Perceptions, motivations and decision regret surrounding preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy.

Is there a difference in level of decision regret following IVF treatment between those who choose to complete or not complete preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy [PGT-A]? Approximately one-third of the participants expressed moderate to severe regret (MSR) following their decision to either complete or not complete PGT-A; notably, decision regret was higher in those who chose not to complete PGT-A, primarily driven by significantly higher regret scores in those that experienced a miscarriage after not testing. Previous research has found that 39% of participants who completed PGT-A expressed some degree of decision regret and that negative clinical outcomes, such as lack of euploid embryos, negative pregnancy test or miscarriage, were associated with a higher level of decision regret. To date, there are no published studies assessing the possible disparity in decision regret surrounding PGT-A in a population of IVF patients that either chose to pursue PGT-A or not. An anonymous online survey was distributed to 1583 patients who underwent IVF with or without PGT-A at a single university institution between January 2016 and December 2017. In total, 335 women accessed the survey, 220 met eligibility criteria and 130 completed the full study survey. Six participants were excluded due to refusal of medical record review, and nine participants were excluded after record review due to not meeting eligibility based on cycle start date or completing only embryo banking without attempting transfer. One hundred and fifteen participants were included in the final analysis. Of the 115 participants included, 55 (48%) completed PGT-A and 60 (52%) did not complete PGT-A. The online survey included four sections: Demographics; Perceptions about PGT-A risks and benefits [scale from 0 (absolutely not true) to 100 (absolutely true)]; Decision-making factors [scale from 0 (not important) to 100 (very important)]; and Brehaut Decision Regret Scale [DRS] [range 0-100, with >25 indicating MSR]. A retrospective chart review was conducted to confirm study eligibility and collect cumulative clinical outcomes of consenting participants who completed the survey. Demographics of the PGT-A and no PGT-A cohorts were similar, with the majority of respondents being Caucasian or Asian, unaffiliated with any religion and with a graduate or professional degree. The two groups differed significantly in mean age, with the PGT-A group being slightly older (mean ± SD: 37 ± 3.7 versus 36 ± 3.4; P = 0.048), and in rate of miscarriages, with fewer participants in the PGT-A cohort experiencing a miscarriage (5% versus 22%; P = 0.012). The majority of participants in both PGT-A and no PGT-A cohorts strongly believed in the purported benefits of PGT-A, including that it decreases the risk of birth defects (median 82 versus 77; P = 0.046), improves the chances of having a healthy baby (median 89 versus 74; P = 0.002) and selects the best embryo for transfer (median 85 versus 80; P = 0.049). When asked to report their motivating factors for decision-making, both groups cited physician counseling as important (median 70 versus 71; P = 0.671); however, the PGT-A cohort was more strongly motivated by a desire to not transfer abnormal embryos (median 84 versus 53; P = 0.0001). Comparison of DRS score between those who did or did not undergo PGT-A showed significantly higher median DRS score after not completing PGT-A (median 15 versus 0; P = 0.013). There was a significantly higher proportion of participants who did not complete PGT-A that expressed mild (36% versus 16%) and MSR (32% versus 24%) compared to those who completed PGT-A (χ2 = 9.03, df = 2; P = 0.011). Sub-group analyses of DRS scores by outcomes of clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth revealed that the higher DRS score in those not completing PGT-A was driven by a large increase in regret noted by those with history of a miscarriage (median 45 versus 0; P = 0.018). Multivariate logistic regression modeling found no evidence that any specific demographic factor, clinical outcome or perception/motivation surrounding PGT-A was independently predictive of increased risk for MSR. The retrospective nature of data collection incurs the possibility of sampling and recall bias. As only 59% of eligible respondents completed the full survey, it is possible that mainly those with very positive or negative sentiments following treatment felt compelled to complete their response. This bias, however, would apply to the whole of the population, and not simply to those who did or did not complete PGT-A. The proportion of participants expressing any degree of decision regret in this PGT-A cohort was 40%, which is comparable to that shown in prior research. This study adds to prior data by also assessing decision regret experienced by those who went through IVF without PGT-A, and showed that 68% expressed some level of regret with their decision-making. These results should not be interpreted to mean that all patients should opt for PGT-A to pre-emptively mitigate their risk of regret. Instead, it suggests that drivers of decision regret are likely multifactorial and unique to the experience of one's personal expectations regarding PGT-A, motivations for pursuing or not pursuing it and resultant clinical outcome. Highlighting the complex nature of regret, these data should encourage physicians to more carefully consider individual patient values toward risk-taking or risk-averse behavior, as well as their own positions regarding PGT-A. Until there are clear recommendations regarding utilization of PGT-A, a strong collaboration between physicians and genetic counselors is recommended to educate patients on the risks and potential benefits of PGT-A in a balanced and individualized manner. No funding was utilized for study completion and the authors have no competing interests. N/A.

