ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2022
Embryo tracking system for high-throughput sequencing-based preimplantation genetic testing.
Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective clinical validation of targeted long-read sequencing for preimplantation genetic testing of α-thalassaemia.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026Article
- Reproductive options and genetic testing for patients with an inherited cardiac disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Review
- Clinical-grade whole genome sequencing-based haplarithmisis enables all forms of preimplantation genetic testing.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Preimplantation genetic testing for Neurofibromatosis type 1: more than 20 years of clinical experience.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
study questionCan the embryo tracking system (ETS) increase safety, efficacy and scalability of massively parallel sequencing-based preimplantation genetic testing (PGT)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Applying ETS-PGT, the chance of sample switching is decreased, while scalability and efficacy could easily be increased substantially. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although state-of-the-art sequencing-based PGT methods made a paradigm shift in PGT, they still require labor intensive library preparation steps that makes PGT cost prohibitive and poses risks of human errors. To increase the quality assurance, efficiency, robustness and throughput of the sequencing-based assays, barcoded DNA fragments have been used in several aspects of next-generation sequencing (NGS) approach. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We developed an ETS that substantially alleviates the complexity of the current sequencing-based PGT. With (n = 693) and without (n = 192) ETS, the downstream PGT procedure was performed on both bulk DNA samples (n = 563) and whole-genome amplified (WGAed) few-cell DNA samples (n = 322). Subsequently, we compared full genome haplotype landscapes of both WGAed and bulk DNA samples containing ETS or no ETS. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
methodsWe have devised an ETS to track embryos right after whole-genome amplification (WGA) to full genome haplotype profiles. In this study, we recruited 322 WGAed DNA samples derived from IVF embryos as well as 563 bulk DNA isolated from peripheral blood of prospective parents. To determine possible interference of the ETS in the NGS-based PGT workflow, barcoded DNA fragments were added to DNA samples prior to library preparation and compared to samples without ETS. Coverages and variants were determined. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Current PGT protocols are quality sensitive and prone to sample switching. To avoid sample switching and increase throughput of PGT by sequencing-based haplotyping, six control steps should be carried out manually and checked by a second person in a clinical setting. Here, we developed an ETS approach in which one step only in the entire PGT procedure needs the four-eyes principal. We demonstrate that ETS not only precludes error-prone manual checks but also has no effect on the genomic landscape of preimplantation embryos. Importantly, our approach increases efficacy and throughput of the state-of-the-art PGT methods. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Even though the ETS simplified sequencing-based PGT by avoiding potential errors in six steps in the protocol, if the initial assignment is not performed correctly, it could lead to cross-contamination. However, this can be detected in silico following downstream ETS analysis. Although we demonstrated an approach to evaluate purity of the ETS fragment, it is recommended to perform a pre-PGT quality control assay of the ETS amplicons with non-human DNA, such that the purity of each ETS molecule can be determined prior to ETS-PGT. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsThe ETS-PGT approach notably increases efficacy and scalability of PGT. ETS-PGT has broad applicative value, as it can be tailored to any single- and few-cell sequencing approach where the starting specimen is scarce, as opposed to other methods that require a large number of cells as the input. Moreover, ETS-PGT could easily be adapted to any sequencing-based diagnostic method, including PGT for structural rearrangements and aneuploidies by low-pass sequencing as well as non-invasive prenatal testing. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): M.Z.E. is supported by the EVA (Erfelijkheid Voortplanting & Aanleg) specialty program (grant no. KP111513) of Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), and the Horizon 2020 innovation (ERIN) (grant no. EU952516) of the European Commission. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
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.