Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Artificial Intelligence | Research

An artificial intelligence model (euploid prediction algorithm) can predict embryo ploidy status based on time-lapse data

Authors: Bo Huang, Wei Tan, Zhou Li, Lei Jin

Published in: Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

For the association between time-lapse technology (TLT) and embryo ploidy status, there has not yet been fully understood. TLT has the characteristics of large amount of data and non-invasiveness. If we want to accurately predict embryo ploidy status from TLT, artificial intelligence (AI) technology is a good choice. However, the current work of AI in this field needs to be strengthened.

Methods

A total of 469 preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) cycles and 1803 blastocysts from April 2018 to November 2019 were included in the study. All embryo images are captured during 5 or 6 days after fertilization before biopsy by time-lapse microscope system. All euploid embryos or aneuploid embryos are used as data sets. The data set is divided into training set, validation set and test set. The training set is mainly used for model training, the validation set is mainly used to adjust the hyperparameters of the model and the preliminary evaluation of the model, and the test set is used to evaluate the generalization ability of the model. For better verification, we used data other than the training data for external verification. A total of 155 PGT cycles from December 2019 to December 2020 and 523 blastocysts were included in the verification process.

Results

The euploid prediction algorithm (EPA) was able to predict euploid on the testing dataset with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.80.

Conclusions

The TLT incubator has gradually become the choice of reproductive centers. Our AI model named EPA that can predict embryo ploidy well based on TLT data. We hope that this system can serve all in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) patients in the future, allowing embryologists to have more non-invasive aids when selecting the best embryo to transfer.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gardner DK, Meseguer M, Rubio C, Treff NR. Diagnosis of human preimplantation embryo viability. Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21:727–47.CrossRef Gardner DK, Meseguer M, Rubio C, Treff NR. Diagnosis of human preimplantation embryo viability. Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21:727–47.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Krisher RL, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG. Omics as a window to view embryo viability. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:333–41.CrossRef Krisher RL, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG. Omics as a window to view embryo viability. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:333–41.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Thouas GA, Francisco D, Green MP, Felipe V, Carlos S, Gardner DK. Soluble ligands and their receptors in human embryo development and implantation. Endocrine Reviews. 2015;36:92–130.CrossRef Thouas GA, Francisco D, Green MP, Felipe V, Carlos S, Gardner DK. Soluble ligands and their receptors in human embryo development and implantation. Endocrine Reviews. 2015;36:92–130.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Katz-Jaffe MG, Gardner DK. Embryology in the era of proteomics. Theriogenology. 2007;68(Suppl 1):S125-130. Katz-Jaffe MG, Gardner DK. Embryology in the era of proteomics. Theriogenology. 2007;68(Suppl 1):S125-130.
5.
go back to reference Katz-Jaffe MG, McReynolds S. Embryology in the era of proteomics. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1073–7.CrossRef Katz-Jaffe MG, McReynolds S. Embryology in the era of proteomics. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1073–7.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Farra C, Choucair F, Awwad J. Non-invasive pre-implantation genetic testing of human embryos: an emerging concept. Human Reproduction. 2018;33:2162–7.CrossRef Farra C, Choucair F, Awwad J. Non-invasive pre-implantation genetic testing of human embryos: an emerging concept. Human Reproduction. 2018;33:2162–7.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Scott RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Zhao, Treff NR. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;2013(3):624–30.CrossRef Scott RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Zhao, Treff NR. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;2013(3):624–30.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Meseguer M, Rubio I, Cruz M, Basile N, Marcos J, Requena A. Embryo incubation and selection in a time-lapse monitoring system improves pregnancy outcome compared with a standard incubator: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:1481-1489.e1410.CrossRef Meseguer M, Rubio I, Cruz M, Basile N, Marcos J, Requena A. Embryo incubation and selection in a time-lapse monitoring system improves pregnancy outcome compared with a standard incubator: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:1481-1489.e1410.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Conaghan J, Chen AA, Willman SP, Ivani K, Chenette PE, Boostanfar R, Baker VL, Adamson GD, Abusief ME, Gvakharia M. Improving embryo selection using a computer-automated time-lapse image analysis test plus day 3 morphology: results from a prospective multicenter trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:412-419.e415.CrossRef Conaghan J, Chen AA, Willman SP, Ivani K, Chenette PE, Boostanfar R, Baker VL, Adamson GD, Abusief ME, Gvakharia M. Improving embryo selection using a computer-automated time-lapse image analysis test plus day 3 morphology: results from a prospective multicenter trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:412-419.e415.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Apter S, Ebner T, Freour T, Yves G, Borut K, Nathalie LC, Monica M, Marcos M, Debbie M. Good practice recommendations for the use of time-lapse technology†. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2:1–26. Apter S, Ebner T, Freour T, Yves G, Borut K, Nathalie LC, Monica M, Marcos M, Debbie M. Good practice recommendations for the use of time-lapse technology†. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2:1–26.
11.
go back to reference Ciray N, Campbell A, Inge EA, Jesús A, Sandrine C, Marga E, Shabana S. Proposed guidelines on the nomenclature and annotation of dynamic human embryo monitoring by a time-lapse user group. Hum Reprod. 2014:2650–60. Ciray N, Campbell A, Inge EA, Jesús A, Sandrine C, Marga E, Shabana S. Proposed guidelines on the nomenclature and annotation of dynamic human embryo monitoring by a time-lapse user group. Hum Reprod. 2014:2650–60.
12.
go back to reference Somigliana E, Busnelli A, Paffoni A, Vigano P, Riccaboni A, Rubio C, Capalbo A. Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies. Fertil Steril. 2019;111:1169–76.CrossRef Somigliana E, Busnelli A, Paffoni A, Vigano P, Riccaboni A, Rubio C, Capalbo A. Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies. Fertil Steril. 2019;111:1169–76.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Rosenwaks Z, Handyside AH, Fiorentino F, Gleicher N, Paulson RJ, Schattman GL, Scott RT Jr., Summers MC, Treff NR, Xu K. The pros and cons of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: clinical and laboratory perspectives. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:353–61.CrossRef Rosenwaks Z, Handyside AH, Fiorentino F, Gleicher N, Paulson RJ, Schattman GL, Scott RT Jr., Summers MC, Treff NR, Xu K. The pros and cons of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: clinical and laboratory perspectives. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:353–61.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Griffin DK, Cagri O. Chromosomal analysis in IVF: just how useful is it? Reproduction. 2018;156:29–50. Griffin DK, Cagri O. Chromosomal analysis in IVF: just how useful is it? Reproduction. 2018;156:29–50.
15.
go back to reference Orvieto R, Gleicher N. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)—finally revealed. Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics. 2020;37:1–4.CrossRef Orvieto R, Gleicher N. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)—finally revealed. Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics. 2020;37:1–4.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Reignier A, Lammers J, Barriere P, Freour T. Can time-lapse parameters predict embryo ploidy? A systematic review. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36:380–7.CrossRef Reignier A, Lammers J, Barriere P, Freour T. Can time-lapse parameters predict embryo ploidy? A systematic review. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36:380–7.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Zaninovic N, Irani M, Meseguer M. Assessment of embryo morphology and developmental dynamics by time-lapse microscopy: is there a relation to implantation and ploidy? Fertil Steril. 2017;108:722–9.CrossRef Zaninovic N, Irani M, Meseguer M. Assessment of embryo morphology and developmental dynamics by time-lapse microscopy: is there a relation to implantation and ploidy? Fertil Steril. 2017;108:722–9.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Mara S, Konstantinos S, Evangelos M, Nikolaos A, Anna R, George A, Panagiotis B, Stamatis B, Agni P, Konstantinos P. Are computational applications the “crystal ball” in the IVF laboratory? The evolution from mathematics to artificial intelligence. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:1545–57.CrossRef Mara S, Konstantinos S, Evangelos M, Nikolaos A, Anna R, George A, Panagiotis B, Stamatis B, Agni P, Konstantinos P. Are computational applications the “crystal ball” in the IVF laboratory? The evolution from mathematics to artificial intelligence. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:1545–57.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Tran D, Cooke S, Illingworth PJ, Gardner DK. Deep learning as a predictive tool for fetal heart pregnancy following time-lapse incubation and blastocyst transfer. Hum Reprod. 2019;34:1011–8.CrossRef Tran D, Cooke S, Illingworth PJ, Gardner DK. Deep learning as a predictive tool for fetal heart pregnancy following time-lapse incubation and blastocyst transfer. Hum Reprod. 2019;34:1011–8.