Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 403–408 | Cite as

Are blastocyst aneuploidy rates different between fertile and infertile populations?

  • Jonathan D. Kort
  • Rajiv C. McCoy
  • Zach Demko
  • Ruth B. Lathi
Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to determine if patients with infertility or recurrent pregnancy loss have higher rates of embryo aneuploidy than fertile controls.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of all pre-implantation genetic screening (PGS) cases processed by a single reference lab prior to March 2014 after a blastocyst biopsy. Cases were excluded if no indication for PGS was designated or patients were translocation carriers. The fertile control group consisted of patients undergoing IVF with PGS for sex selection only. The comparison cohorts included those with recurrent pregnancy loss, male factor infertility, unexplained infertility, prior failed IVF, or previous aneuploid conceptions. A quasi-binomial regression model was used to assess the relationship between the dependent variable, aneuploidy rate and the independent variables, maternal age and reason for PGS. A quasi-Poisson regression model was used to evaluate the relationship between similar independent variables and the number of blastocyst biopsies per case.

Results

The initial study population consisted of 3378 IVF-PGS cycles and 18,387 analyzed trophectoderm samples. Controlling for maternal age, we observed an increased rate of aneuploidy among patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (OR 1.330, p < 0.001), prior aneuploid pregnancy (OR 1.439, p < 0.001), or previous failed IVF cycles (OR 1.356, p = 0.0012) compared to fertile controls. Patients with unexplained and male factor infertility did not have a significantly different aneuploidy rate than controls (p > 0.05). The increase in aneuploidy in patients with RPL and prior IVF failure was driven by both an increase in meiotic (OR 1.488 and 1.508, p < 0.05) and mitotic errors (1.269 and 1.393, p < 0.05) relative to fertile controls, while patients with prior aneuploid pregnancies had only an increased risk of meiotic error aneuploidies (OR 1.650, p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with recurrent pregnancy loss, previous IVF failures, and prior aneuploid pregnancies have a significantly higher, age-independent, aneuploidy rate compared to patients without infertility.

Keywords

Pre-implantation genetic screening (PGS) Aneuploidy Infertility Sex selection 

References

  1. 1.
    Hodes-Wertz B, Grifo J, Ghadir S, et al. Idiopathic recurrent miscarriage is caused mostly by aneuploid embryos. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:675–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harton GL, Munné S, Surrey M, et al. Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1695–703.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Franasiak JMFE, Hong KH, Werner MD, Upham KM, Treff NR, Scott RT Jr. The nature of aneuploidy with increasing age of the female partner: a review of 15,169 consecutive trophectoderm biopsies evaluated with comprehensive chromosomal screening. Fertil Steril. 2014:656–63.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor TH, Patrick JL, Gitlin SA, Crain JL, Wilson JM, Griffin DK. Blastocyst euploidy and implantation rates in a young (<35 years) and old (≥35 years) presumed fertile and infertile patient population. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1318–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Demko ZP, Simon AL, McCoy RC, Petrov DA, Rabinowitz M. Effects of maternal age on euploidy rates in a large cohort of embryos analyzed with 24-chromosome single-nucleotide polymorphism-based preimplantation genetic screening. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:1307–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shahine LK, Marshall L, Lamb JD, Hickok LR. Higher rates of aneuploidy in blastocysts and higher risk of no embryo transfer in recurrent pregnancy loss patients with diminished ovarian reserve undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:1124–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Katz-Jaffe MG, Surrey ES, Minjarez DA, Gustofson RL, Stevens JM, Schoolcraft WB. Association of abnormal ovarian reserve parameters with a higher incidence of aneuploid blastocysts. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121:71–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McCoy RC, Demko ZP, Ryan A, et al. Evidence of selection against complex mitotic-origin aneuploidy during preimplantation development. PLoS Genet. 2015;11:e1005601.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johnson DS, Gemelos G, Baner J, et al. Preclinical validation of a microarray method for full molecular karyotyping of blastomeres in a 24-h protocol. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:1066–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Templado C, Vidal F, Estop A Aneuploidy in human spermatozoa. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133:91–9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Templado C, Uroz L, Estop A. New insights on the origin and relevance of aneuploidy in human spermatozoa. Mol Hum Reprod. 2013;19:634–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hong K, Werner M, Franasiak J, et al. Superovulation does not increase embryonic aneuploidy: a prospective evaluation of aneuploidy in natural IVF cycles with comparison to 15,169 embryos from age controlled peers who had superovulation. Fertil Steril. 2014:e41–e2.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Qi ST, Liang LF, Xian YX, Liu JQ, Wang W. Arrested human embryos are more likely to have abnormal chromosomes than developing embryos from women of advanced maternal age. J Ovarian Res. 2014;7:65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Coates A, Hesla JS, Hurliman A, et al. Use of suboptimal sperm increases the risk of aneuploidy of the sex chromosomes in preimplantation blastocyst embryos. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:866–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neyer A, Zintz M, Stecher A, et al. The impact of paternal factors on cleavage stage and blastocyst development analyzed by time-lapse imaging-a retrospective observational study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:1607–14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Xue Z, Huang K, Cai C, et al. Genetic programs in human and mouse early embryos revealed by single-cell RNA sequencing. Nature. 2013;500:593–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan D. Kort
    • 1
  • Rajiv C. McCoy
    • 2
  • Zach Demko
    • 3
  • Ruth B. Lathi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Reproductive Endocrinology and InfertilityStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of Genome SciencesUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  3. 3.Natera, Inc.San CarlosUSA

Personalised recommendations