Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T20:16:36.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preliminary assessment of aneuploidy rates between the polar, mid and mural trophectoderm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2019

Tyl H. Taylor Open the ORCID record for Tyl H. Taylor [Opens in a new window] ,
Tiffany Stankewicz ,
Seth L. Katz ,
Jennifer L. Patrick ,
Lauren Johnson  and
Darren K. Griffin
Tyl H. Taylor*
Affiliation:
Reproductive Endocrinology Associates of Charlotte, 1524 E Morehead St, Charlotte, NC28207, USA
Tiffany Stankewicz
Affiliation:
University of Kent, School of Biosciences, Canterbury, UK Main Line Fertility, Bryn Mawr, PA19010, USA
Seth L. Katz
Affiliation:
Reproductive Endocrinology Associates of Charlotte, 1524 E Morehead St, Charlotte, NC28207, USA
Jennifer L. Patrick
Affiliation:
Reproductive Endocrinology Associates of Charlotte, 1524 E Morehead St, Charlotte, NC28207, USA
Lauren Johnson
Affiliation:
Reproductive Endocrinology Associates of Charlotte, 1524 E Morehead St, Charlotte, NC28207, USA
Darren K. Griffin
Affiliation:
University of Kent, School of Biosciences, Canterbury, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Tyl H. Taylor, Reproductive Endocrinology Associates of Charlotte, 1524 E Morehead St, Charlotte, NC 28207, USA. Tel: +1 704 343 3400. Fax: +1 704 370 0427. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The objective of this study is to compare aneuploidy rates between three distinct areas of the human trophectoderm: mural, polar and a region in between these two locations termed the ‘mid’ trophectoderm. This is a cohort study on in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients undergoing comprehensive chromosome screening at the blastocyst stage at a private IVF clinic. All embryos underwent assisted hatching on day 3 with blastocyst biopsy and comprehensive chromosome screening. Biopsied blastocysts were divided into three groups depending on which area (polar, mid, or mural) of the trophectoderm was protruding from the zona pellucida and biopsied. Aneuploidy rates were significantly higher with cells from the polar region of the trophectoderm (56.2%) compared with cells removed from the mural region of the trophectoderm (30.0%; P = 0.0243). A comparison of all three areas combined also showed a decreasing trend, but this did not reach clinical significance, polar (56.2%), mid (47.4%) and mural trophectoderm (30.0%; P = 0.1859). The non-concordance demonstrated between polar and mural trophectoderm can be attributed to biological occurrences including chromosomal mosaicism or procedural differences between embryologists.

