Top

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Published in:

01-07-2014 | Genetics

Two different microarray technologies for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening, due to reciprocal translocation imbalances, demonstrate equivalent euploidy and clinical pregnancy rates

Authors: Kyle J. Tobler, Paul R. Brezina, Andrew T. Benner, Luke Du, Xin Xu, William G. Kearns

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 7/2014

Abstract

Purpose

To compare single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) microarray platforms to evaluate embryos for parental translocation imbalances and aneuploidy.

Methods

A retrospective review of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening (PGD/PGS) results of 498 embryos from 63 couples undergoing 75 in vitro fertilization cycles due to parental carriers of a reciprocal translocation.

Results

There was no significant difference between SNP and aCGH microarrays when comparing the prevalence of embryos that were euploid with no translocation imbalance, euploidy with a parental translocation imbalance or aneuploid with or without the parental chromosome imbalance. The clinical pregnancy rates were also equivalent for SNP (60 %) versus aCGH (65 %) microarrays. Of 498 diagnosed embryos, 45 % (226/498) were chromosomally normal without translocation errors or aneuploidy, 22 % (112/498) were euploid but had a parentally derived unbalanced chromosomal segregant, 8 % (42/498) harbored both a translocation imbalance and aneuploidy and 24 % (118/498) of embryos were genetically balanced for the parental reciprocal translocation but were aneuploid for other chromosomes. The overall clinical pregnancy rate per IVF cycle following SNP or aCGH microarray analysis was 61 % and was higher if the biopsy was done on blastocysts (65 %) versus cleavage stage embryos (59 %), although not statistically significant.

Conclusions

SNP or aCGH microarray technologies demonstrate equivalent clinical findings that maximize the pregnancy potential in patients with known parental reciprocal chromosomal translocations.

Gardner RJM, Sutherland GR. Chromosome abnormalities and genetic counseling. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press; 2004.

Sax K. The time factor in X-Ray production of chromosome aberrations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1939;25(5):225–33.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Fryns JP, Van Buggenhout G. Structural chromosome rearrangements in couples with recurrent fetal wastage. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1998;81(2):171–6.PubMedCrossRef

Robert L. Nussbaum MD, McInnes RR, Huntington F. Willard PD. Thompson & Thomspon Genetics in Medicine. 7th ed. Elsevier Science Health Science Division; 2007.

Chen CP, Wu PC, Lin CJ, Chern SR, Tsai FJ, Lee CC, et al. Unbalanced reciprocal translocations at amniocentesis. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;50(1):48–57.PubMedCrossRef

Escudero T, Estop A, Fischer J, Munne S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for complex chromosome rearrangements. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A(13):1662–9.PubMedCrossRef

Grati FR, Barlocco A, Grimi B, Milani S, Frascoli G, Di Meco AM, et al. Chromosome abnormalities investigated by non-invasive prenatal testing account for approximately 50 % of fetal unbalances associated with relevant clinical phenotypes. Am J Med Genet A. 2010;152A(6):1434–42.PubMed

Treff NR, Northrop LE, Kasabwala K, Su J, Levy B, Scott Jr RT. Single nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based concurrent screening of 24-chromosome aneuploidy and unbalanced translocations in preimplantation human embryos. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(5):1606–12.PubMedCrossRef

Lim CK, Cho JW, Song IO, Kang IS, Yoon YD, Jun JH. Estimation of chromosomal imbalances in preimplantation embryos from preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles of reciprocal translocations with or without acrocentric chromosomes. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(6):2144–51.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Beyazyurek C, Ekmekci CG, Saglam Y, Cinar C, Kahraman S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for extremes–successful birth after PGD for a consanguineous couple carrying an identical balanced reciprocal translocation. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(7):1–5.

11.

Huang J, Lian Y, Qiao J, Chen Y, Ren X, Liu P. Characteristics of embryo development in Robertsonian translocations' preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles. Prenat Diagn. 2009;29(12):1167–70.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Ko DS, Cho JW, Park SY, Kim JY, Koong MK, Song IO, et al. Clinical outcomes of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and analysis of meiotic segregation modes in reciprocal translocation carriers. Am J Med Genet A. 2010;152A(6):1428–33.PubMed

13.

Kuliev A, Verlinsky Y. Current features of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Reprod BioMed Online. 2002;5(3):294–9.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Munne S. Analysis of chromosome segregation during preimplantation genetic diagnosis in both male and female translocation heterozygotes. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2005;111(3–4):305–9.PubMed

15.

Munne S, Morrison L, Fung J, Marquez C, Weier U, Bahce M, et al. Spontaneous abortions are reduced after preconception diagnosis of translocations. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998;15(5):290–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

16.