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Khosravi P, Kazemi E, Zhan Q, Malmsten JE, Toschi M, Zisimopoulos P, Sigaras A, Lavery S, Cooper LAD, Hickman C. Deep learning enables robust assessment and selection of human blastocysts after in vitro fertilization. NPJ Digital Med. 2019;2:21.CrossRef Khosravi P, Kazemi E, Zhan Q, Malmsten JE, Toschi M, Zisimopoulos P, Sigaras A, Lavery S, Cooper LAD, Hickman C. Deep learning enables robust assessment and selection of human blastocysts after in vitro fertilization. NPJ Digital Med. 2019;2:21.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Chavez-Badiola A, Flores-Saiffe-Farías A, Mendizabal-Ruiz G, Drakeley AJ, Cohen J. Embryo Ranking Intelligent Classification Algorithm (ERICA), an artificial intelligence clinical assistant with embryo ploidy and implantation predicting capabilities. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41:585–93.CrossRef Chavez-Badiola A, Flores-Saiffe-Farías A, Mendizabal-Ruiz G, Drakeley AJ, Cohen J. Embryo Ranking Intelligent Classification Algorithm (ERICA), an artificial intelligence clinical assistant with embryo ploidy and implantation predicting capabilities. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41:585–93.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Bori L, Dominguez F, Fernandez EI, Gallego RD, Meseguer M. An artificial intelligence model based on the proteomic profile of euploid embryos and time-lapse images: a preliminary study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;1:1. Bori L, Dominguez F, Fernandez EI, Gallego RD, Meseguer M. An artificial intelligence model based on the proteomic profile of euploid embryos and time-lapse images: a preliminary study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;1:1.
23.
go back to reference Huang B, Qian K, Li Z, Yue J, Yang W, Zhu G, Zhang H. Neonatal outcomes after early rescue intracytoplasmic sperm injection: an analysis of a 5-year period. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1432-1437 e1431.CrossRef Huang B, Qian K, Li Z, Yue J, Yang W, Zhu G, Zhang H. Neonatal outcomes after early rescue intracytoplasmic sperm injection: an analysis of a 5-year period. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1432-1437 e1431.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Wu L, Jin L, Chen W, Liu JM, Hu J, Yu Q, Ren XL, Huang B, He H. The true incidence of chromosomal mosaicism after preimplantation genetic testing is much lower than that indicated by trophectoderm biopsy. Hum Reprod. 2021;36:1691–701.CrossRef Wu L, Jin L, Chen W, Liu JM, Hu J, Yu Q, Ren XL, Huang B, He H. The true incidence of chromosomal mosaicism after preimplantation genetic testing is much lower than that indicated by trophectoderm biopsy. Hum Reprod. 2021;36:1691–701.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Alpha Scientists In Reproductive Medicine and Eshre Special Interest Group Embryology. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;22:632–46. Alpha Scientists In Reproductive Medicine and Eshre Special Interest Group Embryology. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;22:632–46.
26.
go back to reference Hara K, Kataoka H, Satoh Y. Can Spatiotemporal 3D CNNs Retrace the History of 2D CNNs and ImageNet? In CVPR2018. 2018. Hara K, Kataoka H, Satoh Y. Can Spatiotemporal 3D CNNs Retrace the History of 2D CNNs and ImageNet? In CVPR2018. 2018.
27.
go back to reference Adolfsson E, Andershed AN. Morphology vs morphokinetics: a retrospective comparison of inter-observer and intra-observer agreement between embryologists on blastocysts with known implantation outcome. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2018;22:228–37. Adolfsson E, Andershed AN. Morphology vs morphokinetics: a retrospective comparison of inter-observer and intra-observer agreement between embryologists on blastocysts with known implantation outcome. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2018;22:228–37.
28.
go back to reference Patel VL, Shortliffe EH, Stefanelli M, Szolovits P, Berthold MR, Bellazzi R, Abu-Hanna A. The coming of age of artificial intelligence in medicine. Artif Intell Med. 2009;46:5–17.CrossRef Patel VL, Shortliffe EH, Stefanelli M, Szolovits P, Berthold MR, Bellazzi R, Abu-Hanna A. The coming of age of artificial intelligence in medicine. Artif Intell Med. 2009;46:5–17.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Basile N, Nogales Mdel C, Bronet F, Florensa M, Riqueiros M, Rodrigo L, Garcia-Velasco J, Meseguer M. Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryos by time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:699–704.CrossRef Basile N, Nogales Mdel C, Bronet F, Florensa M, Riqueiros M, Rodrigo L, Garcia-Velasco J, Meseguer M. Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryos by time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:699–704.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Del Carmen Nogales M, Bronet F, Basile N, Martinez EM, Linan A, Rodrigo L, Meseguer M. Type of chromosome abnormality affects embryo morphology dynamics. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:229-235 e222. Del Carmen Nogales M, Bronet F, Basile N, Martinez EM, Linan A, Rodrigo L, Meseguer M. Type of chromosome abnormality affects embryo morphology dynamics. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:229-235 e222.
31.
