Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Dec 20;16(1):69.
doi: 10.1186/s40246-022-00442-8.

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: challenges in clinical practice

Affiliations
Review

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: challenges in clinical practice

Hui Yang et al. Hum Genomics. .

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has been used widely during in vitro fertilization procedures in assisted reproductive centers throughout the world. Despite its wide use, concerns arise from the use of PGT-A technology in clinical decision-making. We address knowledge gaps in PGT-A, summarizing major challenges and current professional guidelines. First, PGT-A is a screening test and not a diagnostic test. Second, mosaicism is much higher in the blastocyst stage from PGT-A than had been recognized previously and a mosaic embryo may not accurately represent the genetic disease risk for future fetal disorders. Third, PGT-A was not validated clinically before use in patients; the best use of this technology for selected age-groups remains uncertain. Given these gaps, we believe that current professional policies relying on industry-self-regulation are insufficient. In the USA, the Food and Drug Administration may be the most appropriate agency to provide more definitive guidelines and regulations that are needed for better practice.

Keywords: Aneuploidy; Ethics; In vitro fertilization; Mosaicism; Pregnancy; Preimplantation genetic testing; Screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Carvalho F, Coonen E, Goossens V, et al. ESHRE PGT consortium good practice recommendations for the organisation of PGT. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020(3):hoaa021. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Harper JC. Preimplantation genetic screening. J Med Screen. 2018;25(1):1–5. - PubMed
    1. Wilkins-Haug L, Amor DJ, Savulescu J. ISPD 2021 debate - All in vitro fertilization cycles should involve pre-implantation genetic testing to improve fetal health and pregnancy outcomes. Prenat Diagn. 2022;42(8):1015–21. - PubMed
    1. Gleicher N, Patrizio P, Brivanlou A. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy—a castle built on sand. Trends Mol Med. 2021;27(8):731–42. - PubMed
    1. Greco E, Litwicka K, Minasi MG, Cursio E, Greco PF, Barillari P. Preimplantation genetic testing: where we are today. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(12):4381. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources