Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26547204›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2016

Confirmation rates of array-CGH in day-3 embryo and blastocyst biopsies for preimplantation genetic screening.

P Mir, E Mateu, A Mercader, R Herrer, L Rodrigo, M Vera, V Peinado, M Milán-Sánchez, I Campos-Galindo, S García-Herrero and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

P MirIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain. pere.mir@igenomix.com.
E MateuIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
A MercaderIVI-Valencia, Pza.Policía Local, 3, 46015, Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
R HerrerIVI-Zaragoza, Poetisa María Zambrano, 31, 50018, Zaragoza, Spain.
L RodrigoIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
M VeraIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
V PeinadoIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
M Milán-SánchezIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
I Campos-GalindoIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
S García-HerreroIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
C SimónIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
C RubioIGENOMIX, Parc Científic de la Universitat de Valéncia, C/Catedrático Agustín Escardino, 9, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain.
Parc Científic de la Universitat de València · ESUniversidad de Zaragoza · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the confirmation rate of day-3 embryo biopsy (blastomere) and trophectoderm biopsy using array-comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) technology.

methodsA blinded study was conducted to re-analyse 109 embryos previously diagnosed as chromosomally abnormal by array-CGH. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) was performed using array-CGH on day 3 (n = 50) or day 5 (n = 59). Partial chromosome gains or losses were excluded (n=6), and only whole chromosome aneuploidies were considered. Re-analysis of whole blastocysts was carried out following the same array-CGH protocol used for PGS.

resultsThe PGS result was confirmed in the whole blastocyst in (a) 49/50 (98 %) abnormal embryos after day-3 biopsy and (b) 57/59 (96.6 %) abnormal embryos after trophectoderm biopsy. One embryo (1/50; 2 %) was diagnosed as abnormal, with monosomy 18, on day 3, and software analysis of the whole blastocyst gave a euploid result; however, a mosaic pattern was observed for monosomy 18 in the whole blastocyst. Two trophectoderm biopsy cases (3.4 %) did not have the abnormalities (trisomy 7, and trisomy 1 and 4, respectively) verified in the whole embryo. Concordance rates for both biopsy strategies and for individual chromosomes were evaluated by Fisher's exact test and showed no significant differences.

conclusionsBoth types of biopsies showed similar high concordance rates with whole blastocyst results. Therefore, regarding the confirmation rates shown in this work, day-3 embryo biopsies can be representative of the whole embryo and both types of biopsy can be used for clinical analysis in PGS following the described array-CGH protocol.

Indexed as

Chromosome AberrationsBiopsyBlastocystComparative Genomic HybridizationEmbryonic DevelopmentEmbryo TransferFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansPregnancyPreimplantation DiagnosisArray-CGHEmbryo biopsyFalse-positive rateMosaicismPreimplantation

Identifiers

PMID26547204
PMCPMC4717135
OpenAlexW2228105442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.