Chromosomal Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: 25 Years and Counting.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), first successfully carried out in humans in the early 1990s, initially involved the PCR sexing of embryos by Y- (and later also X-) chromosome specific detection. Because of the problems relating to misdiagnosis and contamination of this technology however the PCR based test was superseded by a FISH-based approach involving X and Y specific probes. Sexing by FISH heralded translocation screening, which was shortly followed by preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for Aneuploidy. Aneuploidy is widely accepted to be the leading cause of implantation failure in assisted reproductive technology (ART) and a major contributor to miscarriage, especially in women of advanced maternal age. PGS (AKA PGD for aneuploidy PGD-A) has had a chequered history, with conflicting lines of evidence for and against its use. The current practice of trophectoderm biopsy followed by array CGH or next generation sequencing is gaining in popularity however as evidence for its efficacy grows. PGS has the potential to identify viable embryos that can be transferred thereby reducing the chances of traumatic failed IVF cycles, miscarriage or congenital abnormalities and facilitating the quickest time to live birth of chromosomally normal offspring. In parallel to chromosomal diagnoses, technology for PGD has allowed for improvements in accuracy and efficiency of the genetic screening of embryos for monogenic disorders. The number of genetic conditions available for screening has increased since the early days of PGD, with the human fertilization and embryology authority currently licensing 419 conditions in the UK [1]. A novel technique known as karyomapping that involves SNP chip screening and tracing inherited chromosomal haploblocks is now licensed for the PGD detection of monogenic disorders. Its potential for the universal detection of chromosomal and monogenic disorders simultaneously however, has yet to be realized

Chromosomal Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: 25 Years and Counting.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), first successfully carried out in humans in the early 1990s, initially involved the PCR sexing of embryos by Y- (and later also X-) chromosome specific detection. Because of the problems relating to misdiagnosis and contamination of this technology however the PCR based test was superseded by a FISH-based approach involving X and Y specific probes. Sexing by FISH heralded translocation screening, which was shortly followed by preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for Aneuploidy. Aneuploidy is widely accepted to be the leading cause of implantation failure in assisted reproductive technology (ART) and a major contributor to miscarriage, especially in women of advanced maternal age. PGS (AKA PGD for aneuploidy PGD-A) has had a chequered history, with conflicting lines of evidence for and against its use. The current practice of trophectoderm biopsy followed by array CGH or next generation sequencing is gaining in popularity however as evidence for its efficacy grows. PGS has the potential to identify viable embryos that can be transferred thereby reducing the chances of traumatic failed IVF cycles, miscarriage or congenital abnormalities and facilitating the quickest time to live birth of chromosomally normal offspring. In parallel to chromosomal diagnoses, technology for PGD has allowed for improvements in accuracy and efficiency of the genetic screening of embryos for monogenic disorders. The number of genetic conditions available for screening has increased since the early days of PGD, with the human fertilization and embryology authority currently licensing 419 conditions in the UK [1]. A novel technique known as karyomapping that involves SNP chip screening and tracing inherited chromosomal haploblocks is now licensed for the PGD detection of monogenic disorders. Its potential for the universal detection of chromosomal and monogenic disorders simultaneously however, has yet to be realized

Dynamics and Ethics of Comprehensive Preimplantation Genetic Testing. A Review of the Challenges

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing of preimplantation embryos has been used for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Microarray technology is being introduced in both these contexts, and is to be expected that also whole genome sequencing of blastomeres will become possible. The amount of extra information such tests will yield may prove to be beneficial for embryo selection, but also raise various ethical issues. We present an overview of the developments and an agenda-setting exploration of the ethical issues. METHODS: The paper is a joint endeavour by the presenters at an explorative 'campus meeting' organized by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in cooperation with the department of Health, Ethics & Society of the Maastricht University (The Netherlands). RESULTS: The increasing amount and detail of information that new screening techniques such as microarrays and whole genome sequencing offer does not automatically coincide with an increasing understanding of the prospects of an embryo. From a technical point of view, the future of comprehensive embryo testing may go together with developments in preconception carrier screening. From an ethical point of view, the increasing complexity and amount of information yielded by comprehensive testing techniques will lead to challenges to the principle of reproductive autonomy and the right of the child to an open future, and may imply a possible larger responsibility of the clinician towards the welfare of the future child. “Smart combinations” of preconception carrier testing and embryo testing may solve some of these ethical questions but could introduce others. CONCLUSION: As comprehensive testing techniques are entering the IVF clinic, there is a need for a thorough rethinking of traditional ethical paradigms regarding medically assisted reproduction.This article was written by Dr Ainsley Newson during the time of her employment with the University of Bristol, UK (2006-2012). Self-archived in the Sydney eScholarship Repository with permission of Bristol University, Sept 2014

Methods for comprehensive chromosome screening of oocytes and embryos: capabilities, limitations, and evidence of validity

