Defining the limits of detection for chromosome rearrangements in the preimplantation embryo using next generation sequencing

Hum Reprod. 2018 Aug 1;33(8):1566-1576. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey227.

Abstract

Study question: Is next generation sequencing (NGS) capable of detecting smaller sub-chromosomal rearrangements in human embryos than the manufacturer's quoted resolution suggests?

Summary answer: NGS was able to detect unbalanced chromosome segments smaller than the manufacturer's resolution.

What is known already: Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (array-CGH) has been the gold standard platform used for PGD of chromosome rearrangements. NGS is a viable alternative to array-CGH for PGD of chromosome arrangements given that the manufacturer's guidelines quote a resolution of ≥20 Mb. However, as many patients carry a chromosome rearrangement <20 Mb, the detection limits of NGS warrant further investigation.

Study design, size, duration: This study involved a retrospective assessment of stored DNA samples from embryos that had previously been diagnosed as unbalanced by array-CGH as part of routine PGD in two separate IVF clinics between November 2013 and April 2017. SurePlex whole genome amplification (WGA) products derived from DNA extracted from an embryo biopsy sample known to carry an unbalanced form of a chromosome rearrangement were subjected to a specific NGS workflow (VeriSeq PGS). The results from the two technologies were compared for each sample.

Participants/materials, setting, methods: WGA products from 200 embryos known to carry unbalanced rearrangements were sequenced and analysed. These embryos had been created by 75 patients known to carry a chromosome rearrangement (68 reciprocal translocations, 3 pericentric inversions, 1 paracentric inversion, 2 insertions and 1 dual reciprocal and inversion). Each sample was assessed for the size of the segmental gain/loss (Mb), copy number for each segment and chromosome, segregation pattern, the number of bins in the analysis software used and concordance with array-CGH results.

Main results and the role of chance: A total of 294 unbalanced chromosome segments were assessed. NGS was capable of detecting 285/294 (97%) unbalanced segments previously identified using array-CGH. The final PGD diagnosis was concordant for 200/200 (100%) embryos. In total, 44/75 (59%) patients contained an unbalanced chromosome segment below the quoted 20 Mb manufacturer's stated resolution. Of these, 35/44 (80%) patients had segments that were able to be detected using NGS, whilst maintaining clinical outcome concordance.

Limitations, reasons for caution: Our study subset did not include any rearrangements involving the Y chromosome. NGS has less available bins per chromosome compared to the array-CGH platform used, thus it remains possible that chromosome rearrangements predicted to be small but still detectable by array-CGH may not be feasible for testing using NGS. This should be considered when undertaking a theoretical feasibility assessment for detecting the chromosome rearrangement in question. Only one specific workflow for WGA and NGS was investigated in this study.

Wider implications of the findings: This study has shown that NGS is available for the detection of unbalanced chromosome rearrangements ≥10 Mb.

Study funding/competing interest(s): Part sponsorship of the VeriSeq PGS kits used was provided by Illumina. The remainder of the kits were provided by two commercial IVF clinics. None of the authors has any conflicting interests to declare.

Trial registration number: N/A.

Keywords: human embryos; next generation sequencing; reciprocal translocation; segmental imbalance; sub-chromosomal rearrangement.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study

MeSH terms

  • Chromosome Aberrations*
  • Comparative Genomic Hybridization* / standards
  • Female
  • Genetic Testing* / standards
  • High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing* / standards
  • Humans
  • Limit of Detection
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Pregnancy
  • Preimplantation Diagnosis / methods*
  • Preimplantation Diagnosis / standards
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Reproductive Techniques, Assisted / adverse effects*
  • Retrospective Studies
  • South Australia
  • Victoria