Quantitative decision-making in preimplantation genetic (aneuploidy) screening (PGS)

Karyomapping and how is it improving preimplantation genetics?

INTRODUCTION

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening (PGD/PGS) has been applied clinically for >25 years however inherent drawbacks include the necessity to tailor each case to the trait in question, and that technology to detect monogenic and chromosomal disorders respectively is fundamentally different. Areas covered: The area of preimplantation genetics has evolved over the last 25 years, adapting to changes in technology and the need for more efficient, streamlined diagnoses. Karyomapping allows the determination of inheritance from the (grand)parental haplobocks through assembly of inherited chromosomal segments. The output displays homologous chromosomes, crossovers and the genetic status of the embryos by linkage comparison, as well as chromosomal disorders. It also allows for determination of heterozygous SNP calls, avoiding the risks of allele dropout, a common problem with other PGD techniques. Manuscripts documenting the evolution of preimplantation genetics, especially those investigating technologies that would simultaneously detect monogenic and chromosomal disorders, were selected for review. Expert commentary: Karyomapping is currently available for detection of single gene disorders; ~1000 clinics worldwide offer it (via ~20 diagnostic laboratories) and ~2500 cases have been performed. Due an inability to detect post-zygotic trisomy reliably however and confounding problems of embryo mosaicism, karyomapping has yet to be applied clinically for detection of chromosome disorders.

Live birth after PGD with confirmation by a comprehensive approach (karyomapping) for simultaneous detection of monogenic and chromosomal disorders

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for monogenic disorders has the drawback of time and cost associated with tailoring a specific test for each couple, disorder, or both. The inability of any single assay to detect the monogenic disorder in question and simultaneously the chromosomal complement of the embryo also limits its application as separate tests may need to be carried out on the amplified material. The first clinical use of a novel approach ('karyomapping') was designed to circumvent this problem. In this example, karyomapping was used to confirm the results of an existing PGD case detecting both chromosomal abnormalities and a monogenic disorder (Smith-Lemli-Opitz [SLO] syndrome) simultaneously. The family underwent IVF, ICSI and PGD, and both polar body and cleavage stage biopsy were carried out. Following whole genome amplification, array comparative genomic hybridisation of the polar bodies and minisequencing and STR analysis of single blastomeres were used to diagnose maternal aneuploidies and SLO status, respectively. This was confirmed, by karyomapping. Unlike standard PGD, karyomapping required no a-priori test development. A singleton pregnancy and live birth, unaffected with SLO syndrome and with no chromosome abnormality, ensued. Karyomapping is potentially capable of detecting a wide spectrum of monogenic and chromosome disorders and, in this context, can be considered a comprehensive approach to PGD.

PGS-FISH in reproductive medicine and perspective directions for improvement: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Embryo selection can be carried out via morphological criteria or by using genetic studies based on Preimplantation Genetic Screening. In the present study, we evaluate the clinical validity of Preimplantation Genetic Screening with fluorescence in situ hybridization (PGS-FISH) compared with morphological embryo criteria.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was made of the bibliography, with the following goals: firstly, to determine the prevalence of embryo chromosome alteration in clinical situations in which the PGS-FISH technique has been used; secondly, to calculate the statistics of diagnostic efficiency (negative Likelihood Ratio), using 2 × 2 tables, derived from PGS-FISH. The results obtained were compared with those obtained from embryo morphology. We calculated the probability of transferring at least one chromosome-normal embryo when it was selected using either morphological criteria or PGS-FISH, and considered what diagnostic performance should be expected of an embryo selection test with respect to achieving greater clinical validity than that obtained from embryo morphology.

RESULTS

After an embryo morphology selection that produced a negative result (normal morphology), the likelihood of embryo aneuploidies was found to range from a pre-test value of 65% (prevalence of embryo chromosome alteration registered in all the study groups) to a post-test value of 55% (Confidence interval: 50-61), while after PGS-FISH with a negative result (euploid), the post-test probability was 42% (Confidence interval: 35-49) (p < 0.05). The probability of transferring at least one euploid embryo was the same whether 3 embryos were selected according to morphological criteria or whether 2, selected by PGS-FISH, were transferred. Any embryo selection test, if it is to provide greater clinical validity than embryo morphology, must present a LR-value of 0.40 (Confidence interval: 0.32-0.51) in single embryo transfer, and 0.06 (CI: 0.05-0.07) in double embryo transfer.

DISCUSSION

With currently available technology, and taking into account the number of embryos to be transferred, the clinical validity of PGS-FISH, although superior to that of morphological criteria, does not appear to be clinically relevant.