Munne S, Sandalinas M, Escudero T, Fung J, Gianaroli L, Cohen J. Outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis of translocations. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(6):1209–18.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Otani T, Roche M, Mizuike M, Colls P, Escudero T, Munne S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis significantly improves the pregnancy outcome of translocation carriers with a history of recurrent miscarriage and unsuccessful pregnancies. Reprod BioMed Online. 2006;13(6):869–74.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Harper JC, Wilton L, Traeger-Synodinos J, Goossens V, Moutou C, SenGupta SB, et al. The ESHRE PGD Consortium: 10 years of data collection. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18(3):234–47.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Fragouli E, Wells D. Aneuploidy screening for embryo selection. Semin Reprod Med. 2012;30(4):289–301.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Dierssen M, Herault Y, Estivill X. Aneuploidy: from a physiological mechanism of variance to down syndrome. Physiol Rev. 2009;89(3):887–920.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Wapner RJ. Genetics of stillbirth. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2010;53(3):628–34.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Alfarawati S, Fragouli E, Colls P, Wells D. First births after preimplantation genetic diagnosis of structural chromosome abnormalities using comparative genomic hybridization and microarray analysis. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1560–74.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Fiorentino F, Spizzichino L, Bono S, Biricik A, Kokkali G, Rienzi L, et al. PGD for reciprocal and Robertsonian translocations using array comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1925–35.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Colls P, Escudero T, Fischer J, Cekleniak NA, Ben-Ozer S, Meyer B, et al. Validation of array comparative genome hybridization for diagnosis of translocations in preimplantation human embryos. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24(6):621–9.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Tan YQ, Tan K, Zhang SP, Gong F, Cheng DH, Xiong B, et al. Single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis is likely to improve the clinical outcome for translocation carriers. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(9):2581–92.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Huang CC, Chang LJ, Tsai YY, Hung CC, Fang MY, Su YN, et al. A feasible strategy of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for carriers with chromosomal translocation: Using blastocyst biopsy and array comparative genomic hybridization. J Formos Med Assoc. 2013;112(9):537–44.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Ata B, Kaplan B, Danzer H, Glassner M, Opsahl M, Tan SL, et al. Array CGH analysis shows that aneuploidy is not related to the number of embryos generated. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24(6):614–20.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Mercader A, Mateu E, Buendia P, Pehlivan T, et al. Impact of chromosomal abnormalities on preimplantation embryo development. Prenat Diagn. 2007;27(8):748–56.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Magli MC, Jones GM, Gras L, Gianaroli L, Korman I, Trounson AO. Chromosome mosaicism in day 3 aneuploid embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts in vitro. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(8):1781–6.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Gutierrez-Mateo C, Colls P, Sanchez-Garcia J, Escudero T, Prates R, Ketterson K, et al. Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(3):953–8.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Hodes-Wertz B, Grifo J, Ghadir S, Kaplan B, Laskin CA, Glassner M, et al. Idiopathic recurrent miscarriage is caused mostly by aneuploid embryos. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):675–80.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Kearns WG. I10 PGS/PGD evaluation of 7059 embryos from 872 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles using 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) or 23-chromosome comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) microarrays. Reprod BioMed Online. 2013;26:S4.CrossRef

33.

Northrop LE, Treff NR, Levy B, Scott Jr RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening demonstrates that cleavage-stage FISH poorly predicts aneuploidy in embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16(8):590–600.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

34.

Treff NR, Levy B, Su J, Northrop LE, Tao X, Scott Jr RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening is significantly more consistent than FISH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16(8):583–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

35.

Voullaire L, Wilton L, McBain J, Callaghan T, Williamson R. Chromosome abnormalities identified by comparative genomic hybridization in embryos from women with repeated implantation failure. Mol Hum Reprod. 2002;8(11):1035–41.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Scott Jr 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.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Kearns WG, Benner A, Nguyen KHD, Chipko C, Widra E, Leach R. Validation of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray PGD on single cell (s) from embryos. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(4):S124.CrossRef

Title: Two different microarray technologies for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening, due to reciprocal translocation imbalances, demonstrate equivalent euploidy and clinical pregnancy rates
Authors: Kyle J. Tobler
Paul R. Brezina
Andrew T. Benner
Luke Du
Xin Xu
William G. Kearns
Publication date: 01-07-2014
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 7/2014
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-014-0230-3

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Two different microarray technologies for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening, due to reciprocal translocation imbalances, demonstrate equivalent euploidy and clinical pregnancy rates

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2014

A novel compound heterozygous mutation of the luteinizing hormone receptor –implications for fertility

Human blastocysts exhibit unique microrna profiles in relation to maternal age and chromosome constitution

“Been hit twice”: a novel bi-allelic heterozygous mutation in LHCGR

Human embryo cryopreservation: one-step slow freezing does it all?

Triggering final oocyte maturation with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) versus human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation: an extended experience

Zygote serine decreased uptake from the fertilization medium is associated with implantation and pregnancy