Abstract
Purpose of Review
This review is aimed at providing an overview of the development of, and advances in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) in the last decade. It will summarize advances in the field to date, ongoing controversies, and explore ideas for future directions.
Recent Findings
Recent findings in the field of PGT-A include the publication of the STAR trial in 2019. This large RCT failed to find a benefit for PGT-A in women aged 25–40. As a result of increasing use of PGT-A with comprehensive genomic sequencing, the number of mosaic embryos identified has increased, with an ongoing debate as to the use of these embryos. Further research in this field includes the development of non-invasive pre-implantation testing, which may overcome some of the challenges noted in the field to date.
Summary
This review primarily focuses on the controversies in the field surrounding PGT-A, with suggestions for further research.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bullet important (•) or very important (••) recent references (within past 3 years)
Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, Racowsky C, de Mouzon J, Sokol R, et al. The international glossary on infertility and fertility care, 2017. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2017;32(9):1786–801.
Harper JC, Aittomäki K, Borry P, Cornel MC, de Wert G, Dondorp W, et al. Recent developments in genetics and medically assisted reproduction: from research to clinical applications. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(1):12–33.
Dahdouh EM. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a review of the evidence. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137(3):528–34.
Delhanty JDA. Is the polar body approach best for pre-implantation genetic screening? Placenta. 2011;32(Suppl 3):S268-270.
Scott KL, Hong KH, Scott RT. Selecting the optimal time to perform biopsy for preimplantation genetic testing. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):608–14.
Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(1):9–17.
Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(4):454–66.
Cornelisse S, Zagers M, Kostova E, Fleischer K, Wely M, Mastenbroek S. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (abnormal number of chromosomes) in in vitro fertilisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2021 Mar 19];(9). Available from: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005291.pub3/full?highlightAbstract=genetic%7Cpreimplant%7Cgenet%7Cpreimplantation
Zeng M, Su S, Li L. Comparison of pregnancy outcomes after vitrification at the cleavage and blastocyst stage: a meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35(1):127–34.
Cobo A, de los Santos MJ, Castellò D, Gámiz P, Campos P, Remohí J. Outcomes of vitrified early cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage embryos in a cryopreservation program: evaluation of 3,150 warming cycles. Fertil Steril. 2012 Nov;98(5):1138–1146.e1.
Zaat T, Zagers M, Mol F, Goddijn M, van Wely M, Mastenbroek S. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 4;2:CD011184.
Scott RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Hong KH, Scott KL, Taylor D, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):697–703.
Scott RT, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):870–5.
Neal SA, Franasiak JM, Forman EJ, Werner MD, Morin SJ, Tao X, et al. High relative deoxyribonucleic acid content of trophectoderm biopsy adversely affects pregnancy outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(3):731-736.e1.
Brezina PR, Anchan R, Kearns WG. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33(7):823–32.
Tiegs AW, Hodes-Wertz B, McCulloh DH, Munné S, Grifo JA. Discrepant diagnosis rate of array comparative genomic hybridization in thawed euploid blastocysts. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33(7):893–7.
Werner MD, Leondires MP, Schoolcraft WB, Miller BT, Copperman AB, Robins ED, et al. Clinically recognizable error rate after the transfer of comprehensive chromosomal screened euploid embryos is low. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(6):1613–8.
Yang Z, Lin J, Zhang J, Fong WI, Li P, Zhao R, et al. Randomized comparison of next-generation sequencing and array comparative genomic hybridization for preimplantation genetic screening: a pilot study. BMC Med Genomics [Internet]. 2015 Jun 23 [cited 2021 Apr 9];8. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4477308/
Aleksandrova N, Shubina E, Ekimov A, Kodyleva T, Mukosey I, Makarova N, et al. Comparison of the results of preimplantation genetic screening obtained by a-CGH and NGS methods from the same embryos. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(sup2):1–4.
Friedenthal J, Maxwell SM, Munné S, Kramer Y, McCulloh DH, McCaffrey C, et al. Next generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic screening improves pregnancy outcomes compared with array comparative genomic hybridization in single thawed euploid embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(4):627–32.
Munné S, Kaplan B, Frattarelli JL, Child T, Nakhuda G, Shamma FN, et al. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy versus morphology as selection criteria for single frozen-thawed embryo transfer in good-prognosis patients: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2019;112(6):1071-1079.e7.
Schattman GL. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: it’s déjà vu all over again! Fertil Steril. 2019;112(6):1046–7.
Gleicher N, Albertini DF, Barad DH, Homer H, Modi D, Murtinger M, et al. The 2019 PGDIS position statement on transfer of mosaic embryos within a context of new information on PGT-A. Reprod Biol Endocrinol RBE [Internet]. 2020 May 29 [cited 2021 Mar 23];18. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7257212/
Haviland MJ, Murphy LA, Modest AM, Fox MP, Wise LA, Nillni YI, et al. Comparison of pregnancy outcomes following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy using a matched propensity score design. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2020;35(10):2356–64.
Cimadomo D, Soscia D, Vaiarelli A, Maggiulli R, Capalbo A, Ubaldi FM, et al. Looking past the appearance: a comprehensive description of the clinical contribution of poor-quality blastocysts to increase live birth rates during cycles with aneuploidy testing. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2019;34(7):1206–14.
