Issues in reproductive health in chromosome translocation carriers
- Authors: Shilenkova Y.V.1, Pendina A.A.1, Fedorova E.M.2, Efimova O.A.1, Chiryaeva O.G.1, Petrova L.I.1, Dudkina V.S.1, Tikhonov A.V.1, Gzgzyan A.M.1, Bespalova O.N.1, Kogan I.Y.1
-
Affiliations:
- The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
- AVA-PETER Ltd.
- Issue: Vol 71, No 5 (2022)
- Pages: 85-96
- Section: Original Research
- URL: https://journals.eco-vector.com/jowd/article/view/109329
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/JOWD109329
- ID: 109329
Cite item
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is common a wide range of reproductive disorders in couples with structural chromosome aberration in one of the partners, such as infertility, miscarriage, unsuccessful assisted reproductive technologies attempts. In this regard, predicting the reproductive outcome in a particular couple is an extremely difficult task. To solve it, it is necessary to consider the influence of many factors, including the type of chromosome translocation and the carrier’s sex.
AIM: To evaluate the structure of reproductive disorders in couples where one of the partners was a chromosome translocation carrier, depending on its type: Robertsonian or reciprocal, and carrier’s sex.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the clinical and anamnestic data of 100 couples where one of the partners was a chromosome translocation carrier. Couples applied to fertility centers between March 2009 and May 2019. To assess the effect of the type of chromosomal translocation and carrier’s sex, we provided intergroup comparisons.
RESULTS: Comparative analysis of somatic pathology and chronic gynecological diseases didn’t reveal significant differences between groups of female patients (Fischer’s exact test, p > 0,05). An intergroup comparison of reproductive outcomes in couples divided by the type of chromosome translocation: reciprocal or Robertsonian, and the carrier’s sex, detected significant differences. Primary infertility was significantly more often detected in couples with a male translocation carrier, secondary — with a female carrier (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0,01). Pregnancy significantly more frequent occurred and, it was also significantly more often spontaneously interrupted in couples with a female carrying of reciprocal or Robertson translocation (χ2 = 13,29, df = 3, p = 0,004). Thus, a female carrying a chromosomal translocation is characterized by a greater risk of miscarriage.
CONCLUSIONS: The chromosome translocation type and the carrier’s sex have a differential effect on the nature of reproductive disorders. Female carrying a chromosomal translocation increases the likelihood of both pregnancy and its spontaneous termination. In contrast, in couples with a male translocation carrier, the probability of both pregnancy and miscarriage is lower. Thus, the type of translocation and the carrier’s sex determine the individual risks of reproductive disorders, including infertility and miscarriage, which should be considered in the planning, choosing the method of onset and management of pregnancy.
Full Text

About the authors
Yulia V. Shilenkova
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Author for correspondence.
Email: shil.giulia@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4992-9905
SPIN-code: 1417-9786
Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg
Anna A. Pendina
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: pendina@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9182-9188
SPIN-code: 3123-2133
ResearcherId: F-4396-2017
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgElena M. Fedorova
AVA-PETER Ltd.
Email: fedorova-em@avaclinic.ru
SPIN-code: 4652-3586
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgOlga A. Efimova
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: efimova_o82@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4495-0983
SPIN-code: 6959-5014
Scopus Author ID: 14013324600
ResearcherId: F-5764-2014
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgOlga G. Chiryaeva
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: chiryaeva@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4441-1736
SPIN-code: 4027-4908
Scopus Author ID: 6508206377
ResearcherId: K-2566-2018
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgLubov' I. Petrova
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: petrovaluba@mail.ru
SPIN-code: 8599-6886
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgVera S. Dudkina
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: dudkinavs@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8542-0255
SPIN-code: 6286-7287
ResearcherId: K-2600-2018
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgAndrei V. Tikhonov
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: tixonov5790@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2557-6642
SPIN-code: 3170-2629
ResearcherId: Q-1380-2016
Cand. Sci. (Biol.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgAlexander M. Gzgzyan
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: agzgzyan@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3917-9493
SPIN-code: 6412-4801
ResearcherId: G-7814-2015
MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgOlesya N. Bespalova
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: shiggerra@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6542-5953
SPIN-code: 4732-8089
ResearcherId: D-3880-2018
MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgIgor Yu. Kogan