Kaing A ，Rosen MP ，Quinn MM 《-》

Beyond the biopsy: predictors of decision regret and anxiety following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy.

What factors are associated with decision regret and anxiety following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)? The majority of patients viewed PGT-A favourably regardless of their outcome; although patients with negative outcomes expressed greater decision regret and anxiety. PGT-A is increasingly utilized in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles to aid in embryo selection. Despite the increasing use of PGT-A technology, little is known about patients' experiences and the possible unintended consequences of decision regret and anxiety related to PGT-A outcome. Anonymous surveys were distributed to 395 patients who underwent their first cycle of autologous PGT-A between January 2014 and March 2015. There were 69 respondents who underwent PGT-A at a university-affiliated fertility centre, completed the survey and met inclusion criteria. Respondents completed three validated questionnaires including the Brehaut Decision Regret (DR) Scale, short-form State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6) and a health literacy scale. The surveys also assessed demographics, fertility history, IVF and frozen embryo transfer cycle data. The majority of respondents were Caucasian, >35 years of age and educated beyond an undergraduate degree. The majority utilized PGT-A on their first IVF cycle, most commonly to 'maximize the efficiency of IVF' or reduce per-transfer miscarriage risk. The overall median DR score was low, but 39% of respondents expressed some degree of regret. Multiple regression confirmed a relationship between embryo ploidy and decision regret, with a lower number of euploid embryos associated with a greater degree of regret. Patients who conceived following euploid transfer reported less regret than those who miscarried or failed to conceive (P < 0.005). Decision regret was inversely associated with number of living children but not associated with age, education, race, insurance coverage, religion, marital status or indication for IVF/PGT-A. Anxiety was greater following a negative pregnancy test or miscarriage compared to successful conception (P < 0.0001). Anxiety was negatively associated with age, time since oocyte retrieval and number of living children, and a relationship was observed between anxiety and religious affiliation. Overall, decision regret was low, and 94% of all respondents reported satisfaction with their decision to pursue PGT-A; however, patients with a negative outcome were more likely to express decision regret and anxiety. This survey was performed at a single centre with a relatively homogenous population, and the findings may not be generalizable. Reasons for caution include the possibility of response bias and unmeasured differences among those who did and did not respond to the survey, as well as the possibility of recall bias given the retrospective nature of the survey. Few studies have examined patient perceptions of PGT-A, and our findings should be interpreted with caution. Overall decision regret was low following PGT-A, and the vast majority deemed the information gained valuable for reproductive planning regardless of outcome. However, more than one-third of the respondents expressed some degree of regret. Respondents with no euploid embryos were more likely to express regret, and those with a negative outcome following euploid embryo transfer expressed both higher regret and anxiety. These data identify unanticipated consequences of PGT-A and suggest opportunities for additional counselling and support surrounding IVF with PGT-A. No external funding was obtained for this study. D.H.M. reports personal fees, honorarium, and travel expenses from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, personal fees and travel expenses from Granata Bio, and personal fees from Biogenetics Corporation, The Sperm and Embryo Bank of New York, and ReproART: Georgian American Center for Reproductive Medicine. All conflicts are outside the submitted work.

