Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 7/2016

14.06.2016 | Review

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences?

verfasst von: Paul R. Brezina, Raymond Anchan, William G. Kearns

Erschienen in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Ausgabe 7/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the review was to define the various diagnostic platforms currently available to perform preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and describe in a clear and balanced manner the various strengths and weaknesses of these technologies.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted. We used the terms “preimplantation genetic testing,” “preimplantation genetic diagnosis,” “preimplantation genetic screening,” “preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy,” “PGD,” “PGS,” and “PGD-A” to search through PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar from the year 2000 to April 2016. Bibliographies of articles were also searched for relevant studies. When possible, larger randomized controlled trials were used. However, for some emerging data, only data from meeting abstracts were available.

Results

PGS is emerging as one of the most valuable tools to enhance pregnancy success with assisted reproductive technologies. While all of the current diagnostic platforms currently available have various advantages and disadvantages, some platforms, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), are capable of evaluating far more data points than has been previously possible. The emerging complexity of different technologies, especially with the utilization of more sophisticated tools such as NGS, requires an understanding by clinicians in order to request the best test for their patients..

Conclusion

Ultimately, the choice of which diagnostic platform is utilized should be individualized to the needs of both the clinic and the patient. Such a decision must incorporate the risk tolerance of both the patient and provider, fiscal considerations, and other factors such as the ability to counsel patients on their testing results and how these may or may not impact clinical outcomes.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Kearns WG. The evolving role of genetics in reproductive medicine. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2014;41:41–55.CrossRef Brezina PR, Kearns WG. The evolving role of genetics in reproductive medicine. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2014;41:41–55.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Kutteh WH. Clinical applications of preimplantation genetic testing. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2015;350:g7611. Brezina PR, Kutteh WH. Clinical applications of preimplantation genetic testing. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2015;350:g7611.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Brezina DS, Kearns WG. Preimplantation genetic testing. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2012;345:e5908. Brezina PR, Brezina DS, Kearns WG. Preimplantation genetic testing. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2012;345:e5908.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hassold T, Chen N, Funkhouser J, et al. A cytogenetic study of 1000 spontaneous abortions. Ann Hum Genet. 1980;44:151–78.CrossRefPubMed Hassold T, Chen N, Funkhouser J, et al. A cytogenetic study of 1000 spontaneous abortions. Ann Hum Genet. 1980;44:151–78.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Dahdouh EM, Balayla J, Audibert F, et al. Technical update: preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. J Obstet Gynaecol Can: JOGC = Journal d’obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC. 2015;37:451–63.CrossRefPubMed Dahdouh EM, Balayla J, Audibert F, et al. Technical update: preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. J Obstet Gynaecol Can: JOGC = Journal d’obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC. 2015;37:451–63.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Kalousek DK, Pantzar T, Tsai M, Paradice B. Early spontaneous abortion: morphologic and karyotypic findings in 3,912 cases. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser. 1993;29:53–61.PubMed Kalousek DK, Pantzar T, Tsai M, Paradice B. Early spontaneous abortion: morphologic and karyotypic findings in 3,912 cases. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser. 1993;29:53–61.PubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K, Winston RM. Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature. 1990;344:768–70.CrossRefPubMed Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K, Winston RM. Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature. 1990;344:768–70.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Jobanputra V, Sobrino A, Kinney A, Kline J, Warburton D. Multiplex interphase FISH as a screen for common aneuploidies in spontaneous abortions. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2002;17:1166–70.CrossRef Jobanputra V, Sobrino A, Kinney A, Kline J, Warburton D. Multiplex interphase FISH as a screen for common aneuploidies in spontaneous abortions. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2002;17:1166–70.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Wong KM, Repping S, Mastenbroek S. Limitations of embryo selection methods. Semin Reprod Med. 2014;32:127–33.CrossRefPubMed Wong KM, Repping S, Mastenbroek S. Limitations of embryo selection methods. Semin Reprod Med. 2014;32:127–33.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:454–66.CrossRefPubMed Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:454–66.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:9–17.CrossRefPubMed Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:9–17.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. Fertility and sterility 2008;90:S136-43. Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. Fertility and sterility 2008;90:S136-43.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2010;25:821–3.CrossRef Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2010;25:821–3.CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Committee Opinion No ACOG. 430: preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:766–7.CrossRef Committee Opinion No ACOG. 430: preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:766–7.CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott Jr RT. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:638–40.CrossRefPubMed Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott Jr RT. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:638–40.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Scott Jr RT, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:870–5.CrossRefPubMed Scott Jr RT, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:870–5.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:697–703.CrossRefPubMed Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:697–703.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Tobler KJ, Ross R, Benner AT, Du L, Brezina PR, Kearns WG. The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) and diagnosis (PGD). Fertil Steril. 2014;102:e184–5.CrossRef Tobler KJ, Ross R, Benner AT, Du L, Brezina PR, Kearns WG. The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) and diagnosis (PGD). Fertil Steril. 2014;102:e184–5.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Tobler KJ, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Boyd B, Kearns WG. 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) in 687 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles and 5871 embryos. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:S54.CrossRef Tobler KJ, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Boyd B, Kearns WG. 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) in 687 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles and 5871 embryos. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:S54.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina P, Tobler K, Benner A, Du L, Boyd B, Kearns W. Evaluation of 571 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles and 4,873 embryos using 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Fertil Steril. 2012;97:S23–4. Brezina P, Tobler K, Benner A, Du L, Boyd B, Kearns W. Evaluation of 571 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles and 4,873 embryos using 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Fertil Steril. 2012;97:S23–4.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Technology PCotASfRMatSfAR. ASRM practice committee brief communication on pre-implantation genetic screening for aneuploidy: a committee opinion. 2016: En Press. Technology PCotASfRMatSfAR. ASRM practice committee brief communication on pre-implantation genetic screening for aneuploidy: a committee opinion. 2016: En Press.
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Northrop LE, Treff NR, Levy B, Scott Jr RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening demonstrates that cleavage-stage FISH poorly predicts aneuploidy in embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:590–600.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Northrop LE, Treff NR, Levy B, Scott Jr RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening demonstrates that cleavage-stage FISH poorly predicts aneuploidy in embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:590–600.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Tobler K, Benner AT, Du L, Xu X, Kearns WG. All 23 chromosomes have significant levels of aneuploidy in recurrent pregnancy loss couples. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:S7.CrossRef Brezina PR, Tobler K, Benner AT, Du L, Xu X, Kearns WG. All 23 chromosomes have significant levels of aneuploidy in recurrent pregnancy loss couples. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:S7.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnson DS, Cinnioglu C, Ross R, et al. Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:944–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Johnson DS, Cinnioglu C, Ross R, et al. Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:944–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Munne S, Weier HU, Grifo J, Cohen J. Chromosome mosaicism in human embryos. Biol Reprod. 1994;51:373–9.CrossRefPubMed Munne S, Weier HU, Grifo J, Cohen J. Chromosome mosaicism in human embryos. Biol Reprod. 1994;51:373–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Novik V, Moulton EB, Sisson ME, et al. The accuracy of chromosomal microarray testing for identification of embryonic mosaicism in human blastocysts. Mol Cytogenet. 2014;7:18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Novik V, Moulton EB, Sisson ME, et al. The accuracy of chromosomal microarray testing for identification of embryonic mosaicism in human blastocysts. Mol Cytogenet. 2014;7:18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang BB, Rubin CH, Williams 3rd J. Mosaicism in chorionic villus sampling: an analysis of incidence and chromosomes involved in 2612 consecutive cases. Prenat Diagn. 1993;13:179–90.CrossRefPubMed Wang BB, Rubin CH, Williams 3rd J. Mosaicism in chorionic villus sampling: an analysis of incidence and chromosomes involved in 2612 consecutive cases. Prenat Diagn. 1993;13:179–90.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Ross R, Kaufmann R, Anchan R, Zhao Y, Kearns WG. Genetic normalization of differentiating aneuploid cleavage stage embryos. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:S69.CrossRef Brezina PR, Ross R, Kaufmann R, Anchan R, Zhao Y, Kearns WG. Genetic normalization of differentiating aneuploid cleavage stage embryos. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:S69.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Kutteh WH, Bailey AP, Ke RW. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is an excellent tool, but not perfect: a guide to counseling patients considering PGS. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:49–50.CrossRefPubMed Brezina PR, Kutteh WH, Bailey AP, Ke RW. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is an excellent tool, but not perfect: a guide to counseling patients considering PGS. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:49–50.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Capalbo A, Wright G, Elliott T, Ubaldi FM, Rienzi L, Nagy ZP. FISH reanalysis of inner cell mass and trophectoderm samples of previously array-CGH screened blastocysts shows high accuracy of diagnosis and no major diagnostic impact of mosaicism at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2013;28:2298–307.CrossRef Capalbo A, Wright G, Elliott T, Ubaldi FM, Rienzi L, Nagy ZP. FISH reanalysis of inner cell mass and trophectoderm samples of previously array-CGH screened blastocysts shows high accuracy of diagnosis and no major diagnostic impact of mosaicism at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2013;28:2298–307.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat De Vos A, Staessen C, De Rycke M, et al. Impact of cleavage-stage embryo biopsy in view of PGD on human blastocyst implantation: a prospective cohort of single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2009;24:2988–96.CrossRef De Vos A, Staessen C, De Rycke M, et al. Impact of cleavage-stage embryo biopsy in view of PGD on human blastocyst implantation: a prospective cohort of single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2009;24:2988–96.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Brezina PR, Kutteh WH. Classic and cutting-edge strategies for the management of early pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2014;41:1–18.CrossRef Brezina PR, Kutteh WH. Classic and cutting-edge strategies for the management of early pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2014;41:1–18.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Dreesen J, Destouni A, Kourlaba G, et al. Evaluation of PCR-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis applied to monogenic diseases: a collaborative ESHRE PGD consortium study. Eur J Hum Gen: EJHG 2013. Dreesen J, Destouni A, Kourlaba G, et al. Evaluation of PCR-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis applied to monogenic diseases: a collaborative ESHRE PGD consortium study. Eur J Hum Gen: EJHG 2013.
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Yang Z, Liu J, Collins GS, et al. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet. 2012;5:24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yang Z, Liu J, Collins GS, et al. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet. 2012;5:24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Chipko C, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Christianson MS, Kearns WG. Deletions and duplications identified by 23 chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray are associated with aneuploidy. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S21.CrossRef Chipko C, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Christianson MS, Kearns WG. Deletions and duplications identified by 23 chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray are associated with aneuploidy. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S21.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Christianson MS, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Siegel A, Kearns WG. Chromosomal duplications (≥200 KILOBASES (KB)) are more common than deletions ≥200 KB in developing human embryos as identified by 23 chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S21–2.CrossRef Christianson MS, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Siegel A, Kearns WG. Chromosomal duplications (≥200 KILOBASES (KB)) are more common than deletions ≥200 KB in developing human embryos as identified by 23 chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S21–2.CrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Fiegler H, Geigl JB, Langer S, et al. High resolution array-CGH analysis of single cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:e15.CrossRefPubMed Fiegler H, Geigl JB, Langer S, et al. High resolution array-CGH analysis of single cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35:e15.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Wells D, Alfarawati S, Fragouli E. Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment: microarrays and CGH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008;14:703–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wells D, Alfarawati S, Fragouli E. Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment: microarrays and CGH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008;14:703–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Du L, Brezina P, Benner A, Swelstad B, Gunn M, Kearns W. The rate of de novo and inherited aneuploidy as determined by 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism microarray (SNP) in embryos generated from parents with known chromosomal translocations. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S221.CrossRef Du L, Brezina P, Benner A, Swelstad B, Gunn M, Kearns W. The rate of de novo and inherited aneuploidy as determined by 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism microarray (SNP) in embryos generated from parents with known chromosomal translocations. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S221.CrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Treff NR, Levy B, Su J, Northrop LE, Tao X, Scott Jr RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening is significantly more consistent than FISH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:583–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Treff NR, Levy B, Su J, Northrop LE, Tao X, Scott Jr RT. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening is significantly more consistent than FISH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:583–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Handyside AH. PGD and aneuploidy screening for 24 chromosomes by genome-wide SNP analysis: seeing the wood and the trees. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23:686–91.CrossRefPubMed Handyside AH. PGD and aneuploidy screening for 24 chromosomes by genome-wide SNP analysis: seeing the wood and the trees. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23:686–91.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Siegel A, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Gunn M, Kearns WG. 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray detects genomic aberrations that may be missed by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) arrays in preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S224.CrossRef Siegel A, Brezina PR, Benner AT, Du L, Gunn M, Kearns WG. 23-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray detects genomic aberrations that may be missed by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) arrays in preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Fertil Steril. 2011;96:S224.CrossRef
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Capalbo A, Treff NR, Cimadomo D, et al. Comparison of array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative real-time PCR-based aneuploidy screening of blastocyst biopsies. Eur J Hum Genet: EJHG. 2015;23:901–6.CrossRefPubMed Capalbo A, Treff NR, Cimadomo D, et al. Comparison of array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative real-time PCR-based aneuploidy screening of blastocyst biopsies. Eur J Hum Genet: EJHG. 2015;23:901–6.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Validation report for next generation sequencing for chromosomes (Ploidy) as compared to CGH microarrays. 2015. Validation report for next generation sequencing for chromosomes (Ploidy) as compared to CGH microarrays. 2015.
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Treff NR, Tao X, Ferry KM, Su J, Taylor D, Scott Jr RT. Development and validation of an accurate quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay for human blastocyst comprehensive chromosomal aneuploidy screening. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:819–24.CrossRefPubMed Treff NR, Tao X, Ferry KM, Su J, Taylor D, Scott Jr RT. Development and validation of an accurate quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay for human blastocyst comprehensive chromosomal aneuploidy screening. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:819–24.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Treff NR, Scott Jr RT. Four-hour quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based comprehensive chromosome screening and accumulating evidence of accuracy, safety, predictive value, and clinical efficacy. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1049–53.CrossRefPubMed Treff NR, Scott Jr RT. Four-hour quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based comprehensive chromosome screening and accumulating evidence of accuracy, safety, predictive value, and clinical efficacy. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1049–53.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Zheng H, Jin H, Liu L, Liu J, Wang WH. Application of next-generation sequencing for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of human preimplantation embryos. Mol Cytogenet. 2015;8:38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Zheng H, Jin H, Liu L, Liu J, Wang WH. Application of next-generation sequencing for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of human preimplantation embryos. Mol Cytogenet. 2015;8:38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Bono S, et al. Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing-based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of embryos. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1375–82.CrossRefPubMed Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Bono S, et al. Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing-based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of embryos. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1375–82.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Zurück zum Zitat Fiorentino F, Bono S, Biricik A, et al. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2014;29:2802–13.CrossRef Fiorentino F, Bono S, Biricik A, et al. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2014;29:2802–13.CrossRef
52.
Zurück zum Zitat Treff NR, Fedick A, Tao X, Devkota B, Taylor D, Scott RT. Evaluation of targeted next-generation sequencing–based preimplantation genetic diagnosis of monogenic disease. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1377–84. e6.CrossRefPubMed Treff NR, Fedick A, Tao X, Devkota B, Taylor D, Scott RT. Evaluation of targeted next-generation sequencing–based preimplantation genetic diagnosis of monogenic disease. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1377–84. e6.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Zurück zum Zitat Damerla RR, Chatterjee B, Li Y, Francis RJ, Fatakia SN, Lo CW. Ion Torrent sequencing for conducting genome-wide scans for mutation mapping analysis. Mamm Genome. 2014;25:120–8.CrossRefPubMed Damerla RR, Chatterjee B, Li Y, Francis RJ, Fatakia SN, Lo CW. Ion Torrent sequencing for conducting genome-wide scans for mutation mapping analysis. Mamm Genome. 2014;25:120–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences?
verfasst von
Paul R. Brezina
Raymond Anchan
William G. Kearns
Publikationsdatum
14.06.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Ausgabe 7/2016
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0740-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2016

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 7/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.