Keywords

AneuploidyComprehensive chromosome screeningEmbryo biopsyIn vitro fertilizaton (IVF)Preimplantation genetic screening
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 93 - 96
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Capalbo, A, Wright, G, Elliott, T, Ubaldi, FM, Rienzi, L and Nagy, ZP (2013) FISH reanalysis of inner cell mass and trophectoderm samples of previously array-CGH screened blastocysts shows high accuracy of diagnosis and no major diagnostic impact of mosaicism at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod 28, 2298–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derhaag, JG, Coonen, E, Bras, M, Bergers Janssen, JM, Ignoul-Vanvuchelen, R, Geraedts, JP, Evers, JL and Dumoulin, JC (2003) Chromosomally abnormal cells are not selected for the extra-embryonic compartment of the human preimplantation embryo at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod 18, 2565–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evsikov, S and Verlinsky, Y (1998) Mosaicism in the inner cell mass of human blastocysts. Hum Reprod 13, 3151–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forman, EJ, Hong, KH, Keery, KM, Tao, X, Taylor, Levy B, Treff, NR and Scott, RT Jr (2013) In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 100, 100–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fragouli, E, Lenzi, M, Ross, R, Katz-Jaffe, M, Schoolcraft, WB and Wells, D (2008) Comprehensive molecular cytogenetic analysis of the human blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod 23, 2596–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greco, E, Minasi, MG and Fiorentino, F (2015) Healthy babies after intrauterine transfer of mosaic aneuploid blastocysts. N Engl J Med 373, 2089–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan, B and Tilly, R (1978) In vitro development of inner cell masses isolated immunosurgically from mouse blastocysts. I. Inner cell masses from 3.5-day p.c. blastocysts incubated for 24 h before immunosurgery. J Embryol Exp Morphol 45, 93–105.Google ScholarPubMed
Johnson, DS, Cinnioglu, C, Ross, R, Filby, A, Gemelos, G, Hill, M, Ryan, A, Smotrich, D, Rabinowitz, M and Murray, MJ (2000) Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod 16, 944–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCoy, RC, Demko, ZP, Ryan, A, Banjevic, M, Hill, M, Sigurjonsson, S, Rabinowitz, M and Petrov, DA (2015) Evidence of selection against mitotic-origin aneuploidy during preimplantation development. PLoS Genet 11, e1005601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munne, S, Blazek, J, Large, M, Martinez-Ortiz, PA, Nisson, H, Liu, E, Tarozzi, N, Borini, A, Becker, A, Zhang, J, Maxwell, S, Grifo, J, Barbariya, D, Wells, D and Fragouli, E (2017) Detailed investigation into the cytogenic constitution and pregnancy outcome of replacing mosaic blastocysts detect with the use of high-resolution next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril 108, 62–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagy, ZP, Liu, J, Cecile, J, Silber, S, Devroey, P and van Steirteghem, A (1995) Using ejaculated, fresh and frozen–thawed epididymal and testicular spermatozoa gives rise to comparable results after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 63, 808–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Northrop, LE, Treff, NR, Levy, B and Scott, RT Jr (2010) 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 16, 590–600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patrizio, P, Shoham, G, Shoham, Z, Leong, M, Barad, DH and Gleicher, N (2019) Worldwide live births following transfer of chromosomally “abnormal” embryos after PGT/A. Results of a worldwide web-based survey. J Assist Reprod Genet 36, 1599–607.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruangvutilert, P, Delhanty, JD, Serhal, P, Simpoloulou, M, Rodeck, CH and Harper, JC (2000) FISH analysis on day 5 post-insemination of human arrested and blastocyst stage embryos. Prenat Diagn 20, 552–60.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruttanajit, T, Chanchamroen, S, Cram, DS, Sawakwongpra, K, Suksalak, W, Leng, X, Fan, J, Wang, L, Yao, Y and Quangkananurug, W (2016) Detection and quantitation of chromosomal mosaicism in human blastocysts using copy number variation sequencing. Prenat Diagn 36, 154–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schimmel, T, Cohen, J, Saunders, H and Alikani, M (2014) Laser-assisted zona pellucida thinning does not facilitate hatching and may disrupt the in vitro hatching process: a morphokinetic study in the mouse. Hum Reprod 29, 2670–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoolcraft, WB, Gardner, DK, Lane, M, Sclenker, T, Hamilton, F and Meldrum, DR (1999) Blastocyst culture and transfer: analysis of results and parameters affecting outcome in two in vitro fertilization programs. Fertil Steril 72, 604–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, RT Jr, Ferry, K, Su, J, Tao, X, Scott, K and Treff, NR (2012) Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril 97, 870–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, RT Jr, Upham, KM, Forman, EJ, Hong, KH, Scott, KL, Taylor, D, Tao, X and Treff, NR (2013) 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 100, 697–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, TH, Wright, G, Jones-Colon, S, Mitchell-Leef, D, Kort, HI and Nagy, ZP (2008) Comparison of ICSI and conventional IVF in patients with increased oocyte maturity. Reprod Biomed Online 17, 46–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, TH, Griffin, DK, Katz, SL, Crain, JL, Johnson, L and Gitlin, SA (2016) Technique to “map” chromosomal mosaicism at the blastocyst stage. Cytogenet Genome Res 149, 262–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, TH, Patrick, JL, Gitlin, SA, Wilson, JM, Crain, JL and Griffin, DK (2014a) Comparison of aneuploidy, pregnancy and live birth rates between day 5 and day 6 blastocysts. Reprod Biomed Online 29, 305–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, TH, Gitlin, SA, Patrick, JL, Crain, JL, Wilson, JM and Griffin, DK (2014b) The origin, mechanisms, incidence and clinical consequences of chromosomal mosaicism in humans. Hum Reprod Update 20, 571–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weier, JF, Weier, HU, Jung, CJ, Gormley, M, Zhou, Y, Chu, LW, Genbacev, O, Wright, AA and Fisher, SJ (2005) Human cytotrophoblasts acquires aneuploidies as they differentiate to an invasive phenotype. Dev Biol 279, 420–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, MD, Zenker, J, Bissiere, S and Plachta, N (2018) Instructions for assembling the early mammalian embryo. Dev Cell 45, 667–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, Z, Liu, J, Colins, GS, Salem, SA, Liu, X, Lyle, SS, Peck, AC, Sills, ES and Salem, RD (2012) Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet 5, 24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed