Abstract
Studies of human cleavage stage embryos, 3 days after fertilization of the oocyte, have revealed remarkably high levels of chromosome abnormality. In addition to meiotic errors derived from the gametes, principally the oocyte, mitotic errors occurring after fertilization are also common, leading to widespread chromosomal mosaicism. The prevalence of chromosome anomalies in embryos may explain the relatively poor fertility and fecundity in humans and the low success rates of assisted reproductive treatments (e.g., IVF). While much is known concerning the incidence of aneuploidy during the first 3 days following fertilization, it is only in the last couple of years that large numbers of embryos at the final stage of preimplantation development, the blastocyst stage, 5 days after fertilization, have been subjected to detailed analysis. Here we discuss the latest data from the comprehensive cytogenetic analysis of blastocysts. These findings indicate that the majority of selection against chromosome abnormalities does not occur until the time of implantation or shortly after, with aneuploidy typically affecting more than 50% of blastocysts. Additionally, clinical results presented suggest that screening of blastocyst stage embryos for chromosome abnormality, with preferential transfer to the uterus of those found to be euploid, may help to improve the success rates of assisted reproductive treatments.
References
1.
Alfarawati S, Goodall N, Gordon T, Gunner J, Daphnis D, et al: Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts with the use of FISH, CGH and aCGH: scientific data and technical evaluation. Hum Reprod 25:i41–i44 (2010a).
2.
Alfarawati S, Fragouli E, Colls P, Stevens J, Gutiérrez- Mateo C, et al: The relationship between blastocyst morphology, chromosomal abnormality and embryo sex. Fertil Steril [Epub ahead of print] (2010b).
3.
Angell RR, Aitken RJ, van Look PF, Lumsden MA, Templeton AA: Chromosome abnormalities in human embryos after in vitro fertilization. Nature 303:336–338 (1983).
4.
Angell RR, Sumner AT, West JD, Thatcher SS, Glasier AF, Baird DT: Post-fertilization polyploidy in human preimplantation embryos fertilized in-vitro. Hum Reprod 2:721–727 (1987).
5.
Bielanska M, Tan SL, Ao A: High rate of mixoploidy among human blastocysts cultured in vitro. Fertil Steril 78:1248–1253 (2002).
6.
Bielanska M, Jin S, Bernier M, Tan SL, Ao A: Diploid-aneuploid mosaicism in human embryos cultured to the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril 84:336–342 (2005).
7.
Bonde JP, Ernst E, Jensen TK, Hjollund NH, Kolstad H, et al: Relation between semen quality and fertility: a population based study of 430 first-pregnancy planners. Lancet 352:1172–1177 (1998).
8.
Braude P, Bolton V, Moore S: Human gene expression first occurs between the four- and eight-cell stages of preimplantation development. Nature 332:459–461 (1988).
9.
Burgoyne PS: A Y-chromosomal effect on blastocyst cell number in mice. Development 117:341–345 (1993).
10.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2006 Assisted reproductive technology success rates: preliminary data national summary and fertility clinic reports. 2008. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/art/art2006/index.htm.
11.
Clouston HJ, Fenwick J, Webb AL, Herbert M, Murdoch A, Wolstenholme J: Detection of mosaic and non-mosaic chromosome abnormalities in 6- to 8-day old human blastocysts. Hum Genet 101:30–36 (1997).
12.
Clouston HJ, Herbert M, Fenwick J, Murdoch AP, Wolstenholme J: Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts. Prenat Diagn 22:1143–1152 (2002).
13.
Cohen J, Wells D, Munné S: Removal of 2 cells from cleavage stage embryos is likely to reduce the efficacy of chromosomal tests that are used to enhance implantation rates. Fertil Steril 87:496–503 (2007).
14.
Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Dumoulin JC, van Wissen LC, Bras M, et al: Anaphase lagging mainly explains chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod 19:316–324 (2004).
15.
Daphnis DD, Delhanty JD, Jerkovic S, Geyer J, Craft I Harper JC: Detailed FISH analysis of day 5 human embryos reveals the mechanisms leading to mosaic aneuploidy. Hum Reprod 20:129–137 (2005).
16.
de Boer KA, Catt JW, Jansen RP, Leigh D, McArthur S: Moving to blastocyst biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and single embryo transfer at Sydney IVF. Fertil Steril 82:295–298 (2004).
17.
