Abstract
The relatively high levels of aneuploidy identified in IVF embryos recently have raised the opportunity to improve pregnancy rates and liveborn outcomes with IVF by identifying and transferring only one chromosomally balanced embryo. With the increased use of CGH, it has been observed that any of the chromosomes can be involved in aneuploidy and even de novo segmental aneuploidies may contribute to implantation failure and miscarriage in a typical IVF cycle. The previous limitations in FISH complexity had meant that the full benefits of aneuploidy screening were not initially realised. The impact of reliable whole chromosome amplification methods and the availability of quality controlled commercial microarrays has seen strong uptake of total chromosome screening by many clinics around the world with substantial changes in implantation rates for the selected embryos reported in most cases. In spite of these benefits, the cost of the aCGH process appears to have limited the availability for a significant number of patients. The price of arrays has reduced in the last few years, but this remains a substantial cost burden in many situations. An alternative approach that can still meet the criteria of total chromosome screening but is potentially more cost-effective could bring the benefits of total chromosome screening to an even wider patient group. Partial genome sequencing (PGS) or low-pass sequencing is one alternative that can be used to rapidly karyotype whole-genome-amplified samples from human blastocysts. We compared these with array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) karyotypes. Readily available open-source software was customised and then used to map the individual Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) reads to chromosomes providing considerable flexibility for resolving both total chromosomes as well as segmental variations. Qualitatively, there was complete diagnostic agreement between the two approaches. Quantitatively, the sequencing approach also offered simple implementation of objective measures of levels of mosaicism within the multi-cell trophectoderm biopsy piece aiding final decision-making regarding suitability for transfer of the nominated (single) embryo. Depending on individual laboratory capabilities, either technique can have shortened protocols that enable next day transfer of one euploid embryo. Standard protocols for aCGH or PGS can fit timing wise with cleavage stage biopsy. Embryos biopsied on day 5 of cycle will only be transferrable the next day, while slower developing embryos biopsied on day 6 may need to be frozen and transferred at a later time. While reports of day 3 blastomere biopsy show improved pregnancy rates after screening, the final outcomes do not appear to be as good as blastocyst stage biopsy, thus not realising the full potential of screening. Applied correctly, simplified, cost-effective routine aneuploidy analysis via aCGH or NGS promises high live birth rates per single transferred embryo.
Author Contributions: 
All authors contributed to the preparation of the manuscript. PB and DL performed the laboratory components and WR developed the SeqVar algorithms from publicly available software.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Catt J, Wood T, Henman M, Jansen R. Single embryo transfer in IVF to prevent multiple pregnancies. Twin Res. 2003;6:536–9.
Land JA, Evers JLH. Risks and complications in assisted reproduction techniques: report of an ESHRE consensus meeting. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:455–7.
Henman M, Catt JW, Wood T, Bowman MC, de Boer KA, Jansen RPS. Elective transfer of single fresh blastocysts and later transfer of cryostored blastocysts reduces the twin pregnancy rate and can increase the IVF live birth rate in younger women. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1620–7.
de Boer KA, Catt JW, Jansen RPS, Leigh D, McArthur S. Moving to blastocyst biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and single embryo transfer at Sydney IVF. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:295–8.
Van Steirteghem A. A European perspective on single embryo transfer. In: Gerris J, Adamson GD, De Sutter P, Racowsky C, editors. Single embryo transfer. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2009. p. 283–8.
Jansen RPS, McArthur SJ. Ovarian stimulation, blastocyst culture and preimplantation genetic screening for elective single embryo transfer. In: Gerris J, Adamson GD, De Sutter P, Racowsky C, editors. Single embryo transfer. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2009. p. 93–108.
Montag M, Liebenthron J, Köster M. Which morphological scoring system is relevant in human embryo development? Placenta. 2011;32:s252–6.
Machtinger R, Racowsky C. Morphological systems of human embryo assessment and clinical evidence. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26:210–21.
Boué A, Boué J, Gropp A. Cytogenetics of pregnancy wastage. Adv Hum Genet. 1985;14:1–57.
Eiben B, Bartels I, Bähr-Porsch S, Borgmann S, Gatz G, Gellert G, et al. Cytogenetic analysis of 750 spontaneous abortions with the direct-preparation method of chorionic villi and its implications for studying genetic causes of pregnancy wastage. Am J Hum Genet. 1990;47:656–63.
Menasha J, Levy B, Hirschhorn K, Kardon NB. Incidence and spectrum of chromosome abnormalities in spontaneous abortions: new insights from a 12-year study. Med Genet. 2005;7:251–63.
Delhanty JDA. Mechanisms of aneuploidy induction in human oogenesis and early embryogenesis. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2005;111:237–44.
Mantzouratou A, Delhanty JDA. Aneuploidy in the human cleavage stage embryo. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133:141–8.
Jansen RPS, Bowman MC, de Boer KA, Leigh DA, Lieberman DB, McArthur SJ. What next for preimplantation screening (PGS)? Experience with blastocyst biopsy and testing for aneuploidy. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:1476–8.
Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Dumoulin JCM, van Wissen LCP, Bras M, Janssen M, Evers JLH, Geraedts JPM. Anaphase lagging mainly explains chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:316–24.
Daphnis DD, Delhanty JDA, Jerkovic S, Geyer J, Craft I, Harper JC. Detailed FISH analysis of day 5 human embryos reveals the mechanisms leading to mosaic aneuploidy. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:129–37.
Harrison RH, Kuo H-C, Scriven PN, Handyside AH, Mackie Ogilvie M. Lack of cell cycle checkpoints in human cleavage stage embryos revealed by a clonal pattern of chromosomal mosaicism analysed by sequential multicolour FISH. Zygote. 2000;8:217–24.
