on behalf of the BruMaStra PGD working groupThis study provides an overview of 13 years of experience of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for Huntington's disease (HD) at three European PGD centres in Brussels, Maastricht and Strasbourg. Information on all 331 PGD intakes for HD, couples' reproductive history, PGD approach, treatment cycles and outcomes between 1995 and 2008 were collected prospectively. Of 331 couples for intake, 68% requested direct testing and 32% exclusion testing (with a preponderance of French couples). At the time of PGD intake, 39% of women had experienced one or more pregnancies. A history of pregnancy termination after prenatal diagnosis was observed more frequently in the direct testing group (25%) than in the exclusion group (10%; P¼0.0027). PGD workup was based on two approaches: (1) direct testing of the CAG-triplet repeat and (2) linkage analysis using intragenic or flanking microsatellite markers of the HTT gene. In total, 257 couples had started workup and 174 couples (70% direct testing, 30% exclusion testing) completed at least one PGD cycle. In total, 389 cycles continued to oocyte retrieval (OR). The delivery rates per OR were 19.8%, and per embryo transfer 24.8%, resulting in 77 deliveries and the birth of 90 children. We conclude that PGD is a valuable and safe reproductive option for HD carriers and couples at risk of transmitting HD.

Nephrogenic diabetes insipidus (DIR) is an X-linked disorder characterized by insensitivity of the distal nephron for the pituitary hormone, vasopressin. The genetic map location of the DIR gene on chromosome Xq28 coincides with the physical map location of the functional vasopressin renal V2-type receptor. Recently, the human and rat cDNAs for the vasopressin V2 receptor (AVPR2) have been identified. We show here that the structural AVPR2 gene is localized between DXS52 and G6PD, which is within the genetic map location of DIR. We also tested eight X-linked DIR probands and their families for mutations in one of the most conserved extracellular regions of AVPR2: in three of them, we have identified point mutations resulting in non-conservative amino acid substitutions which cosegregated with DIR in all families.

The field of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is evolving fast and best practice advice is essential for regulation and standardisation of diagnostic testing. The previous ESHRE guidelines on best practice for PGD, published in 2005 and 2011, are considered outdated, and the development of new papers outlining recommendations for good practice in PGT was necessary. The current paper provides recommendations on the technical aspects of PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) and covers recommendations on basic methods for PGT-M and testing strategies. Furthermore, some specific recommendations are formulated for special cases, including de novo pathogenic variants, consanguineous couples, HLA typing, exclusion testing and disorders caused by pathogenic variants in the mitochondrial DNA. This paper is one of a series of four papers on good practice recommendations on PGT. The other papers cover the organisation of a PGT centre, embryo biopsy and tubing and the technical aspects of PGT for chromosomal structural rearrangements/aneuploidies. Together, these papers should assist scientists interested in PGT in developing the best laboratory and clinical practice possible.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for monogenic disorders currently involves polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods, which must be robust, sensitive and highly accurate, precluding misdiagnosis. Twelve adverse misdiagnoses reported to the ESHRE PGD-Consortium are likely an underestimate. This retrospective study, involving six PGD centres, assessed the validity of PCR-based PGD through reanalysis of untransferred embryos from monogenic-PGD cycles. Data were collected on the genotype concordance at PGD and follow-up from 940 untransferred embryos, including details on the parameters of PGD cycles: category of monogenic disease, embryo morphology, embryo biopsy and genotype assay strategy. To determine the validity of PCR-based PGD, the sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp) and diagnostic accuracy were calculated. Stratified analyses were also conducted to assess the influence of the parameters above on the validity of PCR-based PGD. The analysis of overall data showed that 93.7% of embryos had been correctly classified at the time of PGD, with Se of 99.2% and Sp of 80.9%. The stratified analyses found that diagnostic accuracy is statistically significantly higher when PGD is performed on two cells versus one cell (P ¼ 0.001). Se was significantly higher when multiplex protocols versus singleplex protocols were applied (P ¼ 0.005), as well as for PGD applied on cells from good compared with poor morphology embryos (P ¼ 0.032). Morphology, however, did not affect diagnostic accuracy. Multiplex PCR-based methods on one cell, are as robust as those on two cells regarding false negative rate, which is the most important criteria for clinical PGD applications. Overall, this study demonstrates the validity, robustness and high diagnostic value of PCR-based PGD.