Kaing A, Rosen MP, Quinn MM. Perceptions, motivations and decision regret surrounding preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2020;35(9):2047–57.
Taylor TH, Gitlin SA, Patrick JL, Crain JL, Wilson JM, Griffin DK. The origin, mechanisms, incidence and clinical consequences of chromosomal mosaicism in humans. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(4):571–81.
Munné S, Blazek J, Large M, Martinez-Ortiz PA, Nisson H, Liu E, et al. Detailed investigation into the cytogenetic constitution and pregnancy outcome of replacing mosaic blastocysts detected with the use of high-resolution next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(1):62-71.e8.
Orvieto R. The reproducibility of trophectoderm biopsies - the chaos behind preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;254:57–8.
Sachdev NM, McCulloh DH, Kramer Y, Keefe D, Grifo JA. The reproducibility of trophectoderm biopsies in euploid, aneuploid, and mosaic embryos using independently verified next-generation sequencing (NGS): a pilot study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37(3):559–71.
Malvestiti F, Agrati C, Grimi B, Pompilii E, Izzi C, Martinoni L, et al. Interpreting mosaicism in chorionic villi: results of a monocentric series of 1001 mosaics in chorionic villi with follow-up amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn [Internet]. 2015 Nov [cited 2021 Mar 23];35(11). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26213308/
Marin D, Xu J, Treff NR. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a review of published blastocyst reanalysis concordance data. Prenat Diagn [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 23];n/a(n/a). Available from: https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5828
Greco E, Minasi MG, Fiorentino F. Healthy babies after intrauterine transfer of mosaic aneuploid blastocysts. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(21):2089–90.
Singla S, Iwamoto-Stohl LK, Zhu M, Zernicka-Goetz M. Autophagy-mediated apoptosis eliminates aneuploid cells in a mouse model of chromosome mosaicism. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):2958.
Grati FR, Gallazzi G, Branca L, Maggi F, Simoni G, Yaron Y. An evidence-based scoring system for prioritizing mosaic aneuploid embryos following preimplantation genetic screening. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36(4):442–9.
Clinical management of mosaic results from preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) of blastocysts: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2020 Aug;114(2):246–54.
Lin P-Y, Lee C-I, Cheng E-H, Huang C-C, Lee T-H, Shih H-H, et al. Clinical outcomes of single mosaic embryo transfer: high-level or low-Level mosaic embryo, does it matter? J Clin Med [Internet]. 2020 Jun 2 [cited 2021 Mar 23];9(6). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7356018/
Capalbo A, Poli M, Rienzi L, Girardi L, Cimadomo D, Benini F, et al. A prospective double-blinded non-selection trial of reproductive outcomes and chromosomal normalcy of newborns derived from putative low/moderate-degree mosaic IVF embryos. medRxiv. 2021 Feb 8;2021.02.07.21251201.
Chuang T-H, Chang Y-P, Lee M-J, Wang H-L, Lai H-H, Chen S-U. The incidence of mosaicism for individual chromosome in human blastocysts is correlated with chromosome length. Front Genet [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Mar 24];11. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.565348/full
Shahbazi MN, Wang T, Tao X, Weatherbee BAT, Sun L, Zhan Y, et al. Developmental potential of aneuploid human embryos cultured beyond implantation. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):3987.
Lathi RB. Transfer of aneuploid or mosaic embryos following preimplantation genetic testing [Internet]. clinicaltrials.gov; 2021 Mar [cited 2021 Apr 8]. Report No.: NCT04109846. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04109846
Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Pomante A, Crivello AM, Cafueri G, Valerio M, et al. Blastocentesis: a source of DNA for preimplantation genetic testing. Results from a pilot study. Fertil Steril. 2014 Dec;102(6):1692–1699.e6.
Palini S, Galluzzi L, Stefani SD, Bianchi M, Wells D, Magnani M, et al. Genomic DNA in human blastocoele fluid. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26(6):603–10.
Hammond ER, Shelling AN, Cree LM. Nuclear and mitochondrial DNA in blastocoele fluid and embryo culture medium: evidence and potential clinical use. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2016;31(8):1653–61.
Leaver M, Wells D. Non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing (niPGT): the next revolution in reproductive genetics? Hum Reprod Update. 2020;26(1):16–42.
Rubio C, Navarro-Sánchez L, García-Pascual CM, Ocali O, Cimadomo D, Venier W, et al. Multicenter prospective study of concordance between embryonic cell-free DNA and trophectoderm biopsies from 1301 human blastocysts. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(5):751.e1-751.e13.
Huang L, Bogale B, Tang Y, Lu S, Xie XS, Racowsky C. Noninvasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in spent medium may be more reliable than trophectoderm biopsy. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2019;116(28):14105–12.
Rubio C, Racowsky C, Barad DH, Scott RT, Simon C. Noninvasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in spent culture medium as a substitute for trophectoderm biopsy. Fertil Steril. 2021;115(4):841–9.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
-
a)
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
-
b)
All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors have been previously published and complied with all applicable ethical standards (including the Helsinki declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines).
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (REI)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mortimer, R., Ginsburg, E. Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy: Has the Controversy Settled? A Review. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 11, 48–54 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-021-00322-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13669-021-00322-3