ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2017
Towards a better understanding of preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy: insights from a virtual trial for women under the age of 40 when transferring embryos one at a time.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Double vitrification-warming cycles coupled with one blastocyst biopsy do not affect the chance of live birth after an euploid blastocyst transfer: a propensity score matching study.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Elucidating the PGT-A paradox: marginalising the detriment relegates the benefit.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
- Comment on the recent PGDIS Position Statement on the Transfer of Mosaic Embryos 2021.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
- Predictive Modelling in Clinical Bioinformatics: Key Concepts for Startups.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2022Article
- Carrier screening and PGT for an autosomal recessive monogenic disorder: insights from virtual trials.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
- Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies does not increase success rates in fresh oocyte donation cycles: a paired cohort study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- PGT-SR (reciprocal translocation) using trophectoderm sampling and next-generation sequencing: insights from a virtual trial.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- PGT-SR: the red-herring and the siren; interchromosomal effect and screening for unrelated aneuploidy.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- A tale of two studies: now is no longer the best of times for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A).Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Article
- Correlation between Morphologic Grading and Euploidy Rates of Blastocysts, and Clinical Outcomes in In Vitro Fertilization Preimplantation Genetic Screening.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- The cost of a euploid embryo identified from preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A).Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this theoretical study is to explore the cost-effectiveness of aneuploidy screening in a UK setting for every woman aged under the age of 40 years when fresh and vitrified-warmed embryos are transferred one at a time in a first full cycle of assisted conception.
methodsIt is envisaged that a 24-chromosome genetic test for aneuploidy could be used to exclude embryos with an abnormal test result from transfer, or used only to rank embryos with the highest potential to be viable; the effect on cumulative outcome is assessed. The cost associated with one additional live birth event and one clinical miscarriage avoided is estimated, and the time taken to complete a cycle considered. The numbers of individual woman for whom testing is likely to be beneficial or detrimental is also evaluated.
resultsAdding aneuploidy screening to a first treatment cycle is unlikely to result in a higher chance of a live birth event, and can be detrimental for some women. Premature termination of a clinical trial is likely to be biased in favour of genetic testing. Testing is likely to be an expensive way of reducing the chance of clinical miscarriage and shortening treatment time without a substantial reduction in the cost of testing, and is likely to benefit a minority of women. Selecting out embryos is likely to reduce the treatment time for women whether or not they have a baby, whilst ranking embryos only to reduce the time for those that have a child and not for those who need another stimulated cycle.
conclusionsAdding aneuploidy screening to IVF treatment for women under the age of 40 years is unlikely to be beneficial for most women. To achieve an unbiased assessment of the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing for aneuploidy, clinical trials need to take account of women who still have embryos available for transfer at the end of the study period. Specifying the proportions of women for whom testing is likely to be beneficial and detrimental may help better inform couples who might be considering adding aneuploidy screening to their treatment cycle.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.