Effects of PGS2.0 in Patients With Unexplained RPL
Effects of Preimplantation Genetic Screening 2.0 on the Clinical Outcomes of Assisted Reproductive Treatment in Patients With Recurrent Pregnancy Loss : A Multi-center-based Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial
1 other identifier
interventional
710
1 country
1
Brief Summary
50%-60% of the known causes of recurrent pregnancy loss(RPL) are associated with embryonic aneuploidy, such that preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) on embryos acquired by assisted reproductive treatment should improve the rate of pregnancy and live birth in those patients. In dispute though the clinical application of PGS has been, a series of studies show that the new generation of PGS(PGS 2.0), based on blastocyst biopsy followed by whole genome analysis, has significantly improved the clinical outcome of IVF treatment. At present, there is still a need for the evidence of the use of PGS 2.0 in RPL patients, who may benefit from this emerging technology considering the prevalence of genetic abnormalities and the number of transferable embryos in this population. An earlier single center RCT conducted by our IVF center displayed higher implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and ongoing pregnancy rate calculated by per embryo transfer(ET) cycle in IVF/ICSI+PGS group compared with IVF/ICSI group. This multi-center prospective randomized clinical trial is to provide more data to determine whether the clinical outcomes are significantly improved per treatment cycle such that provide evidence for the application of PGS in RPL patients. Besides, risk factors of PGS outcome are to be analyzed from multi-center data to build a model for prediction of the possible outcomes of PGS and direction of the clinical choice.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Feb 2018
Longer than P75 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
July 9, 2017
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
July 11, 2017
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
February 6, 2018
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
September 30, 2020
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 30, 2021
CompletedFebruary 6, 2018
July 1, 2017
2.6 years
July 9, 2017
February 4, 2018
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Live birth rate per initiated cycle
live birth rate of a baby per oocyte retrieval cycle initiated
up to 42 days of a live birth
Secondary Outcomes (5)
Embryo implantation
2 weeks after embryo transfer
Clinical pregnancy
4 weeks after embryo transfer
Ongoing pregnancy
10 weeks after embryo transfer
Time to pregnancy
From the day of entering oocyte retrieval cycle to the embryo transfer day of a later assured ongoing pregnancy,which is up to 24 months within the study period.
Pregnancy outcome
up to 42 days of a live birth
Study Arms (2)
With PGS 2.0
EXPERIMENTALPatients will undergo IVF/ICSI procedure, and experience oocyte aspiration, fertilization,blastocyst formation,conventional embryo morphology evaluation and trophectoderm biopsy before blastocyst cryopreservation. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) will be performed to select euploid embryo. The patients will go through up to three times of frozen-thawed transfers of euploid blastocysts until ongoing pregnancy or live birth is acquired. Only one euploid blastocyst will be transferred at a time.
Without PGS 2.0
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients will undergo IVF/ICSI procedure, and experience oocyte aspiration, fertilization,blastocyst formation,and conventional embryo morphology evaluation before blastocyst cryopreservation. The patients will go through up to three times of frozen-thawed transfers of good quality blastocysts until ongoing pregnancy or live birth is acquired. Only one good quality blastocyst will be transferred at a time.
Interventions
in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmatic sperm injection
Blastocysts are selected by PGS 2.0(NGS based) and only euploid embryos will be transferred.
Blastocysts are selected by morphology criteria and only good-scored embryo will be transferred.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- The couple has experienced two or more failed pregnancies (according to ASRM definition).
- The karyotypes of both husband and wife are normal (polymorphic chromosomes are considered normal either).
- \. Women ages ≥20 and \<38 years old.
You may not qualify if:
- the wife has history of the following diseases: a, the history of thyroid disease; b, the history of adrenal diseases; c, the history of sexually transmitted diseases; d, the history of hereditary diseases; e, the history of mental and psychological disorders.
- the wife has the following uterine abnormalities: a, uterine malformations (uterus unicorns and duplex uterus), untreated septate uterus, adenomyoma, submucous uterine fibroids, endometrial polyps, or intrauterine adhesions (including the history of intrauterine adhesions).
