Differences in cumulus cells gene expression between modified natural and stimulated in vitro fertilization cycles
The aim of our study was to determine whether there are any differences in the cumulus cell gene expression profile of mature oocytes derived from modified natural IVF and controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycles and if these changes could help us understand why modified natural IVF has lower success rates.
Cumulus cells surrounding mature oocytes that developed to morulae or blastocysts on day 5 after oocyte retrieval were submitted to microarray analysis. The obtained data were then validated using quantitative real-time PCR.
There were 66 differentially expressed genes between cumulus cells of modified natural IVF and controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycles. Gene ontology analysis revealed the oxidation-reduction process, glutathione metabolic process, xenobiotic metabolic process and gene expression were significantly enriched biological processes in MNIVF cycles. Among differentially expressed genes we observed a large group of small nucleolar RNA’s whose role in folliculogenesis has not yet been established.
The increased expression of genes involved in the oxidation-reduction process probably points to hypoxic conditions in modified natural IVF cycles. This finding opens up new perspectives for the establishment of the potential role that oxidation-reduction processes have in determining success rates of modified natural IVF.
KeywordsCumulus cells Gene expression Stimulated IVF Unstimulated IVF
- 9.de los Santos MJ, García-Láez V, Beltrán-Torregrosa D, Horcajadas JA, Martínez-Conejero JA, Esteban FJ, et al. Hormonal and molecular characterization of follicular fluid, cumulus cells and oocytes from pre-ovulatory follicles in stimulated and unstimulated cycles. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:1596–605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Grondahl ML, Borup R, Lee YB, Myrhoj V, Meinertz H, Sørensen S. Differences in gene expression of granulosa cells from women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with either recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone or highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:1820–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Tomazevic T, Gersak K, Meden-Vrtovec H, Drobnic S, Veble A, Valentinčič B, et al. Clinical parameters to predict the success of in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer in the natural cycle. Assist Reprod. 1999;9:149–56.Google Scholar
- 25.Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B Met. 1995;57:289–300.Google Scholar
- 27.Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Pattyn F, Poppe B, Van Roy N, De Paepe A, Speleman F. Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biol 2002;3: RESEARCH0034.Google Scholar
- 44.Rabahi F, Brûlé S, Sirois J, Beckers JF, Silversides DW, Lussier JG. High expression of bovine alpha glutathione S-transferase (GSTA1, GSTA2) subunits is mainly associated with steroidogenically active cells and regulated by gonadotropins in bovine ovarian follicles. Endocrinology. 1999;140:3507–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar