Comprehensive preimplantation genetic testing by massively parallel sequencing
Authors: Chen Songchang , Yin Xuyang , Zhang Sijia , Xia Jun , Liu Ping , Xie Pingyuan , Yan Huijuan , Liang Xinming , Zhang Junyu , Chen Yiyao , Fei Hongjun , Zhang Lanlan , Hu Yuting , Jiang Hui , Lin Ge , Chen Fang , Xu Chenming 
Published: September 2020

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION
Can whole genome sequencing (WGS) offer a relatively cost-effective approach for embryonic genome-wide haplotyping and preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for monogenic disorders (PGT-M), aneuploidy (PGT-A) and structural rearrangements (PGT-SR)?

SUMMARY ANSWER
Reliable genome-wide haplotyping, PGT-M, PGT-A and PGT-SR could be performed by WGS with 10× depth of parental and 4× depth of embryonic sequencing data.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
Reduced representation genome sequencing with a genome-wide next-generation sequencing haplarithmisis-based solution has been verified as a generic approach for automated haplotyping and comprehensive PGT. Several low-depth massively parallel sequencing (MPS)-based methods for haplotyping and comprehensive PGT have been developed. However, an additional family member, such as a sibling, or a proband, is required for PGT-M haplotyping using low-depth MPS methods.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
In this study, 10 families that had undergone traditional IVF-PGT and 53 embryos, including 13 embryos from two PGT-SR families and 40 embryos from eight PGT-M families, were included to evaluate a WGS-based method. There were 24 blastomeres and 29 blastocysts in total. All embryos were used for PGT-A. Karyomapping validated the WGS results. Clinical outcomes of the 10 families were evaluated.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
A blastomere or a few trophectoderm cells from the blastocyst were biopsied, and multiple displacement amplification (MDA) was performed. MDA DNA and bulk DNA of family members were used for library construction. Libraries were sequenced, and data analysis, including haplotype inheritance deduction for PGT-M and PGT-SR and read-count analysis for PGT-A, was performed using an in-house pipeline. Haplotyping with a proband and parent-only haplotyping without additional family members were performed to assess the WGS methodology. Concordance analysis between the WGS results and traditional PGT methods was performed.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
For the 40 PGT-M and 53 PGT-A embryos, 100% concordance between the WGS and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-array results was observed, regardless of whether additional family members or a proband was included for PGT-M haplotyping. For the 13 embryos from the two PGT-SR families, the embryonic balanced translocation was detected and 100% concordance between WGS and MicroSeq with PCR-seq was demonstrated.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The number of samples in this study was limited. In some cases, the reference embryo for PGT-M or PGT-SR parent-only haplotyping was not available owing to failed direct genotyping.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
WGS-based PGT-A, PGT-M and PGT-SR offered a comprehensive PGT approach for haplotyping without the requirement for additional family members. It provided an improved complementary method to PGT methodologies, such as low-depth MPS- and SNP array-based methods.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
This research was supported by the research grant from the National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFC0910201 and 2018YFC1004900), the Guangdong province science and technology project of China (2019B020226001), the Shenzhen Birth Defect Screening Project Lab (JZF No. [2016] 750) and the Shenzhen Municipal Government of China (JCYJ20170412152854656). This work was also supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81771638, 81901495 and 81971344), the National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFC1004901 and 2016YFC0905103), the Shanghai Sailing Program (18YF1424800), the Shanghai Municipal Commission of Science and Technology Program (15411964000) and the Shanghai ‘Rising Stars of Medical Talent’ Youth Development Program Clinical Laboratory Practitioners Program (201972). The authors declare no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
N/A.