Goldman KN ，Blakemore J ，Kramer Y ，McCulloh DH ，Lawson A ，Grifo JA ... -  《-》

Comparison of pregnancy outcomes following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy using a matched propensity score design.

Does preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) increase the likelihood of live birth among women undergoing autologous IVF who have fertilized embryos? PGT-A is associated with a greater probability of live birth among women 35 years old and older who are undergoing IVF. Previous studies evaluating the association between PGT-A and the incidence of live birth may be prone to confounding by indication, as women whose embryos undergo PGT-A may have a lower probability of live birth due to other factors associated with their increased risk of aneuploidy (e.g. advancing age, history of miscarriage). Propensity score matching can reduce bias where strong confounding by indication is expected. We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from women who underwent autologous IVF treatment, had their first oocyte retrieval at our institution from 1 January 2011 through 31 October 2017 and had fertilized embryos from this retrieval. If a woman elected to use PGT-A, all good quality embryos (defined as an embryo between Stages 3 and 6 with Grade A or B inner or outer cell mass) were tested. We only evaluated cycles associated with the first oocyte retrieval in this analysis. Our analytic cohort included 8227 women. We used multivariable logistic regression to calculate a propensity score for PGT-A based on relevant demographic and clinical factors available to the IVF provider at the time of PGT-A or embryo transfer. We used the propensity score to match women who did and did not utilize PGT-A in a 1:1 ratio. We then used log-binomial regression to compare the cumulative incidence of embryo transfer, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth between women who did and did not utilize PGT-A. Because the risk of aneuploidy increases with age, we repeated these analyses among women <35, 35-37 and ≥38 years old based on the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology's standards. Overall, women with fertilized embryos who used PGT-A were significantly less likely to have an embryo transfer (risk ratios (RR): 0.78; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.82) but were more likely to have a cycle that resulted in a clinical pregnancy (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.28) and live birth (RR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.35) than women who did not use PGT-A. Among women aged ≥38 years, those who used PGT-A were 67% (RR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.31, 2.13) more likely to have a live birth than women who did not use PGT-A. Among women aged 35-37 years, those who used PGT-A were also more likely to have a live birth (RR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.54) than women who did not use PGT-A. In contrast, women <35 years old who used PGT-A were as likely to have a live birth (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.78, 1.06) as women <35 years old who did not use PGT-A. We were unable to abstract several potential confounding variables from patients' records (e.g. anti-Mullerian hormone levels and prior IVF treatment), which may have resulted in residual confounding. Additionally, by restricting our analyses to cycles associated with the first oocyte retrieval, we were unable to estimate the cumulative incidence of live birth over multiple oocyte retrieval cycles. Women aged 35 years or older are likely to benefit from PGT-A. Larger studies might identify additional subgroups of women who might benefit from PGT-A. No funding was received for this study. D.S. reports that he is a member of the Cooper Surgical Advisory Board. The other authors report no conflicts of interest. N/A.

Haviland MJ ，Murphy LA ，Modest AM ，Fox MP ，Wise LA ，Nillni YI ，Sakkas D ，Hacker MR ... -  《-》

Leave the past behind: women's reproductive history shows no association with blastocysts' euploidy and limited association with live birth rates after euploid embryo transfers.

