ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Aneuploidy detection in pooled polar bodies using rapid nanopore sequencing.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVarious screening techniques have been developed for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) to reduce implantation failure and miscarriages in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. Among these methods, the Oxford nanopore technology (ONT) has already been tested in several tissues. However, no studies have applied ONT to polar bodies, a cellular material that is less restrictively regulated for PGT-A in some countries.
methodsWe performed rapid short nanopore sequencing on pooled first and second polar bodies of 102 oocytes from women undergoing IVF treatment to screen for aneuploidy. An automated analysis pipeline was developed with the expectation of three chromatids per chromosome. The results were compared to those obtained by array-based comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH).
resultsONT and aCGH were consistent for 96% (98/102) of sample ploidy classification. Of those samples, 36 were classified as euploid, while 62 were classified as aneuploid. The four discordant samples were assessed as euploid using aCGH but classified as aneuploid using ONT. The concordance of the ploidy classification (euploid, gain, or loss) per chromosome was 92.5% (2169 of 2346 of analysed chromosomes) using aCGH and ONT and increased to 97.7% (2113/2162) without the eight samples assessed as highly complex aneuploid using ONT.
conclusionThe automated detection of the ploidy classification per chromosome and shorter duplications or deletions depending on the sequencing depth demonstrates an advantage of the ONT method over standard, commercial aCGH methods, which do not consider the presence of three chromatids in pooled polar bodies.
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.