ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
Elucidating the PGT-A paradox: marginalising the detriment relegates the benefit.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reclaiming 'abnormal' embryos after preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: patients' perspectives on transferring embryos against prior institutional advice.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
- PGT-A mosaicism based on NGS intermediate copy numbers: is it time to stop reporting them?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- PGT-A improved singleton live birth rate among all age groups of women who underwent elective single blastocyst transfer: a single-centre retrospective study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- PGT-A "perfect" is the enemy of good.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The hypothetical analysis presented offers insight into the effect of maternal age and protocol on the cost-effectiveness of PGT-A to reduce the risk of clinical miscarriage without materially jeopardising the chance of a first live birth when attempting to transfer every suitable embryo one at a time. Reflecting current practices, the diagnostic accuracy of PGT-A is sensitive to the prevalence of embryos with chromosome aneuploidy which increases with advancing maternal age, and the power of the test to discern a non-viable embryo is higher for older women and sensitive to protocol. PGT-A is effective to mitigate (reduce not eliminate) the risk of clinical miscarriage; however, excluding embryos with intermediate copy number results from transfer is detrimental to accomplishing a first live birth from a full cycle. Paradoxically, the number of blastocysts needed to marginalise the detriment is achieved only for some younger women (≤ 40 years) who are less likely to benefit by avoiding pregnancy loss; this also makes PGT-A an expensive adjuvant. The paradox can be avoided by excluding from transfer only embryos with a 'uniform' aneuploid test result, which mitigates the risk of miscarriage for all women with the potential to be cost-effective for those > 40 years.
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.