Defining Human Embryo Phenotypes by Cohort-specific Prognostic Factors

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2008 Jul 4

PMID 18596962

Citations 11

Authors

Sunny H Jun

Bokyung Choi

Lora Shahine

Lynn M Westphal

Barry Behr

Renee A Reijo Pera

Wing H Wong

Mylene W M Yao

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Hundreds of thousands of human embryos are cultured yearly at in vitro fertilization (IVF) centers worldwide, yet the vast majority fail to develop in culture or following transfer to the uterus. However, human embryo phenotypes have not been formally defined, and current criteria for embryo transfer largely focus on characteristics of individual embryos. We hypothesized that embryo cohort-specific variables describing sibling embryos as a group may predict developmental competence as measured by IVF cycle outcomes and serve to define human embryo phenotypes.

Methodology/principal Findings: We retrieved data for all 1117 IVF cycles performed in 2005 at Stanford University Medical Center, and further analyzed clinical data from the 665 fresh IVF, non-donor cycles and their associated 4144 embryos. Thirty variables representing patient characteristics, clinical diagnoses, treatment protocol, and embryo parameters were analyzed in an unbiased manner by regression tree models, based on dichotomous pregnancy outcomes defined by positive serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-hCG). IVF cycle outcomes were most accurately predicted at approximately 70% by four non-redundant, embryo cohort-specific variables that, remarkably, were more informative than any measures of individual, transferred embryos: Total number of embryos, number of 8-cell embryos, rate (percentage) of cleavage arrest in the cohort and day 3 follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) level. While three of these variables captured the effects of other significant variables, only the rate of cleavage arrest was independent of any known variables.

Conclusions/significance: Our findings support defining human embryo phenotypes by non-redundant, prognostic variables that are specific to sibling embryos in a cohort.

Citing Articles

Using Unlabeled Information of Embryo Siblings from the Same Cohort Cycle to Enhance In Vitro Fertilization Implantation Prediction.

Tzukerman N, Rotem O, Shapiro M, Maor R, Meseguer M, Gilboa D Adv Sci (Weinh). 2023; 10(27):e2207711.

PMID: 37507828 PMC: 10520665. DOI: 10.1002/advs.202207711.

Preimplantation loss of fertilized human ova: estimating the unobservable.

Wilcox A, Harmon Q, Doody K, Wolf D, Adashi E Hum Reprod. 2020; 35(4):743-750.

PMID: 32296829 PMC: 8287936. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deaa048.

Quality of embryos transferred and progesterone levels are the most important predictors of live birth after fresh embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort study.

Cai Q, Wan F, Appleby D, Hu L, Zhang H J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013; 31(2):185-94.

PMID: 24202826 PMC: 3933599. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-013-0129-4.

Derivation of human embryonic stem cells using a post-inner cell mass intermediate.

OLeary T, Heindryckx B, Lierman S, van der Jeught M, Duggal G, De Sutter P Nat Protoc. 2013; 8(2):254-64.

PMID: 23306459 DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2012.157.

Influence of group embryo culture strategies on the blastocyst development and pregnancy outcome.

Tao T, Robichaud A, Mercier J, Ouellette R J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012; 30(1):63-8.

PMID: 23239126 PMC: 3553343. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-012-9892-x.

References

Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar J, Verhoeve H . In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357(1):9-17. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa067744. View

Stone B, Greene J, Vargyas J, Ringler G, Marrs R . Embryo fragmentation as a determinant of blastocyst development in vitro and pregnancy outcomes following embryo transfer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 192(6):2014-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.02.048. View

Braude P, Bolton V, Moore S . Human gene expression first occurs between the four- and eight-cell stages of preimplantation development. Nature. 1988; 332(6163):459-61. DOI: 10.1038/332459a0. View

Gardner D, Surrey E, Minjarez D, Leitz A, Stevens J, Schoolcraft W . Single blastocyst transfer: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 2004; 81(3):551-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.07.023. View

Neuber E, Mahutte N, Arici A, Sakkas D . Sequential embryo assessment outperforms investigator-driven morphological assessment at selecting a good quality blastocyst. Fertil Steril. 2006; 85(3):794-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.08.064. View

Friedman J, Meulman J . Multiple additive regression trees with application in epidemiology. Stat Med. 2003; 22(9):1365-81. DOI: 10.1002/sim.1501. View

Gardner D, Schoolcraft W, Wagley L, Schlenker T, Stevens J, Hesla J . A prospective randomized trial of blastocyst culture and transfer in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1999; 13(12):3434-40. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/13.12.3434. View

Guzick D, Overstreet J, Factor-Litvak P, Brazil C, Nakajima S, Coutifaris C . Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. N Engl J Med. 2002; 345(19):1388-93. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa003005. View

Rijnders P, Jansen C . The predictive value of day 3 embryo morphology regarding blastocyst formation, pregnancy and implantation rate after day 5 transfer following in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13(1O):2869-73. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/13.10.2869. View

10.

Gardner D, Lane M, Schoolcraft W . Culture and transfer of viable blastocysts: a feasible proposition for human IVF. Hum Reprod. 2001; 15 Suppl 6:9-23. View

11.

Volpes A, Sammartano F, Coffaro F, Mistretta V, Scaglione P, Allegra A . Number of good quality embryos on day 3 is predictive for both pregnancy and implantation rates in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril. 2004; 82(5):1330-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.03.067. View

12.

Dobson A, Raja R, Abeyta M, Taylor T, Shen S, Haqq C . The unique transcriptome through day 3 of human preimplantation development. Hum Mol Genet. 2004; 13(14):1461-70. DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddh157. View

13.

Spyropoulou I, Karamalegos C, Bolton V . A prospective randomized study comparing the outcome of in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer following culture of human embryos individually or in groups before embryo transfer on day 2. Hum Reprod. 1999; 14(1):76-9. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/14.1.76. View

14.

Broekmans F, Kwee J, Hendriks D, Mol B, Lambalk C . A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update. 2006; 12(6):685-718. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dml034. View

15.

Milki A, Hinckley M, Gebhardt J, Dasig D, Westphal L, Behr B . Accuracy of day 3 criteria for selecting the best embryos. Fertil Steril. 2002; 77(6):1191-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03104-7. View

16.

Nagy Z, Dozortsev D, Diamond M, Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Abdelmassih R . Pronuclear morphology evaluation with subsequent evaluation of embryo morphology significantly increases implantation rates. Fertil Steril. 2003; 80(1):67-74. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00569-7. View

17.

Racowsky C, Jackson K, Cekleniak N, Fox J, Hornstein M, Ginsburg E . The number of eight-cell embryos is a key determinant for selecting day 3 or day 5 transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000; 73(3):558-64. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(99)00565-8. View

18.

Paria B, Dey S . Preimplantation embryo development in vitro: cooperative interactions among embryos and role of growth factors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990; 87(12):4756-60. PMC: 54196. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.87.12.4756. View

19.

Artley J, Braude P, Johnson M . Gene activity and cleavage arrest in human pre-embryos. Hum Reprod. 1992; 7(7):1014-21. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137761. View

20.

Jun S, OLeary T, Jackson K, Racowsky C . Benefit of intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with a high incidence of triploidy in a prior in vitro fertilization cycle. Fertil Steril. 2006; 86(4):825-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.03.043. View