New methods for embryo selection: NGS and MitoGrade

Similar documents
USA: Livingston, NJ. PGD for infertility. Europe: Barcelona, Spain Oxford, UK Hamburg, Germany. Asia: Kobe, Japan. South America: Lima, Peru

Mosaicism in human embryos: Etiology and pregnancy outcome Santi Munné

Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Is NextGen Likely to be the Final Best Platform and What are its Advantages and Quirks?


Chromosomal Aneuploidy

Differences in chromosome abnormalities in eggs and embryos between fertility centers Santi Munné

Congreso Nacional del Laboratorio Clínico 2016

Targeted qpcr. Debate on PGS Technology: Targeted vs. Whole genome approach. Discolsure Stake shareholder of GENETYX S.R.L

Increase your chance of IVF Success. PGT-A Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGS 2.0)

NEXCCS. Your guide to aneuploidy screening

Disclosure. Dagan Wells University of Oxford Oxford, United Kingdom

SNP array-based analyses of unbalanced embryos as a reference to distinguish between balanced translocation carrier and normal blastocysts

Diagnosis of parental balanced reciprocal translocations by trophectoderm biopsy and comprehensive chromosomal screening

The effects of PGS/PGT-A on IVF outcomes

New perspectives on embryo biopsy, not how, but when and why PGS

but it still needs a bit of work

UNDERSTANDING THE GENETIC HEALTH OF EMBRYOS

Comprehensive chromosome screening and embryo biopsy: advantages and difficulties. Antonio Capalbo, PhD Italy

PGS & PGD. Preimplantation Genetic Screening Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis

Validation of Next-Generation Sequencer for 24-Chromosome Aneuploidy Screening in Human Embryos

Application of OMICS technologies on Gamete and Embryo Selection

@ CIC Edizioni Internazionali. Origin and mechanisms of aneuploidies in preimplantation embryos

A Stepwise Approach to Embryo Selection and Implantation Success

IVF AND PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC TESTING FOR ANEUPLOIDY (PGT-A) WHAT THE COMMUNITY PHYSICIAN NEEDS TO KNOW

Preimplantation Genetic Testing Where are we going? Genomics Clinical Medicine Symposium Sept 29,2012 Jason Flanagan, MS,CGC

An Update on PGD: Where we are today

CIC Edizioni Internazionali. Preimplantation genetic screening: definition, role in IVF, evolution and future perspectives. Summary.

Scientific and Clinical Advances Advisory Committee Paper

EmbryoCellect TM. Pre-implantation Genetic Screening Kit TECHNICAL INFORMATION

Incidence of Chromosomal Abnormalities from a Morphologically Normal Cohort of Embryos in Poor- Prognosis Patients

INSIDE IVF: HOW SCIENCE CARES FOR PATIENTS DR DEIRDRE ZANDER-FOX MONASH IVF GROUP HDA GRAND ROUND OCTOBER 31 ST 2018

Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study

Results of the Virtual Academy of Genetics (VAoGEN) questionnaire on Mosaicism in PGS

Nothing more controversial than PGS

Telomeres and Genomic Instability In Preimplanation Embryos. David L. Keefe, M.D.

Rejuvenation of Gamete Cells; Past, Present and Future

Organisation of the PGD Centre. Overview. Setting up a PGD centre

The Impact of ESHRE 2017 on Japanese Fertility Practice

Blastocentesis: innovation in embryo biopsy

The ASRM Committee Opinion on PGT for Aneuploidy Our Conclusions and How We Drew Them. Alan Penzias, MD

Same Day, Cost-Effective Aneuploidy Detection with Agilent Oligonucleotide array CGH and MDA Single Cell Amplification Method

Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation

Case Report What Drives Embryo Development? Chromosomal Normality or Mitochondria?

Understanding IVF Processes in Surrogacy

CLINICAL RESULTS 2017.

Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos

MALBAC Technology and Its Application in Non-invasive Chromosome Screening (NICS)

PATIENT CONSENT FORM Preimplantation Genetic Screening (PGS) 24 Chromosome Aneuploidy and Translocation Screening with acgh

Development of new comprehensive

Detection of aneuploidy in a single cell using the Ion ReproSeq PGS View Kit

Hold On To Your Dreams

Introduction ASSISTED REPRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES. Alison Coates 1,2 & Brandon J. Bankowski 1 & Allen Kung 2,3 & Darren K. Griffin 2 & Santiago Munne 3

Supplementary Appendix

Diagnostic Techniques to Improve the Assessment of Human IVF Embryos: Genomics and Proteomics

Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis and pre-implantation genetic screening: two years experience at a single center

Paul R. Brezina, Raymond Anchan & William G. Kearns

L6: DuoStim: the alternative of oocytes/embryos accumulation programs Carlo Alviggi

1 PGS (PGS) IVF PGS, PGS,, PGS 2, PGS : (PGS); PGS; ; : R321.1 : A : X(2015) PGS 1995, 1 , (ART)

Rapid genomic screening of embryos using nanopore sequencing

Next generation technologies for PGD and 24- chromosome aneuploidy testing. PGD s 25 Year Journey: What is next?

The Progress of Next Generation Sequencing in Preimplantation Genetic Testing

CLINICAL RESULTS 2016

Explaining the Purpose of PGT-A. Nathan R. Treff PhD, HCLD(ABB) Chief Science Officer Clinical Laboratory Director

Problem Challenge Need. Solution Innovation Invention

Trends in Egg Donation. Vitaly A. Kushnir MD Center for Human Reproduction

New Innovations and Technologies:

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis

Do it Once, Do it Right

Dr Guy Gudex. Gynaecologist and Fertility Specialist Repromed. 9:05-9:30 Advances in Assisted Reproduction What s New?

UCLA UCLA Previously Published Works

Accuracy of FISH analysis in predicting chromosomal status in patients undergoing preimplantation genetic diagnosis

Myths About Success Rates Do they truly reflect quality of care

Validation of a next-generation sequencing based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of blastocysts

MPS for translocations

Pregnancy outcomes following 24-chromosome preimplantation genetic diagnosis in couples with balanced reciprocal or Robertsonian translocations

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: polar body and embryo biopsy

PGS Embryo Screening

Chapter 15 Notes 15.1: Mendelian inheritance chromosome theory of inheritance wild type 15.2: Sex-linked genes

Blastocyst Morphology Holds Clues Concerning The Chromosomal Status of The Embryo

Technical Update: Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Screening

Autologous Mitochondria Injection to Improve Oocyte Function in Women Undergoing IVF. Robert Casper MD University of Toronto and TRIO Fertility

Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage

SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening is significantly more consistent than FISH

Here s Looking at You, Kid: Time Lapse in the Clinical Embryology Laboratory

Clinical applications of preimplantation genetic testing

Hsing-Hua Lai 1, Tzu-Hsuan Chuang 1, Lin-Kin Wong 1, Meng-Ju Lee 1, Chia-Lin Hsieh 1, Huai-Lin Wang 1 and Shee-Uan Chen 2*

Scientifically advanced. Personally accessible.

PG-Seq NGS Kit for Preimplantation Genetic Screening

The use of mitochondrial nutrients to improve IVF. Robert F Casper MD

Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) single gene disorders. A patient guide

Preimplantation Genetic Testing

Polar Body Approach to PGD. Anver KULIEV. Reproductive Genetics Institute

CHROMOSOME MICROARRAY TESTING (NON-ONCOLOGY CONDITIONS)

Comprehensive molecular cytogenetic analysis of the human blastocyst stage

Articles Impact of parental gonosomal mosaicism detected in peripheral blood on preimplantation embryos

Erez Baron Families Through Surrogacy October 2017

Randomized comparison of next-generation sequencing and array comparative genomic hybridization for preimplantation genetic screening: a pilot study