Avo Santos M, Teklenburg G, Macklon NS, Van Opstal D, Schuring-Blom GH, Krijtenburg PJ, de Vreeden-Elbertse J, Fauser BC, Baart EB. The fate of the mosaic embryo: chromosomal constitution and development of Day 4, 5 and 8 human embryos. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:1916–26.
Baart EB, van den Berg I, Martini E, Eussen HJ, Fauser BCJM, Van Opstal D. FISH analysis of 15 chromosomes in human day 4 and 5 preimplantation embryos: the added value of extended aneuploidy detection. Prenat Diagn. 2007;27:55–63.
Wells D, Sherlock JK, Handyside AH, Delhanty JD. Detailed chromosomal and molecular genetic analysis of single cells by whole genome amplification and comparative genomic hybridisation. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:1214–8.
Wells D, Delhanty JDA. Comprehensive chromosomal analysis of human preimplantation embryos using whole genome amplification and single cell comparative genomic hybridization. Mol Hum Reprod. 2000;6:1055–62.
Wilton L, Williamson R, McBain J, Edgar D, Voullaire L. Birth of a healthy infant after preimplantation confirmation of euploidy by comparative genomic hybridization. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1537–41.
Wells D, Alfarawati S, Fragouli E. Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment: microarray and CGH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008;14:703–10.
Fragouli E, Lenzi M, Ross R, Katz-Jaffe M, Schoolcraft WB, Wells D. Comprehensive molecular cytogenetic analysis of the human blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2596–608.
Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munné S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1700–6.
Kuwayama M. Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: the Cryotop method. Theriogenology. 2007;67:73–80.
McArthur SJ, Leigh D, Marshall JT, de Boer KA, Jansen RPS. Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1628–36.
McArthur SJ, Leigh D, Marshall JT, Gee AJ, De Boer KA, Jansen RPS. Blastocyst trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic diagnosis for familial monogenic disorders and chromosomal translocations. Prenat Diagn. 2008;28:434–42.
Jansen RPS. Benefits and challenges brought by improved results from in vitro fertilization. Intern Med J. 2005;35:108–17.
Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Daphnis DD, Goodall NN, Mania A, Griffiths T, Gordon A, Wells D. Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts with the use of FISH, CGH and aCGH: scientific data and technical evaluation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:480–90.
Johnson DS, Cinnioglu C, Ross R, Filby A, Gemelos G, Hill M, Ryan A, Smotrich D, Rabinowitz M, Murray MJ. Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod. 2009;16:944–9.
Bisgnano A, Wells D, Harton G, Munné S. PGD and aneuploidy screening for 24 chromosomes: advantages and disadvantages of competing platforms. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23:677–85.
Yin XY, Tan K, Vajta G, Jiang H, Tan YQ, Zhang CL, et al. Massively parallel sequencing for chromosomal abnormality testing in trophectoderm cells of human blastocysts. Biol Reprod. 2013;88:1–6.
Clouston HJ, Herbert M, Fenwick J, Murdoch AP, Wolstoneholm J. Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts. Prenat Diagn. 2002;22:1143–52.
Xie C, Tammi MT. CNV-seq, a new method to detect copy number variation using high-throughput sequencing. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009;10:80–8.
Vanneste E, Voet T, Melotte C, Debrock S, Sermon K, Staessen C, Liebaers I, Fryns JP, D’Hooghe T, Vermeesch JR. What next for preimplantation genetic screening? High mitotic chromosome instability rate provides the biological basis for the low success rate. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(11):2679–82.
Barbash-Hazan S, Frumkin T, Malcov M, Yaron Y, Cohen T, Azem F, Amit A, Ben-Yosef D. Preimplantation aneuploid embryos undergo self-correction in correlation with their developmental potential. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:890–6.
Kalousek DK, Vekemans M. Confined placental mosaicism. J Med Genet. 1996;33(7):529–33.
Simpson JL, Rechitsky S, Kuliev A. Next-generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1203–4.
Jansen RPS. Elusive fertility: fecundability in perspective. Fertil Steril. 1995;64:252–4.
Leridon H. Levels of natural fertility. In: Human fertility, the basic components. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1977. p. 104–20.
Roy TK, Bradley CK, Bowman MC, McArthur SJ. Single-embryo transfer of vitrified-warmed blastocysts yields equivalent live-birth rates and improved neonatal outcomes compared with fresh transfers, Chapter 14 Microarrays. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1294–301.
Barnhart KT. Introduction: are we ready to eliminate the transfer of fresh embryos in in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril. 2014;102(1):1–2.
International Standing Committee on Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature. In: Shaffer LG, McGowan-Jordon J, Schmid M, editors. ISCN 2013: An international system for human cytogenetic nomenclature. Basel: Karger; 2013. p. 121–8.
Acknowledgements
We thank Omar Chami, Ph.D., at Genea for his contribution towards the administration associated with the 25 blastocysts contributed to the project under NHMRC Licence 309702B and for thawing the embryos for further culture and preparation leading to the analyses.
Competing Interests DL, SMcA, and RPSJ are shareholders in Genea Limited (formerly Sydney IVF, Ltd), an unlisted public company.
Conflict of Interest The authors declare no conflict.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barahona, P., Leigh, D., Ritchie, W., McArthur, S.J., Jansen, R.P.S. (2015). Array CGH and Partial Genome Sequencing for Rapidly Karyotyping IVF Blastocysts Before Single Transfer. In: Sills, E. (eds) Screening the Single Euploid Embryo. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16892-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16892-0_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16891-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16892-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)