Preimplantation genetic screening 2.0: an evolving and promising technique

Reflections

Like Comment

Authors

David Roy Meldrum, M.D., H. Irene Su, M.D., M.S.C.E., Mandy G. Katz-Jaffe, Ph.D., William B. Schoolcraft, M.D.

Abstract

In this issue Kushnir et al. (1) recalculated Centers for Disease Control data reporting 2011–2012 fresh cycle preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) live birth rates per ET. They appropriately pointed out that PGS results must be reported per initiated cycle. Increased live birth rates per ET may result from excluding from ET embryos destined to not implant or miscarry. They concluded that nationwide improvements in live birth and miscarriage rates reported for older women were “likely due to favorable patient selection biases.” However, this data set was not optimally analyzed by intention to treat (i.e., cycle start), because only cycles with at least one oocyte retrieved were included and approximately 40% of cycles did not reach transfer for various reasons including “freeze all” or cycles with no euploid embryo (Chang J, personal communication, 2016).

Read the full text at: http://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(16)612...

Fertility and Sterility

Editorial Office, American Society for Reproductive Medicine

Fertility and Sterility® is an international journal for obstetricians, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, urologists, basic scientists and others who treat and investigate problems of infertility and human reproductive disorders. The journal publishes juried original scientific articles in clinical and laboratory research relevant to reproductive endocrinology, urology, andrology, physiology, immunology, genetics, contraception, and menopause. Fertility and Sterility® encourages and supports meaningful basic and clinical research, and facilitates and promotes excellence in professional education, in the field of reproductive medicine.

No comments yet.