Is there an association between patients' reproductive history and the mean euploidy rates per biopsied blastocysts (m-ER) or the live birth rates (LBRs) per first single vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transfers? Patients' reproductive history (as annotated during counselling) showed no association with the m-ER, but a lower LBR was reported after euploid blastocyst transfer in women with a history of repeated implantation failure (RIF). Several studies have investigated the association between the m-ER and (i) patients' basal characteristics, (ii) ovarian stimulation strategy and dosage, (iii) culture media and conditions, and (iv) embryo morphology and day of full blastocyst development. Conversely, the expected m-ER due to women's reproductive history (previous live births (LBs), miscarriages, failed IVF cycles and transfers, and lack of euploid blastocysts among prior cohorts of biopsied embryos) still needs investigations. Yet, this information is critical to counsel new patients about a first cycle with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), but even more so after former adverse outcomes to prevent treatment drop-out. This observational study included all patients undergoing a comprehensive chromosome testing (CCT)-based PGT-A cycle with at least one biopsied blastocyst in the period April 2013-December 2019 at a private IVF clinic (n = 2676 patients undergoing 2676 treatments and producing and 8151 blastocysts). m-ER were investigated according to women's reproductive history of LBs: no/≥1, miscarriages: no/1/>1; failed IVF cycles: no/1/2/>2, and implantation failures after previous transfers: no/1/2/>2. Among the 2676 patients included in this study, 440 (16%) had already undergone PGT-A before the study period; the data from these patients were further clustered according to the presence or absence of euploid embryo(s) in their previous cohort of biopsied blastocysts. The clinical outcomes per first single vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transfers (n =1580) were investigated according to the number of patients' previous miscarriages and implantation failures. The procedures involved in this study included ICSI, blastocyst culture, trophectoderm biopsy without hatching in Day 3, CCT-based PGT-A without reporting segmental and/or putative mitotic (or mosaic) aneuploidies and single vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transfer. For statistical analysis, Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis tests, as well as linear regressions and generalised linear models among ranges of maternal age at oocyte retrieval were performed to identify significant differences for continuous variables. Fisher's exact tests and multivariate logistic regression analyses were instead used for categorical variables. Maternal age at oocyte retrieval was the only variable significantly associated with the m-ER. We defined five clusters (<35 years: 66 ± 31%; 35-37 years: 58 ± 33%; 38-40 years: 43 ± 35%; 40-42 years: 28 ± 34%; and >42 years: 17 ± 31%) and all analyses were conducted among them. The m-ER did not show any association with the number of previous LBs, miscarriages, failed IVF cycles or implantation failures. Among patients who had already undergone PGT-A before the study period, the m-ER did not associate with the absence (or presence) of euploid blastocysts in their former cohort of biopsied embryos. Regarding clinical outcomes of the first single vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transfer, the implantation rate was 51%, the miscarriage rate was 14% and the LBR was 44%. This LBR was independent of the number of previous miscarriages, but showed a decreasing trend depending on the number of previous implantation failures, reaching statistical significance when comparing patients with >2 failures and patients with no prior failure (36% versus 47%, P < 0.01; multivariate-OR adjusted for embryo quality and day of full blastocyst development: 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86, P < 0.01). No such differences were shown for previous miscarriage rates. The sample size for treatments following a former completed PGT-A cycle should be larger in future studies. The data should be confirmed from a multicentre perspective. The analysis should be performed also in non-PGT cycles and/or including patients who did not produce blastocysts, in order to investigate a putative association between women's reproductive history with outcomes other than euploidy and LBRs. These data are critical to counsel infertile couples before, during and after a PGT-A cycle, especially to prevent treatment discontinuation due to previous adverse reproductive events. Beyond the 'maternal age effect', the causes of idiopathic recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) and RIF are likely to be endometrial receptivity and selectivity issues; transferring euploid blastocysts might reduce the risk of a further miscarriage, but more information beyond euploidy are required to improve the prognosis in case of RIF. No funding was received and there are no competing interests. N/A.

Cimadomo D ，Capalbo A ，Dovere L ，Tacconi L ，Soscia D ，Giancani A ，Scepi E ，Maggiulli R ，Vaiarelli A ，Rienzi L ，Ubaldi FM ... -  《-》

Preimplantation genetic testing is not a preferred recommendation for patients with X chromosome abnormalities.

