 2014 Aug;91(2):37
pubmed: 24966395
J Hum Genet. 2010 Aug;55(8):541-5
pubmed: 20555339
Fertil Steril. 2011 Jul;96(1):e66-70
pubmed: 21561609
Hum Genet. 1995 Dec;96(6):655-60
pubmed: 8522322
Am J Hum Genet. 1983 Mar;35(2):301-8
pubmed: 6837576
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013 Apr;30(4):525-30
pubmed: 23468097
Hum Reprod. 2005 Aug;20(8):2295-300
pubmed: 15878922
Genet Med. 2008 Oct;10(10):730-8
pubmed: 18813133
Hum Genet. 1980;55(2):209-22
pubmed: 7450764
Eur J Hum Genet. 2012 Apr;20(4):376-80
pubmed: 22071893
Zygote. 2016 Feb;24(1):107-14
pubmed: 25601127
Hum Reprod. 2009 May;24(5):1221-8
pubmed: 19155287
Fertil Steril. 2010 Jun;94(1):283-9
pubmed: 20034626
Fertil Steril. 2005 Aug;84(2):365-73
pubmed: 16084877
Reprod Biomed Online. 2004 Dec;9(6):637-44
pubmed: 15670411
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019 Dec;36(12):2547-2555
pubmed: 31696386
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jul;26(7):1925-35
pubmed: 21489979
Cytogenet Cell Genet. 2000;88(1-2):15-21
pubmed: 10773657