↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is compromised by degree of mosaicism of human embryos

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 1,113)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Accuracy of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is compromised by degree of mosaicism of human embryos
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12958-016-0193-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Norbert Gleicher, Andrea Vidali, Jeffrey Braverman, Vitaly A. Kushnir, David H. Barad, Cynthia Hudson, Yang-Guan Wu, Qi Wang, Lin Zhang, David F. Albertini, the International PGS Consortium Study Group

Abstract

To preclude transfer of aneuploid embryos, current preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) usually involves one trophectoderm biopsy at blastocyst stage, assumed to represent embryo ploidy. Whether one such biopsy can correctly assess embryo ploidy has recently, however, been questioned. This descriptive study investigated accuracy of PGS in two ways. Part I: Two infertile couples donated 11 embryos, previously diagnosed as aneuploid and, therefore, destined to be discarded. They were dissected into 37 anonymized specimens, and sent to another national laboratory for repeat analyses to assess (i) inter-laboratory congruity and (ii) intra-embryo congruity of multiple embryo biopsies in a single laboratory. Part II: Reports on human IVF cycle outcomes after transfer of allegedly aneuploid embryos into 8 infertile patients. Only 2/11 (18.2 %) embryos were identically assessed at two PGS laboratories; 4/11 (36.4 %), on repeat analysis were chromosomally normal, 2 mosaic normal/abnormal, and 5/11 (45.5 %) completely differed in reported aneuploidies. In intra-embryo analyses, 5/10 (50 %) differed between biopsy sites. Eight transfers of previously reported aneuploid embryos resulted in 5 chromosomally normal pregnancies, 4 delivered and 1 ongoing. Three patients did not conceive, though 1 among them experienced a chemical pregnancy. Though populations of both study parts are too small to draw statistically adequately powered conclusions on specific degrees of inaccuracy of PGS, here presented results do raise concerns especially about false-positive diagnoses. While inter-laboratory variations may at least partially be explained by different diagnostic platforms utilized, they cannot explain observed intra-embryo variations, suggesting more frequent trophectoderm mosiaicsm than previously reported. Together with recentl published mouse studies of lineages-specific degrees of survival of aneuploid cells in early stage embryos, these results call into question the biological basis of PGS, based on the assumption that a single trophectoderm biopsy can reliably determine embryo ploidy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 125 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 17%
Student > Bachelor 19 15%
Student > Master 15 12%
Other 12 10%
Researcher 12 10%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 24 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 29 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 110. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 July 2023.
All research outputs
#378,082
of 25,202,494 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#22
of 1,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,366
of 344,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,202,494 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,247 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.