Should women with X chromosome abnormalities (XCAs) be recommended to have embryos selected by both morphological and cytogenetic assessment through preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) rather than morphological assessment only in conventional IVF/ICSI treatment? PGT is not a preferred recommendation for women with XCAs in the absence of other PGT indications. XCAs are the most frequent sort of chromosomal aberrations in infertile women. Patients with a complete or partial absence of one X chromosome, diagnosed as Turner Syndrome (TS), demonstrate low spontaneous pregnancy rates (5-7%) and high miscarriage rates (22.8-30.8%), as well as high chances of birth defects (20%). PGT is known to improve pregnancy rates and decrease the incidence of miscarriage in couples with chromosomal aberrations such as Robertsonian and reciprocal translocations and Klinefelter Syndrome. A retrospective cohort study was conducted with 394 women with XCAs and undergoing their first oocyte retrieval and first embryo transfer cycle from June 2011 to August 2019 in the Reproductive Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between the conventional IVF/ICSI group (n = 284) and the PGT group (n = 110) in the first fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycle for each woman with XCAs. Three platforms were applied in PGT: fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH, n = 34), array comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH, n = 24) and next-generation sequencing (NGS, n = 51). The embryo aneuploidy rate and distribution of embryonic chromosomal aberrations revealed by aCGH or NGS were analysed and stratified by maternal age and type of XCAs to assess the effect of maternal XCAs on embryo karyotypes. The live birth rate (LBR) per embryo transfer was similar between the PGT group and IVF/ICSI group both in the first cycle of fresh or frozen embryo transfer respectively (39.13% in PGTFISH vs 42.58% in IVF/ICSI, Padj=0.558; 66.67% in PGTFISH vs 52.08% in PGTaCGH/NGS vs 53.06% in IVF/ICSI, Padj=0.756), as was the clinical pregnancy rate (60.87% in PGTFISH vs 50.97% in IVF/ICSI, Padj =0.672; 88.89% in PGTFISH vs 58.33% in PGTaCGH/NGS vs 69.39% in IVF/ICSI, Padj =0.480) and the pregnancy loss rate (35.71% in PGTFISH vs 16.46% in IVF/ICSI, Padj =0.136; 12.50% in PGTFISH vs 10.71% in PGTaCGH/NGS vs 23.53% in IVF/ICSI, Padj =0.352). The rates of maternal and neonatal complications were also comparable between the PGT and IVF/ICSI groups with fresh and frozen transfers respectively (10.00% vs 8.85%, P = 1.000; 21.74% vs 14.55%, P = 0.272). Intriguingly, the distribution of embryonic chromosome abnormalities was more frequent on autosomes 22 (20.39%), 21 (18.45%) and 16 (17.47%), compared with the X chromosome (8.73%). Selection bias is an inherent drawback of a retrospective study. First, our participants hosted 4.84% X chromosome mosaicism with few typical somatic anomalies of TS. Second, the incidences of history of recurrent miscarriage and abnormal offspring in the PGT group were higher than in IVF/ICSI group although binary logistic regression analysis was performed to attenuate the modifying effect of confounding factors. Third, FISH performed in this study only used X/Y probes and lacked the reference of autosome, which might have resulted in misdiagnosis and bias. Finally, intrinsic disadvantages could not be totally avoided due to the retrospective nature of this study. In the current study, comparable pregnancy outcomes were revealed among a large cohort of women with XCAs undergoing their first cycles of PGT or conventional IVF/ICSI treatment. Moreover, the X chromosome abnormality was illustrated to cause no higher frequency of aberrations in embryos. Our data provided perspectives for genetic and reproductive counselling to XCAs individuals and their families. This work was supported by National Research and Development Plan (2016YFC1000604 and 2017YFC1001100), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81701406), Shandong Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (JQ201720), Taishan Scholars Program for Young Experts of Shandong Province (tsqn20161069) and Projects of Medical and Health Technology Development Program in Shandong Province (202005010520, 202005010523 and 2016WS0368). There is no conflict of interest to declare. N/A.

Li C ，Dang Y ，Li J ，Li H ，Zhu Y ，Qin Y ... -  《-》