Skip to content

Effects of PGS2.0 in Patients With Unexplained RPL

Effects of Preimplantation Genetic Screening 2.0 on the Clinical Outcomes of Assisted Reproductive Treatment in Patients With Recurrent Pregnancy Loss : A Multi-center-based Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03214185
Enrollment
710
Registered
2017-07-11
Start date
2018-02-06
Completion date
2021-09-30
Last updated
2018-02-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Recurrent Pregnancy Loss, Infertility, Female

Keywords

unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss, infertility, female, preimplantation genetic screening, in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Brief summary

50%-60% of the known causes of recurrent pregnancy loss(RPL) are associated with embryonic aneuploidy, such that preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) on embryos acquired by assisted reproductive treatment should improve the rate of pregnancy and live birth in those patients. In dispute though the clinical application of PGS has been, a series of studies show that the new generation of PGS(PGS 2.0), based on blastocyst biopsy followed by whole genome analysis, has significantly improved the clinical outcome of IVF treatment. At present, there is still a need for the evidence of the use of PGS 2.0 in RPL patients, who may benefit from this emerging technology considering the prevalence of genetic abnormalities and the number of transferable embryos in this population. An earlier single center RCT conducted by our IVF center displayed higher implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and ongoing pregnancy rate calculated by per embryo transfer(ET) cycle in IVF/ICSI+PGS group compared with IVF/ICSI group. This multi-center prospective randomized clinical trial is to provide more data to determine whether the clinical outcomes are significantly improved per treatment cycle such that provide evidence for the application of PGS in RPL patients. Besides, risk factors of PGS outcome are to be analyzed from multi-center data to build a model for prediction of the possible outcomes of PGS and direction of the clinical choice.

Interventions

PROCEDUREIVF/ICSI

in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmatic sperm injection

GENETICPGS 2.0

Blastocysts are selected by PGS 2.0(NGS based) and only euploid embryos will be transferred.

OTHERConventional embryo morphology evaluation

Blastocysts are selected by morphology criteria and only good-scored embryo will be transferred.

Sponsors

The International Peace Maternity & Child Health Hospital of China welfare institute
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
RenJi Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
ShangHai Ji Ai Genetics & IVF Institute
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
20 Years to 37 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. The couple has experienced two or more failed pregnancies (according to ASRM definition). 2. The karyotypes of both husband and wife are normal (polymorphic chromosomes are considered normal either). 3\. Women ages ≥20 and \<38 years old.

Exclusion criteria

1. the wife has history of the following diseases: a, the history of thyroid disease; b, the history of adrenal diseases; c, the history of sexually transmitted diseases; d, the history of hereditary diseases; e, the history of mental and psychological disorders. 2. the wife has the following uterine abnormalities: a, uterine malformations (uterus unicorns and duplex uterus), untreated septate uterus, adenomyoma, submucous uterine fibroids, endometrial polyps, or intrauterine adhesions (including the history of intrauterine adhesions). 3. the wife has a medical condition that contraindicate ART or pregnancy, including poorly controlled type I or type II diabetes; undiagnosed liver and renal disease or liver and renal insufficiency (based on blood test); deep vein thrombosis; pulmonary embolism; history of cerebrovascular accident; uncontrolled hypertension; cardiac disease; carcinoma; severe anemia; suspicious or undiagnosed vaginal bleeding.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Live birth rate per initiated cycleup to 42 days of a live birthlive birth rate of a baby per oocyte retrieval cycle initiated

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Embryo implantation2 weeks after embryo transferpositive serum hCG after 2 weeks of embryo transfer
Clinical pregnancy4 weeks after embryo transferthe presence of a gestational sac confirmed by transvaginal ultrasound examination
Ongoing pregnancy10 weeks after embryo transferthe fetal heat beat continued at 10 weeks after embryo transfer
Time to pregnancyFrom the day of entering oocyte retrieval cycle to the embryo transfer day of a later assured ongoing pregnancy,which is up to 24 months within the study period.From the day of entering oocyte retrieval cycle to the embryo transfer day of a later assured ongoing pregnancy,which is up to 24 months within the study period.If the patient fails to obtain ongoing pregnancy during the study period, this outcome measure will not be recorded.
Pregnancy outcomeup to 42 days of a live birthabortion, multiple birth, birth defects, preterm delivery, small for gestational age, still birth

Countries

China

Contacts

Primary ContactCAIXIA LEI, MD
green3318@163.com86-18917958213
Backup ContactXIAOXI SUN, PHD
xiaoxi_sun@aliyun.com86-21-63456043

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 17, 2026