go back to reference Chawla M, Fakih M, Shunnar A, Bayram A, Hellani A, Perumal V, Divakaran J, Budak E. Morphokinetic analysis of cleavage stage embryos and its relationship to aneuploidy in a retrospective time-lapse imaging study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:69–75.CrossRef Chawla M, Fakih M, Shunnar A, Bayram A, Hellani A, Perumal V, Divakaran J, Budak E. Morphokinetic analysis of cleavage stage embryos and its relationship to aneuploidy in a retrospective time-lapse imaging study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:69–75.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Patel DV, Shah PB, Kotdawala AP, Herrero J, Rubio I, Banker MR. Morphokinetic behavior of euploid and aneuploid embryos analyzed by time-lapse in embryoscope. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2016;9:112–8.CrossRef Patel DV, Shah PB, Kotdawala AP, Herrero J, Rubio I, Banker MR. Morphokinetic behavior of euploid and aneuploid embryos analyzed by time-lapse in embryoscope. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2016;9:112–8.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Balakier H, Sojecki A, Motamedi G, Librach C. Impact of multinucleated blastomeres on embryo developmental competence, morphokinetics, and aneuploidy. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:608-614 e602.CrossRef Balakier H, Sojecki A, Motamedi G, Librach C. Impact of multinucleated blastomeres on embryo developmental competence, morphokinetics, and aneuploidy. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:608-614 e602.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Giulia MM, Alessandro C, Teresa R, Alessandra R, Valentina C, Filomena S, Francesca S, Francesco F, Teresa VM, Ermanno G. Correlation between aneuploidy, standard morphology evaluation and morphokinetic development in 1730 biopsied blastocysts: a consecutive case series study. Hum Reprod. 2016;10:2245. Giulia MM, Alessandro C, Teresa R, Alessandra R, Valentina C, Filomena S, Francesca S, Francesco F, Teresa VM, Ermanno G. Correlation between aneuploidy, standard morphology evaluation and morphokinetic development in 1730 biopsied blastocysts: a consecutive case series study. Hum Reprod. 2016;10:2245.
35.
go back to reference Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Hickman CFL. Modelling a risk classification of aneuploidy in human embryos using non-invasive morphokinetics. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26:477–85.CrossRef Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Hickman CFL. Modelling a risk classification of aneuploidy in human embryos using non-invasive morphokinetics. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26:477–85.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Thornton S. Retrospective analysis of outcomes after IVF using an aneuploidy risk model derived from time-lapse imaging without PGS. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;27:140–6.CrossRef Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Thornton S. Retrospective analysis of outcomes after IVF using an aneuploidy risk model derived from time-lapse imaging without PGS. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;27:140–6.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Campbell A, Fishel S, Laegdsmand M. Aneuploidy is a key causal factor of delays in blastulation: author response to ‘A cautionary note against aneuploidy risk assessment using time-lapse imaging’. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28:279–83.CrossRef Campbell A, Fishel S, Laegdsmand M. Aneuploidy is a key causal factor of delays in blastulation: author response to ‘A cautionary note against aneuploidy risk assessment using time-lapse imaging’. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28:279–83.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Sundvall L, Ingerslev HJ, Breth Knudsen U, Kirkegaard K. Inter- and intra-observer variability of time-lapse annotations. Human Reproduction. 2013;28:3215–21.CrossRef Sundvall L, Ingerslev HJ, Breth Knudsen U, Kirkegaard K. Inter- and intra-observer variability of time-lapse annotations. Human Reproduction. 2013;28:3215–21.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Harper J, Jackson E, Sermon K, Aitken RJ, Harbottle S, Mocanu E, Hardarson T, Mathur R, Viville S, Vail A. Adjuncts in the IVF laboratory: where is the evidence for ‘add-on’ interventions? Hum Reprod. 2017;3:485–91. Harper J, Jackson E, Sermon K, Aitken RJ, Harbottle S, Mocanu E, Hardarson T, Mathur R, Viville S, Vail A. Adjuncts in the IVF laboratory: where is the evidence for ‘add-on’ interventions? Hum Reprod. 2017;3:485–91.
40.
go back to reference Curchoe CL, Bormann CL. Artificial intelligence and machine learning for human reproduction and embryology presented at ASRM and ESHRE 2018. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;4:591–600. Curchoe CL, Bormann CL. Artificial intelligence and machine learning for human reproduction and embryology presented at ASRM and ESHRE 2018. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;4:591–600.
Metadata
Title
An artificial intelligence model (euploid prediction algorithm) can predict embryo ploidy status based on time-lapse data
Authors
Bo Huang
Wei Tan
Zhou Li
Lei Jin
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7827
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00864-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 1/2021 Go to the issue