Diagnostic accuracy: theoretical models for preimplantation genetic testing of a single nucleus using the fluorescence in situ hybridization technique.

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to develop and use theoretical models to investigate the accuracy of the fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technique in testing a single nucleus from a preimplantation embryo without the complicating effect of mosaicism. METHODS Mathematical models were constructed for three different applications of FISH in preimplantation genetic testing (sex determination for sex-linked diseases, two-way reciprocal translocations and sporadic chromosome aneuploidy). The input values were the degree of aneuploidy (initially set at 3% per chromosome for sporadic aneuploidy) and the accuracy per probe (initially set at 95%), defined as the proportion of normal diploid nuclei with a normal signal pattern. The primary statistic was the predictive value of the test result. RESULTS Testing two chromosome pairs to determine sex chromosome status or detect unbalanced translocation products had high predictive value: at least 99.5% for a normal test result (95% CI: 99-100%), and 90% for an abnormal test result (95% CI: 88-92%). However, the predictive value of an abnormal test result testing five chromosomes for sporadic chromosome aneuploidy was 41% (95% CI: 36-46%); 90% would be achieved with an aneuploidy rate per chromosome of 20.3% (equivalent to 99.5% prevalence for 23 chromosomes) rather than 3%, or with an accuracy per probe of 99.6% rather than 95%, or when testing 23 chromosome pairs, rather than 5 pairs, with either 8.3% aneuploidy (86.4% prevalence) or 99.5% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS Testing a single cell using the FISH technique has the potential to achieve acceptable analytical performance for sex determination and two-way reciprocal translocations, but is unlikely to achieve adequate performance testing for sporadic chromosome aneuploidy. New techniques for detecting the copy number of every chromosome are emerging, but it remains to be seen if the high accuracy required will be achieved.

[1]  A. Mercader,et al.  Improving FISH diagnosis for preimplantation genetic aneuploidy screening. , 2010, Human reproduction.

[2]  D. Griffin,et al.  Karyomapping: a universal method for genome wide analysis of genetic disease based on mapping crossovers between parental haplotypes , 2009, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[3]  C. Moutou,et al.  ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection IX: cycles from January to December 2006 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2007. , 2009, Human reproduction.

[4]  S Mastenbroek,et al.  What next for preimplantation genetic screening? More randomized controlled trials needed? , 2008, Human reproduction.

[5]  D. Wells,et al.  Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment: microarrays and CGH , 2008, Molecular human reproduction.

[6]  H. Danzer,et al.  Accuracy of FISH analysis in predicting chromosomal status in patients undergoing preimplantation genetic diagnosis. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[7]  J. Simpson What next for preimplantation genetic screening? Randomized clinical trial in assessing PGS: necessary but not sufficient. , 2008, Human reproduction.

[8]  P. Bossuyt Interpreting diagnostic test accuracy studies. , 2008, Seminars in hematology.

[9]  Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[10]  L. Gianaroli,et al.  Substandard application of preimplantation genetic screening may interfere with its clinical success. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[11]  Jacques Cohen,et al.  Increased efficiency of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for infertility using "no result rescue". , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[12]  Jacques Cohen,et al.  Removal of 2 cells from cleavage stage embryos is likely to reduce the efficacy of chromosomal tests that are used to enhance implantation rates. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[13]  James A Grifo,et al.  Multicentre trial of preimplantation genetic screening reported in the New England Journal of Medicine: an in-depth look at the findings. , 2007, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[14]  Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[15]  N. Muntjewerff,et al.  ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection V: cycles from January to December 2002 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2003. , 2008, Human reproduction.

[16]  A. V. Van Steirteghem,et al.  The analysis of one or two blastomeres for PGD using fluorescence in-situ hybridization. , 2006, Human reproduction.

[17]  M. Robinson,et al.  ESHRE PGD Consortium 'Best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)'. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[18]  D. Van Opstal,et al.  The development of cytogenetically normal, abnormal and mosaic embryos: a theoretical model. , 2004, Human reproduction update.

[19]  J. Jarow,et al.  Chromosomal abnormalities in embryos derived from testicular sperm extraction. , 2003, The Journal of urology.

[20]  Santiago Munné,et al.  Chromosomal abnormalities in embryos derived from testicular sperm extraction. , 2003, Fertility and sterility.

[21]  J. Demaille,et al.  Maternal aging and chromosomal abnormalities: new data drawn from in vitro unfertilized human oocytes , 2003, Human Genetics.

[22]  C. Ogilvie,et al.  Meiotic outcomes in reciprocal translocation carriers ascertained in 3-day human embryos , 2002, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[23]  K. Schulz,et al.  Uses and abuses of screening tests , 2002, The Lancet.

[24]  R. Williamson,et al.  Birth of a healthy infant after preimplantation confirmation of euploidy by comparative genomic hybridization. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  P. N. Rao,et al.  Prenatal diagnosis using interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): 2‐year multi‐center retrospective study and review of the literature , 2001, Prenatal diagnosis.

[26]  R.H. Martin,et al.  Aneuploidy in human sperm: a review of the frequency and distribution of aneuploidy, effects of donor age and lifestyle factors , 2000, Cytogenetic and Genome Research.

[27]  A. Handyside,et al.  Chromosome translocations: segregation modes and strategies for preimplantation genetic diagnosis , 1998, Prenatal diagnosis.

[28]  M. Legator,et al.  Preimplantation diagnosis of the aneuploidies most commonly found in spontaneous abortions and live births: XY, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22 , 1998, Prenatal diagnosis.

[29]  J Cohen,et al.  Chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. , 1998, Human reproduction update.