Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34434931›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2021

A Non-invasive Chromosome Screening Strategy for Prioritizing

Li Chen, Qin Sun, Juanjuan Xu, Haiyan Fu, Yuxiu Liu, Yaxin Yao, Sijia Lu, Bing Yao

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors.

Li ChenDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Affiliated Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Qin SunDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Affiliated Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Juanjuan XuDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Affiliated Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Haiyan FuDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Affiliated Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Yuxiu LiuDepartment of Medical Statistics, Jinling Hospital, Southern Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Yaxin YaoDepartment of Clinical Research, Yikon Genomics Company, Ltd., Suzhou, China.
Sijia LuDepartment of Clinical Research, Yikon Genomics Company, Ltd., Suzhou, China.
Bing YaoDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Affiliated Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) is widely used to select embryos having normal ploidy for transfer, but they require an invasive embryo biopsy procedure that may cause harm to the embryos and offspring. Therefore, a non-invasive approach to select embryos with normal ploidy for implantation is highly demanded. Non-invasive chromosome screening (NICS) methods have been proposed and applied in clinical practices, but a large-scale validation versus invasive preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) and the whole embryo ploidy has not yet been reported. In this study, by using the whole embryo as a gold standard, we validated NICS assay in a total of 265 donated human embryos and compared its performance with conventional trophectoderm (TE) biopsy PGT. The NICS assay showed promising performance, which is comparable to PGT-TE [sensitivity: 87.36 versus 89.66%; specificity: 80.28 versus 82.39%; negative predictive value (NPV): 91.2 versus 92.86%; positive predictive value (PPV): 73.08 versus 75.73%]. Additionally, NICS provides a scoring system for prioritizing embryo: embryos can be categorized into three groups with euploid prediction probabilities of 90.0, 27.8, and 72.2% for group euploid (A), aneuploid (B), and multiple abnormal chromosomes (MAC) (C), respectively. When an addition of TE assay is provided as a secondary validation, the accuracy significantly increases from 72.2 to 84.3% for group B and from 27.8 to 83.3% for group C. Our results suggest that NICS is a good rule in assay for identifying chromosomal normal embryos for transfer and might serve as a non-invasive approach for prioritizing embryos instead of preventing transfer of aneuploid and MAC embryos. It will help to ensure the safety of offspring and efficient utilization of embryos.

Indexed as

blastocystnext generation sequencingnon-invasive chromosome screeningpreimplantation genetic screeningspent culture medium

Identifiers

PMID34434931
PMCPMC8380813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.