Preimplantation aneuploidy screening of cleavage stage embryos using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) may no longer be considered the standard of care in reproductive medicine. Over the last few years, there has been considerable development of novel technologies for comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) of the human genome. Among the notable methodologies that have been incorporated are whole genome amplification, metaphase and array based comparative genomic hybridization, single nucleotide polymorphism microarrays, and quantitative real-time PCR. As these methods become more integral to treating patients with infertility, it is critical that clinicians and scientists obtain a better understanding of their capabilities and limitations. This article will focus on reviewing these technologies and the evidence of their validity

Attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancer

The use of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for hereditary cancer is subject to on-going debate, particularly among professionals. This study evaluates the attitude towards PGD and attitude-associated characteristics of those concerned: family members with a hereditary cancer predisposition. Forty-eight Von Hippel-Lindau and 18 Li–Fraumeni Syndrome families were identified via the 9 family cancer clinics in the Netherlands. In total, 216 high risk family members and partners were approached, of whom 179 (83%) completed a self-report questionnaire. Of the high risk family members, 35% expressed a positive attitude towards PGD. Those with a current desire to have children were significantly more likely to have a positive attitude: 48% would consider the use of PGD. No other sociodemographic, medical or psychosocial variables were associated significantly with a positive attitude. The most frequently reported advantage of PGD is the avoidance of a possible pregnancy termination. Uncertainty about late effects was the most frequently reported disadvantage. These results indicate that approximately half of those contemplating a future pregnancy would consider the use of PGD. The actual uptake, however, is expected to be lower. There is no indication that psychosocial factors affect interest in PGD

The Beneficial Effects of Antifreeze Proteins in the Vitrification of Immature Mouse Oocytes

Antifreeze proteins (AFPs) are a class of polypeptides that permit organismal survival in sub-freezing environments. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of AFP supplementation on immature mouse oocyte vitrification. Germinal vesicle-stage oocytes were vitrified using a two-step exposure to equilibrium and vitrification solution in the presence or absence of 500 ng/mL of AFP III. After warming, oocyte survival, in vitro maturation, fertilization, and embryonic development up to the blastocyst stage were assessed. Spindle and chromosome morphology, membrane integrity, and the expression levels of several genes were assessed in in vitro matured oocytes. The rate of blastocyst formation was significantly higher and the number of caspase-positive blastomeres was significantly lower in the AFP-treated group compared with the untreated group. The proportion of oocytes with intact spindles/chromosomes and stable membranes was also significantly higher in the AFP group. The AFP group showed increased Mad2, Hook-1, Zar1, Zp1, and Bcl2 expression and lower Eg5, Zp2, Caspase6, and Rbm3 expression compared with the untreated group. Supplementation of the vitrification medium with AFP has a protective effect on immature mouse oocytes, promoting their resistance to chilling injury. AFPs may preserve spindle forming ability and membrane integrity at GV stage. The fertilization and subsequent developmental competence of oocytes may be associated with the modulation of Zar1, Zp1/Zp2, Bcl2, Caspase6, and Rbm3

A comparison of polarized and non-polarized human endometrial monolayer culture systems on murine embryo development

BACKGROUND: Co-culture of embryos with various somatic cells has been suggested as a promising approach to improve embryo development. Despite numerous reports regarding the beneficial effects of epithelial cells from the female genital tract on embryo development in a co-culture system, little is known about the effect of these cells when being cultured under a polarized condition on embryo growth. Our study evaluated the effects of in vitro polarized cells on pre-embryo development. METHODS: Human endometrial tissue was obtained from uterine specimens excised at total hysterectomy performed for benign indications. Epithelial cells were promptly isolated and cultured either on extra-cellular matrix gel (ECM-Gel) coated millipore filter inserts (polarized) or plastic surfaces (non-polarized). The epithelial nature of the cells cultured on plastic was confirmed through immunohistochemistry, and polarization of cells cultured on ECM-Gel was evaluated by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). One or two-cell stage embryos of a superovulated NMRI mouse were then flushed and placed in culture with either polarized or non-polarized cells and medium alone. Development rates were determined for all embryos daily and statistically compared. At the end of the cultivation period, trophectoderm (TE) and inner cell mass (ICM) of expanded blastocysts from each group were examined microscopically. RESULTS: Endometrial epithelial cells cultured on ECM-Gel had a highly polarized columnar shape as opposed to the flattened shape of the cells cultured on a plastic surface. The two-cell embryos cultured on a polarized monolayer had a higher developmental rate than those from the non-polarized cells. There was no statistically significant difference; still, the blastocysts from the polarized monolayer, in comparison with the non-polarized group, had a significantly higher mean cell number. The development of one-cell embryos in the polarized and non-polarized groups showed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: Polarized cells could improve in vitro embryo development from the two-cell stage more in terms of quality (increasing blastocyst cellularity) than in terms of developmental rate