- the wife has a medical condition that contraindicate ART or pregnancy, including poorly controlled type I or type II diabetes; undiagnosed liver and renal disease or liver and renal insufficiency (based on blood test); deep vein thrombosis; pulmonary embolism; history of cerebrovascular accident; uncontrolled hypertension; cardiac disease; carcinoma; severe anemia; suspicious or undiagnosed vaginal bleeding.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Shanghai Ji Ai Genetics & IVF Institute, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University
Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, 200011, China
Related Publications (10)
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013 Jan;99(1):63. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023. Epub 2012 Oct 22.
PMID: 23095139BACKGROUNDKolte AM, Bernardi LA, Christiansen OB, Quenby S, Farquharson RG, Goddijn M, Stephenson MD; ESHRE Special Interest Group, Early Pregnancy. Terminology for pregnancy loss prior to viability: a consensus statement from the ESHRE early pregnancy special interest group. Hum Reprod. 2015 Mar;30(3):495-8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu299. Epub 2014 Nov 5.
PMID: 25376455BACKGROUNDHodes-Wertz B, Grifo J, Ghadir S, Kaplan B, Laskin CA, Glassner M, Munne S. Idiopathic recurrent miscarriage is caused mostly by aneuploid embryos. Fertil Steril. 2012 Sep;98(3):675-80. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.025. Epub 2012 Jun 7.
PMID: 22683012BACKGROUNDScott RT Jr, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Hong KH, Scott KL, Taylor D, Tao X, Treff NR. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013 Sep;100(3):697-703. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.035. Epub 2013 Jun 1.
PMID: 23731996BACKGROUNDForman EJ, Hong KH, Ferry KM, Tao X, Taylor D, Levy B, Treff NR, Scott RT Jr. In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013 Jul;100(1):100-7.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.056. Epub 2013 Mar 30.
PMID: 23548942BACKGROUNDDahdouh EM, Balayla J, Garcia-Velasco JA. Comprehensive chromosome screening improves embryo selection: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015 Dec;104(6):1503-12. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.08.038. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
PMID: 26385405BACKGROUNDDahdouh EM, Balayla J, Garcia-Velasco JA. Impact of blastocyst biopsy and comprehensive chromosome screening technology on preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015 Mar;30(3):281-9. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.11.015. Epub 2014 Dec 11.
PMID: 25599824BACKGROUNDSermon K, Capalbo A, Cohen J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, De Vos A, Delhanty J, Fiorentino F, Gleicher N, Griesinger G, Grifo J, Handyside A, Harper J, Kokkali G, Mastenbroek S, Meldrum D, Meseguer M, Montag M, Munne S, Rienzi L, Rubio C, Scott K, Scott R, Simon C, Swain J, Treff N, Ubaldi F, Vassena R, Vermeesch JR, Verpoest W, Wells D, Geraedts J. The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists. Mol Hum Reprod. 2016 Aug;22(8):845-57. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gaw034. Epub 2016 Jun 2.
PMID: 27256483BACKGROUNDLei C, Sui Y, Ye J, Lu Y, Xi J, Sun Y, Jin L, Sun X. Comparison of PGS2.0 versus conventional embryo morphology evaluation for patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised trial. BMJ Open. 2020 Oct 7;10(10):e036252. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036252.
PMID: 33033011DERIVEDCornelisse S, Zagers M, Kostova E, Fleischer K, van Wely M, Mastenbroek S. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (abnormal number of chromosomes) in in vitro fertilisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 8;9(9):CD005291. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005291.pub3.
PMID: 32898291DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY CHAIR
XIAOXI SUN, PHD
Shanghai Ji Ai Genetics & IVF Institute, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
July 9, 2017
First Posted
July 11, 2017
Study Start
February 6, 2018
Primary Completion
September 30, 2020
Study Completion
September 30, 2021
Last Updated
February 6, 2018
Record last verified: 2017-07