The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott
Email: ikogan@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7351-6900
SPIN-code: 6572-6450
Scopus Author ID: 56895765600
ResearcherId: P-4357-2017
MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgReferences
- Boivin J, Bunting L, Collins JA, et al. International estimates of infertility prevalence and treatment-seeking: potential need and demand for infertility medical care Hum Reprod. 2007;22(6):1506–1512. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem046
- Polis CB, Cox CM, Tunçalp Ö, et al. Estimating infertility prevalence in low-to-middle-income countries: an application of a current duration approach to demographic and health survey data. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(5):1064–1074. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex025
- Shah K, Sivapalan G, Gibbons N, et al. The genetic basis of infertility. Reproduction. 2003;126(1):13–25. doi: 10.1530/rep.0.1260013
- Krausz C, Riera-Escamilla A. Genetics of male infertility. Nat Rev Urol. 2018;15(6):369–384. doi: 10.1038/s41585-018-0003-3
- Zorrilla M, Yatsenko AN. The genetics of infertility: current status of the field. Curr Genet Med Rep. 2013;1(4). doi: 10.1007/s40142-013-0027-1
- Wilch ES, Morton CC. Historical and clinical perspectives on chromosomal translocations. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1044:1–14. doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-0593-1_1
- Bochkov NP, Kuleshov NP, Chebotarev AN, et al. Population cytogenetic investigation of newborns in Moscow. Humangenetik. 1974;22(2):139–152. doi: 10.1007/BF00278453
- Hamerton JL, Canning N, Ray M, et al. A cytogenetic survey of 14,069 newborn infants. I. Incidence of chromosome abnormalities. Clin Genet. 1975;8(4):223–243. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1975.tb01498.x
- Hansteen IL, Varslot K, Steen-Johnsen J, et al. Cytogenetic screening of a new-born population. Clin Genet. 1982;21(5):309–314. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1982.tb01377.x
- Jacobs PA, Melville M, Ratcliffe S, et al. A cytogenetic survey of 11,680 newborn infants. Ann Hum Genet. 1974;37(4):359–376. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1974.tb01843.x
- Nielsen J, Sillesen I. Incidence of chromosome aberrations among 11148 newborn children. Humangenetik. 1975;30(1):1–12. doi: 10.1007/BF00273626
- Nielsen J, Wohlert M. Chromosome abnormalities found among 34,910 newborn children: results from a 13-year incidence study in Arhus, Denmark. Hum Genet. 1991;87(1):81–83. doi: 10.1007/BF01213097
- Artini PG, Papini F, Ruggiero M, et al. Genetic screening in Italian infertile couples undergoing intrauterine insemination and in vitro fertilization techniques: a multicentric study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2011;27(7):453–457. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2011.579207
- Testart J, Gautier E, Brami C, et al. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection in infertile patients with structural chromosome abnormalities. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(12):2609–2612. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a01917
- Meza-Espinoza JP, Anguiano LO, Rivera H. Chromosomal abnormalities in couples with reproductive disorders. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2008;66(4):237–240. doi: 10.1159/000147170
- Peschka B, Leygraaf J, Van der Ven K, et al. Type and frequency of chromosome aberrations in 781 couples undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(9):2257–2263. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.9.2257
- Jesus AR, Silva-Soares S, Silva J, et al. Reproductive success of assisted reproductive technology in couples with chromosomal abnormalities. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(7):1471–1479. doi: 10.1007/s10815-019-01486-x
- Castle D, Bernstein R. Cytogenetic analysis of 688 couples experiencing multiple spontaneous abortions. Am J Med Genet. 1988;29(3):549–556. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.1320290312
- Awartani KA, Al Shabibi MS. Description of cytogenetic abnormalities and the pregnancy outcomes of couples with recurrent pregnancy loss in a tertiary-care center in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J. 2018;39(3):239–242. doi: 10.15537/smj.2018.3.21592
- Elkarhat Z, Kindil Z, Zarouf L, et al. Chromosomal abnormalities in couples with recurrent spontaneous miscarriage: a 21-year retrospective study, a report of a novel insertion, and a literature review. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(3):499–507. doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1373-4
- Ghazaey S, Keify F, Mirzaei F, et al. Chromosomal analysis of couples with repeated spontaneous abortions in northeastern Iran. Int J Fertil Steril. 2015;9(1):47–54. doi: 10.22074/ijfs.2015.4208
- Zemlyanova EV, Chumarina VZh. Births’ postponement by women in Russia within modern socio-economic context. Social’nye aspekty zdorov’a naselenia. 2018;64(6). (In Russ.). doi: 10.21045/2071-5021-2018-64-6-9
- Glick I, Kadish E, Rottenstreich M. Management of pregnancy in women of advanced maternal age: improving outcomes for mother and baby. Int J Womens Health. 2021;13:751–759. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S283216
- Waldenström U. Postponing parenthood to advanced age. Ups J Med Sci. 2016;121(4):235–243. doi: 10.1080/03009734.2016.1201553