INDICATIONS OF IVF/ICSI

From the earliest years of IVF, it

Effect of ovarian stimulation on oocyte quality and embryonic aneuploidy: a prospective, randomised controlled trial

Transcription:

New methods for embryo selection: NGS and MitoGrade Santiago Munné, PhD US: Livingston, Los Angeles, Chicago, Portland, Miami / Europe: Barcelona (Spain), Oxford (UK), Hamburg (Germany) / Asia: Kobe (Japan), Macao, Abu Dhabi (UAE) / Latin America: Lima (Peru), Buenos Aires (Argentina), Sao Paulo (Brazil), DF (Mexico)

Aneuploidy is the major cause of loss of implantation potential with AMA Aneuploid blastocysts 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 years Reprogenetics data 2012-2015, n= 13,400 PGS cycles by array CGH and blastocyst biopsy

The PGS hypothesis updated PGS v.2: Comprehensive chromosome analysis + blastocyst biopsy Aneuploid increases from 30% to 80% with maternal age Aneuploid embryos miscarry or do not implant The error rate of PGS v.2 is low (<2%) And blastocyst biopsy is non detrimental PGS v.2: Results Improved ongoing Implantation rates Reduces the maternal age effect on implantation

Metanalysis Implantation rates Control PGS Yang et al. 2012 (acgh) 46% 69% Scott et al. 2013 (qpcr) 63% 80% Forman et al. 2013 (qpcr) 40% 58% TOTAL 53% 73% P<0.001

PGS for egg donation PGS donor egg control donor egg Av. donor age 25 25 FET transfers 163 60 Av. emb transferred 1.5 1.5 # positive tests 96% 83% p<0.005 # ongoing pregs 79% 62% p<0.025 Implantation(+sac) 83% 58% P<0.001 P All cycles were FET in both groups. PGS by acgh or NGS. Coates et al. (submitted) Data from Oregon Reprod Medicine and Reprogenetics

acgh eliminates the negative effect of maternal age on implantation 60% Implantation rate 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% <35 35 37 39 40 41 42 >42 Maternal age n/a SART No PGS * blastocyst PGS (acgh) ** * SART 2011 ** Harton, Munné et al. (2013) Fertil Steril. And unpublished data to 8/2013. N >800 blast biopsies

Significant decrease after 42 Total Patients (with follow up) NO MORPHOLOGICAL SELECTION POSIBLE? EGD <35 35 37 38 40 41 42 >42 mtdna? 75 542 359 371 226 203 Av. Euploid embryos 6.4 4.6 3.6 2.5 1.9 1.1 Implantation rate (+sacs) 62% 73% 75% 72% 83% 59% % Pregnant / transfer 69% 66% 64% 63% 65% 54% >18,000 Cycles of acgh, 15,109 of Blastocyst biopsy, but only 1776 with follow up information

Miscarriage rate after blastocyst biopsy and acgh do not increase with age Compared to SART: Compared to other studies: 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% No PGS * PGS ** This study Scott et al. 2013 Preg nan cies age SAB 307 34.9 7.5% 72 32.2 8.3% 5% 0% <35 35 37 38 40 41 42 *SART, ** Harton et al. (2013) Fertil Steril, and unpublished data

Euploidy decreases with age but not with cohort size # of embryos egg donors <35 years % normal blastocysts 35 37 years 38 40 years 41 42 years >42 years 1 3 60% 58% 47% 35% 21% 13% 4 6 64% 55% 47% 34% 19% 14% 7 10 65% 55% 47% 33% 18% 11% >10 66% 56% 43% 33% 21% 11% Total 65% 56% 46% 33% 19% 13% N = 10,852 cycles and 58,798 embryos, up to 5/2015. Ata, Munne et al. (2012) Reprod Biomed Online and Reprogenetics unpublished data.