Delhanty JD, Griffin DK, Handyside AH, Harper J, Atkinson GH, et al: Detection of aneuploidy and chromosomal mosaicism in human embryos during preimplantation sex determination by fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH). Hum Mol Genet 2:1183–1185 (1993).
18.
Delhanty JD, Harper JC, Ao A, Handyside AH, Winston RM: Multicolour FISH detects frequent chromosomal mosaicism and chaotic division in normal preimplantation embryos from fertile patients. Hum Genet 99:755–760 (1997).
19.
Dumoulin JC, Derhaag JG, Bras M, Van Montfoort AP, Kester AD, et al: Growth rate of human preimplantation embryos is sex dependent after ICSI but not after IVF. Hum Reprod 20:484–491 (2005).
20.
Edwards RG, Beard HK: Oocyte polarity and cell determination in early mammalian embryos. Mol Hum Reprod 3:863–905 (1997).
21.
Edwards RG, Brody SA: Principles and Practice of Assisted Human Reproduction, pp 65–80 (Saunders, Philadelphia 1995).
22.
Evsikov S, Verlinsky Y: Mosaicism in the inner cell mass of human blastocysts. Hum Reprod 13:3151–3155 (1998).
23.
Fragouli E, Wells D, Thornhill A, Serhal P, Faed MJ, et al: Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of human oocytes and polar bodies. Hum Reprod 21:2319–2328 (2006).
24.
Fragouli E, Lenzi M, Ross R, Katz-Jaffe M, Schoolcraft WB, Wells D: Comprehensive molecular cytogenetic analysis of the human blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod 23:2596–2608 (2008).
25.
Fragouli E, Katz-Jaffe M, Alfarawati S, Stevens J, Colls P, et al: Comprehensive chromosome screening of polar bodies and blastocysts from couples experiencing repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril 94:875–887 (2010).
26.
Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Daphnis D, Goodall N, Mania A, Griffiths T, Gordon A, Wells D: Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts with the use of FISH, CGH and aCGH: scientific data and technical evaluation. Hum Reprod in press.
27.
Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB: In vitro culture of human blastocysts, in Jansen R, Mortimer D (eds): Towards Reproductive Certainty: Fertility and Genetics Beyond, pp 378–388 (ParthenonPublishing, Carnforth 1999).
28.
Griffin DK, Wilton LJ, Handyside AH, Winston RM, Delhanty JD: Dual fluorescent in situ hybridisation for simultaneous detection of X and Y chromosome-specific probes for the sexing of human preimplantation embryonic nuclei. Hum Genet 89:18–22 (1992).
29.
Gutierrez-Mateo C, Benet J, Wells D, Colls P, Bermudez MG, et al: Aneuploidy study of human oocytes first polar body comparative genomic hybridization and metaphase II fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis. Hum Reprod 19:2859–2868 (2004).
30.
Hassold T, Hall H, Hunt P: The origin of human aneuploidy: where we have been, where we are going. Hum Mol Genet 16:R203–R208 (2007).
31.
Heikinheimo O, Gibbons WE: The molecular mechanisms of oocyte maturation and early embryonic development are unveiling new insights into reproductive medicine. Mol Hum Reprod 4:745–756 (1998).
32.
Johnson DS, Cinnioglu C, Ross R, Filby A, Hill M, et al: Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod [Epub ahead of print] (2010).
33.
Kamiguchi Y, Rosenbusch B, Sterzik K, Mikamo K: Chromosomal analysis of unfertilized human oocytes prepared by a gradual fixation-air drying method. Hum Genet 90:533–541 (1993).
34.
Katz-Jaffe MG, Trounson AO, Cram DS: Mitotic errors in chromosome 21 of human preimplantation embryos are associated with non-viability. Mol Hum Reprod 10:143–147 (2004).
35.
Kokkali G, Traeger-Synodinos J, Vrettou C, Stavrou D, Jones GM, et al: Blastocyst biopsy versus cleavage stage biopsy and blastocyst transfer for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of beta-thalassaemia: a pilot study. Hum Reprod 22:1443–1449 (2007).
36.
Kuliev A, Cieslak J, Ilkevitch Y, Verlinsky Y: Chromosomal abnormalities in a series of 6,733 human oocytes in preimplantation diagnosis for age-related aneuploidies. Reprod Biomed Online 6:54–59 (2003).
37.
Li M, DeUgarte CM, Surrey M, Danzer H, DeCherney A, Hill DL: Fluorescence in situ hybridization reanalysis of day-6 human blastocysts diagnosed with aneuploidy on day 3. Fertil Steril 84:1395–1400 (2005).
38.
Magli MC, Jones GM, Gras L, Gianaroli L, Korman I, Trounson AO. Chromosome mosaicism in day 3 aneuploid embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts in vitro. Hum Reprod 15:1781–1786 (2000).
39.
McArthur SJ, Leigh D, Marshall JT, de Boer KA, Jansen RP: Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril 84:1628–1636 (2005).
40.
Menasha J, Levy B, Hirschhorn K, Kardon NB: Incidence and spectrum of chromosome abnormalities in spontaneous abortions: new insights from a 12-year study. Genet Med 7:251–263 (2005).
41.
Mittwoch U: Blastocysts prepare for the race to be male. Hum Reprod 8:1550–1555 (1993).
42.
Munne S, Lee A, Rosenwaks Z, Grifo J, Cohen J: Diagnosis of major chromosome aneuploidies in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod 8:2185–2191 (1993).
43.
Munne S, Sandalinas M, Escudero T, Marquez C, Cohen J: Chromosome mosaicism in cleavage-stage human embryos: evidence of a maternal age effect. Reprod Biomed Online 4:223–232 (2002).
44.
Northrop LE, Treff NR, Levy B, Scott RT: SNP microarray based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening demonstrates that cleavage stage FISH poorly predicts aneuploidy in embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts. Mol Hum Reprod 16:590–600 (2010).
45.
Pellestor F, Andreo B, Arnal F, Humeau C, Demaille J: Maternal aging and chromosomal abnormalities: new data drawn from in vitro unfertilized human oocytes. Hum Genet 112:195–203 (2003).
46.
Pergament E, Fiddler M, Cho N, Johnson D, Holmgren WJ: Sexual differentiation and preimplantation cell growth. Hum Reprod 9:1730–1732 (1994).
47.
Ray PF, Conaghan J, Winston RM, Handyside AH: Increased number of cells and metabolic activity in male human preimplantation embryos following in vitro fertilization. J Reprod Fertil 104:165–171 (1995).
48.
Ruangvutilert P, Delhanty JD, Serhal P, Simopoulou M, Rodeck CH, Harper JC: FISH analysis on day 5 post-insemination of human arrested and blastocyst stage embryos. Prenat Diagn 20:552–560 (2000).
49.
Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Mercader A, Mateu E, Buendia P, et al: Impact of chromosomal abnormalities on preimplantation embryo development. Prenat Diagn 27:748–756 (2007).
50.
Sandalinas M, Sadowy S, Alikani M, Calderon G, Cohen J, Munne S: Developmental ability of chromosomally abnormal human embryos to develop to the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod 16:1954–1958 (2001).
51.
Sandalinas M, Marquez C, Munne S: Spectral karyotyping of fresh, non-inseminated oocytes. Mol Hum Reprod 8:580–585 (2002).
52.
Schoolcraft WB, Gardner DK, Lane M, Schlenker T, Hamilton F, Meldrum DR: Blastocyst culture and transfer: analysis of results and parameters affecting outcome in two in vitro fertilization programs. Fertil Steril 72:604–609 (1999).
53.
Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munne S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D: Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril 94:1700–1706 (2010).
54.
Styer AK, Wright DL, Wolkovich AM, Veiga C, Toth T: Single-blastocyst transfer decreases twin gestation without affecting pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril 89:1702–1708 (2008).
55.
Veiga A, Calderon G, Santalo J, Barri PN, Egozcue J: Chromosome studies in oocytes and zygotes from an IVF programme. Hum Reprod 2:425–430 (1987).
56.
Voullaire L, Slater H, Williamson R, Wilton L: Chromosome analysis of blastomeres from human embryos by using comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Genet 106:210–217 (2000).
57.
Wells D, Delhanty JD: Comprehensive chromosomal analysis of human preimplantation embryos using whole genome amplification and single cell comparative genomic hybridization. Mol Hum Reprod 6:1055–1062 (2000).
58.
Wells D, Sherlock JK, Handyside AH, Delhanty JD: Detailed chromosomal and molecular genetic analysis of single cells by whole genome amplification and comparative genomic hybridisation. Nucleic Acids Res 27:1214–1218 (1999).
59.
Wells D, Alfarawati S, Fragouli E: Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment: microarrays and CGH. Mol Hum Reprod 14:703–710 (2008).
© 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel
2011
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.