- Guedes M, Canavarro MC. Characteristics of primiparous women of advanced age and their partners: a homogenous or heterogenous group?. Birth. 2014;41(1):46–55. doi: 10.1111/birt.12089
- Mayeur A, Ahdad N, Hesters L, et al. Does the prognosis after PGT for structural rearrangement differ between female and male translocation carriers?. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;40(5):684–692. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.01.025
- Song H, Shi H, Yang ET, et al. Effects of gender of reciprocal chromosomal translocation on blastocyst formation and pregnancy outcome in preimplantation genetic testing. Front Endocrinol. 2021;12. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.704299
- Fodina V, Dudorova A, Alksere B, et al. The application of PGT-A for carriers of balanced structural chromosomal rearrangements. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2019;35(sup.1):18–23. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2019.1632091
- Mateu-Brull E, Rodrigo L, Peinado V, et al. Interchromosomal effect in carriers of translocations and inversions assessed by preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements (PGT-SR). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(12):2547–2555. doi: 10.1007/s10815-019-01593-9
- Zhang L, Wei D, Zhu Y, et al. Interaction of acrocentric chromosome involved in translocation and sex of the carrier influences the proportion of alternate segregation in autosomal reciprocal translocations. Hum Reprod. 2019;34(2):380–387. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey367
- Mahdavi M, Sharafi SM, Daniali SS, et al. The clinical effectiveness of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosomal translocation carriers: a meta-analysis. Glob Med Genet. 2020;7(1):14–21. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1712455
- Zhang L, Jiang W, Zhu Y, et al. Effects of a carrier’s sex and age on the segregation patterns of the trivalent of Robertsonian translocations. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(9):1963–1969. doi: 10.1007/s10815-019-01534-6
- Maithripala S, Durland U, Havelock J, et al. prevalence and treatment choices for couples with recurrent pregnancy loss due to structural chromosomal anomalies. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018;40(6):655–662. doi: 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.09.024
- Kato K, Aoyama N, Kawasaki N, et al. Reproductive outcomes following preimplantation genetic diagnosis using fluorescence in situ hybridization for 52 translocation carrier couples with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss. J Hum Genet. 2016;61(8):687–692. doi: 10.1038/jhg.2016.39
- Huang C, Jiang W, Zhu Y, et al. Pregnancy outcomes of reciprocal translocation carriers with two or more unfavorable pregnancy histories: before and after preimplantation genetic testing. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(11):2325–2331. doi: 10.1007/s10815-019-01585-9
- Iews M, Tan J, Taskin O, et al. Does preimplantation genetic diagnosis improve reproductive outcome in couples with recurrent pregnancy loss owing to structural chromosomal rearrangement? A systematic review. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36(6):677–685. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.03.005
- Chen CK, Wu D, Yu HT, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis by fluorescence in situ hybridization of reciprocal and Robertsonian translocations. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;53(1):48–52. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2012.04.043
- Gardner RJM, Sutherland G., Shaffer L. Chromosome abnormalities and genetic counseling. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. doi: 10.1093/med/9780195375336.001.0001
- Fiorentino F, Spizzichino L, Bono S, et al. PGD for reciprocal and Robertsonian translocations using array comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1925–1935. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der082
- Hann MC, Lau PE, Tempest HG. Meiotic recombination and male infertility: from basic science to clinical reality? Asian J Androl. 2011;13(2):212–218. doi: 10.1038/aja.2011.1
- Harton GL, Tempest HG. Chromosomal disorders and male infertility. Asian J Androl. 2012;14(1):32–39. doi: 10.1038/aja.2011.66
- Morin SJ, Eccles J, Iturriaga A, et al. Translocations, inversions and other chromosome rearrangements. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(1):19–26. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.013
- Marchetti F, Wyrobek AJ. Mechanisms and consequences of paternally-transmitted chromosomal abnormalities. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today. 2005;75(2):112–129. doi: 10.1002/bdrc.20040
- Yin B, Zhu Y, Wu T, et al. Clinical outcomes for couples containing a reciprocal chromosome translocation carrier without preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;136(3):304–308. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12062
- Li S, Chen M, Zheng PS. Analysis of parental abnormal chromosomal karyotype and subsequent live births in Chinese couples with recurrent pregnancy loss. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1). doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-98606-4
- Franssen MT, Korevaar JC, van der Veen F, et al. Reproductive outcome after chromosome analysis in couples with two or more miscarriages: index [corrected]-control study. BMJ. 2006;332(7544):759–763. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38735.459144.2F
Supplementary files