# of embryos Prognosis depending on age and ovarian response % of patients with normal blastocysts egg donors <35 years 35 37 years 38 40 years 41 42 years >42 years 1 3 83% 80% 71% 57% 36% 22% 4 6 97% 95% 92% 82% 59% 43% 7 10 99% 98% 96% 89% 74% 50% 10 17 100% 99% 99% 97% >17 100% 100% 100% 99% 88% banked 97% banked 64% banked 87% banked N = 10,852 cycles and 58,798 embryos, up to 5/2015. Ata, Munne et al. (2012) Reprod Biomed Online and Reprogenetics unpublished data.

NGS for PGS

Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)

NGS validation: reanalysis of blastocysts Kung et al. 2014 (Reprogenetics) Fiorentino et al. 2014 Wells et al. 2014 (Reprogenetics) Original Analysis method Reanalysis method Sample acgh NGS Same biopsy Karyotype / acgh acgh/ G Band NGS NGS Same biopsy Separate biopsy Confirmed Euploid Confirme d abnormal TOTAL 44/44 108/108 152/152 67/67 141/141 208/208 13/13 28/28 41/41 Total 100% Sensitivity 100% Specificity 0% Error rate Kung, Munne et al. (2014) Hum Reprod. accepted for publication, Fiorentino et al. (2014) F&S, Wang et al. (2014) Biol Reprod, Wells, Kung, Munne et al. (2014) J Med Genetics

First baby born from NGS First NGS baby: David Levy Wells, Kaur, Grifo, Glassner, Taylor, Fragouli, Munne (2014) J Med Genet 51:553 562.

Comparison of current PGS platforms acgh SNPs qpcr t NGS NGS % missed Misdiagnosis full aneuploidy <2% c 2% d <1% e? <1% c 69,XXX w/o aneuploidy no yes no no no 0.2% a UPD w/o other abnormalities no yes no no no 0.01% b Translocations (99% of them) yes no no no yes 2% Partial aneuploidy (>6Mb) yes yes no no yes 5% Mosaicism (>20%) no no no no yes g 12% h Resolution (in Mb) 1 6? >20? 6 19% a Bisignano, Wells, Harton and Munne (2011) RBO. b www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/omim, c Kung et al. (2014) ESHRE, d Scott et al. (2012), e Treff et al. (2012) Fertil Steril 97:819 24, f Konstantinides et al (2014) ASRM, g Fiorentino et al (2014) ASRM, h Tormasi et al (2015) PGDIS

NGS calls mosaics better NGS: +7pter-p15.2 and mosaic monosomy 1 and 10 acgh: +7pter-p15.2 and monosomy 1 and 10

Misdiagnosed by acgh Embryo diagnosed as normal by acgh, miscarriage of trisomy 16. Reanalysis by acgh was normal, but reanalysis with NGS of same DNA was mosaic Trisomy 16:

NGS can identify as low as 20% chromosomal mosaicism 3.5 3 2.5 * ** ** ** ** trisomy monosomy Copy number 2 1.5 1 * ** ** ** ** 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 WGA products (%) * **,p<0,05,p<0,001 Courtesy of Dr. Fiorentino @ Genoma

% of mosaicism detected by NGS at blastocyst stage # % Embryos analyzed 916 97.6 Normal 382 41.7 Complex Abnormal 124 13.5 Full Aneuploid (<=2 chromosomes) 255 27.8 Partial aneuploidy 43 4.7 Mosaic full aneuploidy 78 8.5 Mosaic partial aneuploidy 34 3.7 All mosaic 112 12.2 Tormasi et al. (2015) PGDIS