STUDY QUESTION Can reduced representation genome sequencing offer an alternative to single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays as a generic and genome-wide approach for comprehensive preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M), aneuploidy (PGT-A) and structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) in human embryo biopsy samples? SUMMARY ANSWER Reduced representation genome sequencing, with OnePGT, offers a generic, next-generation sequencing-based approach for automated haplotyping and copy-number assessment, both combined or independently, in human single blastomere and trophectoderm samples. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Genome-wide haplotyping strategies, such as karyomapping and haplarithmisis, have paved the way for comprehensive PGT, i.e. leveraging PGT-M, PGT-A and PGT-SR in a single workflow. These methods are based upon SNP array technology. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This multi-centre verification study evaluated the concordance of PGT results for a total of 225 embryos, including 189 originally tested for a monogenic disorder and 36 tested for a translocation. Concordance for whole chromosome aneuploidies was also evaluated where whole genome copy-number reference data were available. Data analysts were kept blind to the results from the reference PGT method. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Leftover blastomere/trophectoderm whole genome amplified (WGA) material was used, or secondary trophectoderm biopsies were WGA. A reduced representation library from WGA DNA together with bulk DNA from phasing references was processed across two study sites with the Agilent OnePGT solution. Libraries were sequenced on an Illumina NextSeq500 system, and data were analysed with Agilent Alissa OnePGT software. The embedded PGT-M pipeline utilises the principles of haplarithmisis to deduce haplotype inheritance whereas both the PGT-A and PGT-SR pipelines are based upon read-count analysis in order to evaluate embryonic ploidy. Concordance analysis was performed for both analysis strategies against the reference PGT method. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE PGT-M analysis was performed on 189 samples. For nine samples, the data quality was too poor to analyse further, and for 20 samples, no result could be obtained mainly due to biological limitations of the haplotyping approach, such as co-localisation of meiotic crossover events and nullisomy for the chromosome of interest. For the remaining 160 samples, 100% concordance was obtained between OnePGT and the reference PGT-M method. Equally for PGT-SR, 100% concordance for all 36 embryos tested was demonstrated. Moreover, with embryos originally analysed for PGT-M or PGT-SR for which genome-wide copy-number reference data were available, 100% concordance was shown for whole chromosome copy-number calls (PGT-A). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Inherent to haplotyping methodologies, processing of additional family members is still required. Biological limitations caused inconclusive results in 10% of cases. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Employment of OnePGT for PGT-M, PGT-SR, PGT-A or combined as comprehensive PGT offers a scalable platform, which is inherently generic and thereby, eliminates the need for family-specific design and optimisation. It can be considered as both an improvement and complement to the current methodologies for PGT. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) Agilent Technologies, the KU Leuven (C1/018 to J.R.V. and T.V.) and the Horizon 2020 WIDENLIFE (692065 to J.R.V. and T.V). H.M. is supported by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO, 11A7119N). M.Z.E, J.R.V. and T.V. are co-inventors on patent applications: ZL910050-PCT/EP2011/060211- WO/2011/157846 ‘Methods for haplotyping single cells’ and ZL913096-PCT/EP2014/068315 ‘Haplotyping and copy-number typing using polymorphic variant allelic frequencies’. T.V. and J.R.V. are co-inventors on patent application: ZL912076-PCT/EP2013/070858 ‘High-throughput genotyping by sequencing’. Haplarithmisis (‘Haplotyping and copy-number typing using polymorphic variant allelic frequencies’) has been licensed to Agilent Technologies. The following patents are pending for OnePGT: US2016275239, AU2014345516, CA2928013, CN105874081, EP3066213 and WO2015067796. OnePGT is a registered trademark. D.L., J.T. and R.L.R. report personal fees during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work from Agilent Technologies. S.H. and K.O.F. report personal fees and other during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work from Agilent Technologies. J.A. reports personal fees and other during the conduct of the study from Agilent Technologies and personal fees from Agilent Technologies and UZ Leuven outside the submitted work. B.D. reports grants from IWT/VLAIO, personal fees during the conduct of the study from Agilent Technologies and personal fees and other outside the submitted work from Agilent Technologies. In addition, B.D. has a patent 20160275239 - Genetic Analysis Method pending. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest.

