Are Ovarian Responses and the Number of Transferable Embryos Different in Females and Partners of Male Balanced Translocation Carriers?

Overview

Journal J Assist Reprod Genet

Publisher Springer

Specialties Genetics
Reproductive Medicine

Date 2022 Aug 4

PMID 35925537

Authors

Mingyue Liu

Zhiqin Bu

Yan Liu

Jinhao Liu

Shanjun Dai

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare ovarian response and the number of transferable embryos between women with balanced autosomal translocations and women whose partners carry the translocation (control group). To investigate the predictive value of metaphase II (MII) oocyte number and biopsied embryo number for gaining at lowest one transferable embryo.

Design: We retrospectively analyzed 1942 preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) cycles of 1505 balanced autosomal translocation couples over 8 years. All cycles were divided into two subgroups: Robertsonian and reciprocal translocations (ROBT and ReBT). Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to ascertain a cutoff of MII oocytes and biopsied embryos as predictors of gaining at lowest one transferable embryo.

Result: There were no statistical differences in baseline features or ovarian response indicators regarding the number of retrieved/MII oocytes, E2 level on the day of HCG, and ovarian sensitivity index (OSI) between women with balanced autosomal translocations and control group (P > 0.05). A decreased number of transferable embryos were found in women with balanced autosomal translocations regardless of the type of translocation. The cutoff values for gaining at lowest one transferable embryo are 12.5 MII oocytes and 4.5 biopsied embryos, respectively.

Conclusion: Women with balanced autosomal translocations have a normal ovarian response, but fewer transferable embryos, meaning that higher gonadotropin (Gn) doses may be required to increase transferable embryos. When fewer than 12.5 MII oocytes or 4.5 blastocysts are obtained in a PGT-SR cycle, couples should be notified that the likelihood of gaining a transferable embryo is low.

Citing Articles

Effects of chromosomal translocation characteristics on fertilization and blastocyst development - a retrospective cohort study.

Wu S, Zhang J, Guan Y, Ren B, Zhang Y, Liu X BMC Med Genomics. 2023; 16(1):273.

PMID: 37915045 PMC: 10619257. DOI: 10.1186/s12920-023-01715-4.

References

Hamerton J, Canning N, Ray M, Smith S . A cytogenetic survey of 14,069 newborn infants. I. Incidence of chromosome abnormalities. Clin Genet. 1975; 8(4):223-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1975.tb01498.x. View

Fryns J, Van Buggenhout G . Structural chromosome rearrangements in couples with recurrent fetal wastage. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1999; 81(2):171-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-2115(98)00185-7. View

Scriven P . PGT-SR (reciprocal translocation) using trophectoderm sampling and next-generation sequencing: insights from a virtual trial. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021; 38(8):1971-1978. PMC: 8417212. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02174-5. View

Mayeur A, Ahdad N, Hesters L, Grynberg M, Romana S, Sonigo C . Does the prognosis after PGT for structural rearrangement differ between female and male translocation carriers?. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020; 40(5):684-692. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.01.025. View

Tong J, Niu Y, Wan A, Zhang T . Effect of parental origin and predictors for obtaining a euploid embryo in balanced translocation carriers. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021; 44(1):72-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.09.007. View

Chen S, Escudero T, Cekleniak N, Sable D, Garrisi M, Munne S . Patterns of ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation in female carriers of balanced translocation. Fertil Steril. 2005; 83(5):1504-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.11.058. View

Lledo B, Ortiz J, Morales R, Ten J, de la Fuente P, Garcia-Ochoa C . The paternal effect of chromosome translocation carriers observed from meiotic segregation in embryos. Hum Reprod. 2010; 25(7):1843-8. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq111. View

Harper J, Wilton L, Traeger-Synodinos J, Goossens V, Moutou C, SenGupta S . The ESHRE PGD Consortium: 10 years of data collection. Hum Reprod Update. 2012; 18(3):234-47. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmr052. View

Mateu-Brull E, Rodrigo L, Peinado V, Mercader A, Campos-Galindo I, Bronet F . Interchromosomal effect in carriers of translocations and inversions assessed by preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements (PGT-SR). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019; 36(12):2547-2555. PMC: 6911137. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01593-9. View

10.

Tur-Kaspa I . Clinical management of in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Semin Reprod Med. 2012; 30(4):309-22. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1313910. View

11.

Huber M, Hadziosmanovic N, Berglund L, Holte J . Using the ovarian sensitivity index to define poor, normal, and high response after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in the long gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist protocol: suggestions for a new principle to solve an old problem. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(5):1270-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.049. View

12.

Li H, Lee V, Ho P, Ng E . Ovarian sensitivity index is a better measure of ovarian responsiveness to gonadotrophin stimulation than the number of oocytes during in-vitro fertilization treatment. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013; 31(2):199-203. PMC: 3933607. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-013-0144-5. View

13.

Niu W, Wang L, Xu J, Li Y, Shi H, Li G . Improved clinical outcomes of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy using MALBAC-NGS compared with MDA-SNP array. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020; 20(1):388. PMC: 7333433. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-020-03082-9. View

14.

Dechanet C, Castelli C, Reyftmann L, Hamamah S, Hedon B, Dechaud H . Do female translocations influence the ovarian response pattern to controlled ovarian stimulation in preimplantation genetic diagnosis?. Hum Reprod. 2011; 26(5):1232-40. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der032. View

15.

Verdoni A, Hu J, Surti U, Babcock M, Sheehan E, Clemens M . Reproductive outcomes in individuals with chromosomal reciprocal translocations. Genet Med. 2021; 23(9):1753-1760. DOI: 10.1038/s41436-021-01195-w. View

16.

Ko D, Cho J, Lee H, Kim J, Kang I, Yang K . Preimplantation genetic diagnosis outcomes and meiotic segregation analysis of robertsonian translocation carriers. Fertil Steril. 2013; 99(5):1369-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.010. View

17.

Liu H, Mao B, Xu X, Liu L, Ma X, Zhang X . The Effectiveness of Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Balanced Translocation Couples. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2021; 160(11-12):625-633. DOI: 10.1159/000512847. View

18.

Ma X, Xu X, Mao B, Liu H, Li H, Liu K . Chromosomal analysis for embryos from balanced chromosomal rearrangement carriers using next generation sequencing. Mol Reprod Dev. 2021; 88(5):362-370. DOI: 10.1002/mrd.23469. View

19.

Bint S, Ogilvie C, Flinter F, Khalaf Y, Scriven P . Meiotic segregation of Robertsonian translocations ascertained in cleavage-stage embryos--implications for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod. 2011; 26(6):1575-84. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der080. View

20.

Lin L, Chen X, Wang J, Li R, Ding C, Cai B . Effect of carriers' sex on meiotic segregation patterns and chromosome stability of reciprocal translocations. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021; 43(6):1011-1018. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.08.017. View