NGS reanalysis of miscarriages after transfer of euploid by array embryos 39 miscarriages were reported from transfers with euploid embryos (*). 23 miscarriages were undiagnosed and 16 were found trisomic. After NGS analysis of the same biopsies we found: NGS result POC POC Detectable by Total undiagnosed diagnosed acgh, qpcr Euploid 44% 33% 40% Yes Triploid XXX 8% 0% 5% No Mosaic euploid / full aneuploid 12% 50% 28% No Mosaic euploid / partial aneuploid 28% 6% 19% No Complete aneuploid 0% 0% 0% Yes MISCARRIAGES COULD BE FURTHER REDUCED BY NGS (*) miscarriage rate about 7%. Grifo, Munne et al. (2015) submitted

mosaic embryos detected by NGS result in fewer ongoing pregnancies Replaced miscarried ongoing pregnancies NGS result # # % # % p Fiorentino et al* mosaic 16 2 13% 5 31% mosaic 43 5 12% 11 26% Fragouli et al** euploid 51 5 10% 23 51% p<0.001 Mosaics can progress to term but at half the rate of euploid embryos * Fiorentino et al. (2014) ASRM, ** Fragouli et al. (2015) submitted

Is NGS better clinically than acgh? Preliminary results from a single center: acgh NGS Implant 588 56 Not Implant 397 21 Total 985 77 Imp Rate 60% 73% p<0.025 Grifo et al. (unpublished)

NGS mosaics: summary Mosaicism is only detectable by NGS (not by t NGS) 12% of blastocysts are mosaics 60% less miscarriages with NGS than other PGS techniques 50% lower pregnancy than euploid embryos Some mosaics make babies Better implantation rates with NGS than acgh Recommended: First replace euploid embryos and careful discarding mosaics

MitoGrade Selection of the most viable euploid blastocyst by mitochondrial DNA quantification

Blastocyst Mitochondria Mitochondria are cytoplasmic organelles that generate energy for the cell Mitochondria are all maternal in origin, and contain one or more copies of their genome At cleavage stage the mitochondria are still those inherited from the egg The embryo produces its own mitochondria during blastocyst formation Due to a bottleneck mitochondria in the egg and in the blastocyst can be different. Therefore mitochondria competence should be tested in blastocysts, not PBs, or day 3 embryos.

mtdna quantity and blastocyst implantation ability Reprogenetics has discovered that elevated mtdna is associated with failure to implant Above a threshold of mtdna fewer euploid blastocysts implant. 30% of non implanting euploid blastocysts had high levels of mtdna Elevated mtdna levels first appear after first embryonic differentiation Implantation No Implantation Fragouli et al. (2015) PLOS

Mitochondria is an independent biomarker There was no association with blastocyst morphology Only mild association with maternal age and aneuploidy mtdna quantification represents a new independent biomarker of embryo viability No difference in mutations between high and low level mtdna blastocysts Fragouli et al., 2015. PLOS

Mitochondria quantification Blastocyst biopsy WGA PGS by acgh or NGS Quantify mtdna by qpcr (soon by NGS) Targeting multiple mitochondria sites Normalize cell number by comparing to a multi copy nuclear sequence Sequence reads (depth of coverage) 100 50 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Mitochondrial genome (kb) Fragouli et al. (2015) PLOS

PGS + MitoGrade Example patient 35 years old 100% 90% Blastocysts available for transfer 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 33% 47% 70% 80% aneuploid euploid elevated MitoGrade euploid not implanting (unknown ) euploid implanting 0% no selection PGS PGS + MitoGrade

PGS + Mitograde : Implantation rate after euploid SET 90% 80% 82% implantation 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% P<0.001 10% 0% 4% Euploid + Elevated Mitograde Euploid + Low Mitograde Reprogenetics, to 8/2015

MitoGrade better than Morphology Implantation is higher if the blastocyst is: Euploid, Mitograde normal, morphology BB Than Euploid, Mitograde Elevated, morphology AA

MitoGrade at ASRM O 91 Fragouli E, Cohen J, Munne S, Grifo J, Caroline McCaffrey, Wells D (Reprogenetics): The biological and clinical impact of mitochondrial genome variation in human embryos. Tuesday October 20, 11,15AM SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM PRIZE PAPER

MitoGrade logistics Mitograde is offered jointly with PGS: a single blastocyst biopsy produces Mitograde and PGS results. Mitograde can be offered to any women, of any age, as a booster to obtain even better PGS outcomes. TAT is 2 weeks or less.

THE PGD PORTAL (Jawid)