Cited by 290Reproductive Biology and FertilityPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics

The origin and impact of embryonic aneuploidy

Fragouli, Elpida, Alfarawati, Samer, Spath, Katharina, Jaroudi, Souraya, Sarasa, Jonas, Enciso, Maria, Wells, Dagan·2013·Human Genetics

Abstract

Despite the clinical importance of aneuploidy, surprisingly little is known concerning its impact during the earliest stages of human development. This study aimed to shed light on the genesis, progression, and survival of different types of chromosome anomaly from the fertilized oocyte through the final stage of preimplantation development (blastocyst). 2,204 oocytes and embryos were examined using comprehensive cytogenetic methodology. A diverse array of chromosome abnormalities was detected, including many forms never recorded later in development. Advancing female age was associated with dramatic increase in aneuploidy rate and complex chromosomal abnormalities. Anaphase lag and congression failure were found to be important malsegregation causing mechanisms in oogenesis and during the first few mitotic divisions. All abnormalities appeared to be tolerated until activation of the embryonic genome, after which some forms started to decline in frequency. However, many aneuploidies continued to have little impact, with affected embryos successfully reaching the blastocyst stage. Results from the direct analyses of female meiotic divisions and early embryonic stages suggest that chromosome errors present during preimplantation development have origins that are more varied than those seen in later pregnancy, raising the intriguing possibility that the source of aneuploidy might modulate impact on embryo viability. The results of this study also narrow the window of time for se…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00439-013-1309-0

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Human embryos likely tolerate aneuploidy up to embryo genome activation.

    “It is likely that human embryos tolerate aneuploidy up to embryo genome activation, given that even embryos with observed multipolar spindles continue to develop during early cleavage divisions (34).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fragouli, E., Alfarawati, S., Spath, K., Jaroudi, S., Sarasa, J., Enciso, M., & Wells, D.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Fragouli, Elpida
Venue
Human Genetics
Published
2013-04-26
Volume
132
Issue
9
Pages
1001-1013
ISSN
  • 0018-7348 (ISSN-L)
  • 0340-6717
  • 1432-1203
OpenAlex
W2058843560
Cited by
290
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 4
FWCI
22.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Microtubule and mitosis dynamics
Keywords
embryonic aneuploidy, chromosomal abnormalities, preimplantation embryo development, oocyte meiosis, maternal age, embryo viability, blastocyst, zygotic genome activation, embryo selection
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Anaphase, Aneuploidy, Female, Humans, Oogenesis, Pregnancy, Chromosome Segregation, Cytogenetic Analysis, Embryonic Development, Comparative Genomic Hybridization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review