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 ... -  《-》

Pregnancy outcomes following in vitro fertilization frozen embryo transfer (IVF-FET) with or without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) in women with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL): a SART-CORS study.

Can preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) improve the live birth rate in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? PGT-A use was associated with improved live birth rates in couples with recurrent pregnancy loss undergoing frozen embryo transfer (IVF-FET). Euploid embryo transfer is thought to optimize outcomes in some couples with infertility. There is insufficient evidence, however, supporting this approach to management of recurrent pregnancy loss. This study included data collected by the Society of Assisted Reproductive Technologies Clinical Outcomes Reporting System (SART-CORS) for IVF-FET cycles between years 2010 through 2016. A total of 12 631 FET cycles in 10 060 couples were included in this analysis designed to assess the utility of PGT-A in couples with RPL undergoing FET, including 4287 cycles in couples with tubal disease who formed a control group. The experimental group included couples with RPL (strictly defined as a history of 3 or more pregnancy losses) undergoing FET with or without PGT-A. The primary outcome was live birth rate. Secondary outcomes included rates of clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, and biochemical pregnancy loss. Differences were analyzed using generalized estimating equations logistic regression models to account for multiple cycles per patient. Covariates included in the model were age, gravidity, geographic region, race/ethnicity, smoking history, and indication for assisted reproductive technologies. Analyses were stratified for age groups as defined by SART: <35 years, 35-37 years, 38-40 years, 41-42 years, and >42 years. In women with a diagnosis of RPL, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) comparing IVF-FET with PGT-A versus without PGT-A for live birth outcome was 1.31 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.52) for age <35 years, 1.45 (95% CI: 1.21, 1.75) for ages 35-37 years, 1.89 (95% CI: 1.56, 2.29) for ages 38-40, 2.62 (95% CI: 1.94-3.53) for ages 41-42, and 3.80 (95% CI: 2.52, 5.72) for ages >42 years. For clinical pregnancy, the OR was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.48) for age <35 years, 1.37 (95% CI: 1.14, 1.64) for ages 35-37 years, 1.68 (95% CI: 1.40, 2.03) for ages 38-40 years, 2.19 (95% CI: 1.65, 2.90) for ages 41-42, and 2.31 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.32) for ages >42 years. Finally, for spontaneous abortion, the OR was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.21) for age <35 years, 0.85 (95% CI: 0.65, 1.11) for ages 35-37 years, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.08) for ages 38-40, 0.86 (95% CI: 0.58, 1.27) for ages 41-42, and 0.58 (95% CI: 0.32, 1.07) for ages >42 years. The retrospective collection of data including only women with recurrent pregnancy loss undergoing FET presents a limitation of this study, and results may not be generalizable to all couples with recurrent pregnancy loss. Also, data regarding evaluation and treatment for RPL for the included women is unavailable. This is the largest study to date assessing the utility of PGT-A in women with RPL. PGT-A was associated with improvement in live birth and clinical pregnancy in women with RPL, with the largest difference noted in the group of women with age greater than 42 years. Couples with RPL warrant counseling on all management options to reduce subsequent miscarriage, which may include IVF with PGT-A for euploid embryo selection. There are no conflicts of interest to declare. N/A.

Bhatt SJ ，Marchetto NM ，Roy J ，Morelli SS ，McGovern PG ... -  《-》

To test or not to test? A framework for counselling patients on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A).

Murphy LA ，Seidler EA ，Vaughan DA ，Resetkova N ，Penzias AS ，Toth TL ，Thornton KL ，Sakkas D ... -  《-》

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 《-》