PurposeThe aim of this study was to determine whether BRCA1/2 mutation carriers produce fewer mature oocytes after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), in comparison to a PGD control group.MethodsA retrospective, international, multicenter cohort study was performed on data of first PGD cycles performed between January 2006 and September 2015. Data were extracted from medical files. The study was performed in one PGD center and three affiliated IVF centers in the Netherlands and one PGD center in Belgium. Exposed couples underwent PGD because of a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation, controls for other monogenic conditions. Only couples treated in a long gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist-suppressive protocol, stimulated with at least 150 IU follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), were included. Women suspected to have a diminished ovarian reserve status due to chemotherapy, auto-immune disorders, or genetic conditions (other than BRCA1/2 mutations) were excluded. A total of 106 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers underwent PGD in this period, of which 43 (20 BRCA1 and 23 BRCA2 mutation carriers) met the inclusion criteria. They were compared to 174 controls selected by frequency matching.ResultsThirty-eight BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (18 BRCA1 and 20 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and 154 controls proceeded to oocyte pickup. The median number of mature oocytes was 7.0 (interquartile range (IQR) 4.0–9.0) in the BRCA group as a whole, 6.5 (IQR 4.0–8.0) in BRCA1 mutation carriers, 7.5 (IQR 5.5–9.0) in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 8.0 (IQR 6.0–11.0) in controls. Multiple linear regression analysis with the number of mature oocytes as a dependent variable and adjustment for treatment center, female age, female body mass index (BMI), type of gonadotropin used, and the total dose of gonadotropins administered revealed a significantly lower yield of mature oocytes in the BRCA group as compared to controls (p = 0.04). This finding could be fully accounted for by the BRCA1 subgroup (BRCA1 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.02, BRCA2 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.50).ConclusionsOvarian response to stimulation, expressed as the number of mature oocytes, was reduced in BRCA1 but not in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Although oocyte yield was in correspondence to a normal response in all subgroups, this finding points to a possible negative influence of the BRCA1 gene on ovarian reserve.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10815-017-1014-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In this study, the use of Ca2+/Mg2+-free medium for biopsy of human embryos at the 4- to 10-cell stage on the third day of development was evaluated. When compared with control medium containing normal concentrations of Ca2+ and Mg2+ ions, the use of Ca2+/Mg2+-free medium allows an easier removal of blastomeres as illustrated by a lower rate of cell lysis as well as by a shorter time needed to perform the procedure. Subsequent embryo development to the blastocyst stage is not affected by the choice of biopsy medium, not even when embryos are exposed to the medium for 45 min. The use of Ca2+/Mg2+-free medium thus allows for an easier biopsy procedure during pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, while it does not result in a loss of developmental potential of the embryo to the blastocyst stage.

PurposePreimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a reproductive option for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers wishing to avoid transmission of the predisposition for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) to their offspring. Embryos obtained by in vitro fertilisation (IVF/ICSI) are tested for the presence of the mutation, only BRCA-negative embryos are transferred into the uterus. The suitability and outcome of PGD for HBOC is evaluated. MethodsObservational cohort study on PGD treatments for HBOC carried out in two of WesternEurope's largest PGD centres from 2006 until 2012. Male carriers, asymptomatic female carriers, and breast cancer survivors were eligible. If available, PGD on embryos cryopreserved before chemotherapy was possible. Generic PGD-PCR tests were developed based on haplotyping, if necessary combined with mutation detection. Results 70couples underwent PGD for BRCA1/2. 42/71 carriers (59.2%) were female, six (14.3%) of whom have had breast cancer prior to PGD. In total, 145 PGD cycles were performed. 720 embryos were tested, identifying 294 (40.8%) as BRCA-negative. Of fresh IVF/PGD cycles, 23.9% resulted in a clinical pregnancy. Three cycles involved PGD on embryos cryopreserved before chemotherapy; two of these women delivered a healthy child. Overall, 38 children were liveborn. Two BRCA1 carriers were diagnosed with breast cancer shortly after PGD treatment, despite negative screening prior to PGD. ConclusionsPGD for HBOC proved to be suitable, yielding good pregnancy rates for asymptomatic carriers as well as breast cancer survivors. Because of two cases of breast cancer shortly after treatment, maternal safety of IVF(/PGD) in female carriers needs further evaluation. [2,3]. The prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 mutations is estimated at 0.1-1.0% in the general population, making HBOC one of the more prevalent autosomal dominant genetic disorders [4,5].Carriers of a BRCA1/2 mutation have a 50% risk of passing this predisposition to their offspring. There are several reproductive options to circumvent this, but only two lead to a child genetically related to both partners: prenatal diagnosis and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Prenatal diagnosis on the one hand, involves genetic testing of a fetus for the presence of a familial BRCA1/2 mutation during pregnancy, followed by pregnancy termination in case of an unfavourable result. Although applied on a small scale, reports regarding clinical experience with prenatal diagnosis for HBOC are not available in the literature to date. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) on the other hand, involves in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), followed by genetic testing of the embryos for the presence of a familial BRCA1/2 mutation before intrauterine transfer.PGD has been successfully applied since 1990 for an expanding list of monogenic disorders and chromosomal abnormalities [6]. In 2003, the Ethics Taskforce of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology stated that it is acceptable to ...