Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:40:18.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 9 - Exposures Driving Long-Term DOHaD Effects

Influence of Assisted Reproductive Technologies

from Section II - Exposures Driving Long-Term DOHaD Effects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2022

Lucilla Poston
Affiliation:
King's College London
Keith M. Godfrey
Affiliation:
University of Southampton
Peter D. Gluckman
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Mark A. Hanson
Affiliation:
University of Southampton
Get access

Summary

Almost 40 years ago David Barker made his observation that poor in utero growth increased cardiovascular disease risk in the offspring. A few years prior to this, the first baby to be conceived through IVF was born. Since then, an estimated 8 million babies worldwide have been born via one form or another of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). However, data from experimental animal and human clinical studies have highlighted the period around conception as being particularly sensitive to sub-optimal environmental conditions. Furthermore, there is growing concern that aspects of the ART procedures themselves may alter fetal and neonatal growth and increase the incidence of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, cancer, asthma and neurodevelopmental issues in the children. However, a large degree of confounding factors including parental infertility, disparity in ART culture media and methods, and even the design of the follow-up studies, mean that further investigations are required in the definition of causal relationships between ART and child health.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barker, DJ, Winter, PD, Osmond, C, Margetts, B, Simmonds, SJ. Weight in infancy and death from ischaemic heart disease. Lancet. 1989;2(8663), 577–580.Google Scholar
Fleming, TP, Watkins, AJ, Velazquez, MA, et al. Origins of lifetime health around the time of conception: causes and consequences. Lancet. 2018;391(10132), 1842–1852.Google Scholar
Eckersley-Maslin, MA, Alda-Catalinas, C, Reik, W. Dynamics of the epigenetic landscape during the maternal-to-zygotic transition. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018;19(7), 436–450.Google Scholar
Velazquez, MA, Fleming, TP, Watkins, AJ. Periconceptional environment and the developmental origins of disease. J Endocrinol. 2019;242(1), T33T49.Google Scholar
Crawford, GE, Ledger, WL. In vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection beyond 2020. BJOG. 2019;126(2), 237–243.Google Scholar
Roseboom, TJ. Developmental plasticity and its relevance to assisted human reproduction. Hum Reprod. 2018;33(4), 546–552.Google Scholar
Hann, M, Roberts, SA, D’Souza, SW, Clayton, P, Macklon, N, Brison, DR. The growth of assisted reproductive treatment-conceived children from birth to 5 years: a national cohort study. BMC Med. 2018;16(1), 224.Google Scholar
Turkgeldi, E, Yagmur, H, Seyhan, A, Urman, B, Ata, B. Short and long term outcomes of children conceived with assisted reproductive technology. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;207, 129–136.Google Scholar
Hargreave, M, Jensen, A, Hansen, MK, et al. Association between fertility treatment and cancer risk in children. JAMA. 2019;322(22), 2203–2210.Google Scholar
Sakka, SD, Loutradis, D, Kanaka-Gantenbein, C, et al. Absence of insulin resistance and low-grade inflammation despite early metabolic syndrome manifestations in children born after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(5), 1693–1699.Google Scholar
Cavoretto, P, Candiani, M, Giorgione, V, et al. Risk of spontaneous preterm birth in singleton pregnancies conceived after IVF/ICSI treatment: meta-analysis of cohort studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(1), 43–53.Google Scholar
Hart, R, Norman, RJ. The longer-term health outcomes for children born as a result of IVF treatment: Part I – General health outcomes. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19(3), 232–243.Google Scholar
Hart, R, Norman, RJ. The longer-term health outcomes for children born as a result of IVF treatment. Part II – Mental health and development outcomes. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19(3), 244–250.Google Scholar
Kuiper, DB, Seggers, J, Schendelaar, P, et al. Asthma and asthma medication use among 4-year-old offspring of subfertile couples – association with IVF? Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;31(5), 711–714.Google Scholar
Ludwig, AK, Katalinic, A, Thyen, U, Sutcliffe, AG, Diedrich, K, Ludwig, M. Physical health at 5.5 years of age of term-born singletons after intracytoplasmic sperm injection: results of a prospective, controlled, single-blinded study. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(1), 115–124.Google Scholar
Guo, XY, Liu, XM, Jin, L, et al. Cardiovascular and metabolic profiles of offspring conceived by assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(3), 622–631 e625.Google Scholar
Schendelaar, P, Van den Heuvel, ER, Heineman, MJ, et al. Increased time to pregnancy is associated with less optimal neurological condition in 4-year-old singletons, in vitro fertilization itself is not. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(12), 2773–2786.Google Scholar
Vanky, E, Engen Hanem, LG, Abbott, DH. Children born to women with polycystic ovary syndrome-short- and long-term impacts on health and development. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(6), 1065–1075.Google Scholar
Simard, M, Laprise, C, Girard, SL. Impact of paternal age at conception on human health. Clin Chem. 2019;65(1), 146–152.Google Scholar
Seggers, J, Haadsma, ML, Bastide-van Gemert, S, et al. Blood pressure and anthropometrics of 4-y-old children born after preimplantation genetic screening: follow-up of a unique, moderately sized, randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Res. 2013;74(5), 606–614.Google Scholar
Berntsen, S, Soderstrom-Anttila, V, Wennerholm, UB, et al. The health of children conceived by ART: ‘the chicken or the egg?’. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25(2), 137–158.Google Scholar
Mintjens, S, Menting, MD, Gemke, R, et al. The effects of intrauterine insemination and single embryo transfer or modified natural cycle in vitro fertilization on offspring’s health-Follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;242, 131–138.Google Scholar
Lazaraviciute, G, Kauser, M, Bhattacharya, S, Haggarty, P, Bhattacharya, S. A systematic review and meta-analysis of DNA methylation levels and imprinting disorders in children conceived by IVF/ICSI compared with children conceived spontaneously. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(6), 840–852.Google Scholar
White, CR, Denomme, MM, Tekpetey, FR, Feyles, V, Power, SG, Mann, MR. High frequency of imprinted methylation errors in human preimplantation embryos. Sci Rep. 2015;5, 17311.Google Scholar
Song, S, Ghosh, J, Mainigi, M, et al. DNA methylation differences between in vitro- and in vivo-conceived children are associated with ART procedures rather than infertility. Clin Epigenetics. 2015;7(7), 41.Google Scholar
Williams, CL, Teeling, JL, Perry, VH, Fleming, TP. Mouse maternal systemic inflammation at the zygote stage causes blunted cytokine responsiveness in lipopolysaccharide-challenged adult offspring. BMC Biol. 2011;9, 49.Google Scholar
Novakovic, B, Lewis, S, Halliday, J, et al. Assisted reproductive technologies are associated with limited epigenetic variation at birth that largely resolves by adulthood. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1), 3922.Google Scholar
Dumoulin, JC, Land, JA, Van Montfoort, AP, et al. Effect of in vitro culture of human embryos on birthweight of newborns. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(3), 605–612.Google Scholar
Nelissen, EC, Van Montfoort, AP, Smits, LJ, et al. IVF culture medium affects human intrauterine growth as early as the second trimester of pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(8), 2067–2074.Google Scholar
Kleijkers, SH, Mantikou, E, Slappendel, E, et al. Influence of embryo culture medium (G5 and HTF) on pregnancy and perinatal outcome after IVF: a multicenter RCT. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(10), 2219–2230.Google Scholar
Zandstra, H, Smits, LJM, van Kuijk, SMJ, et al. No effect of IVF culture medium on cognitive development of 9-year-old children. Hum Reprod Open. 2018;2018(4), hoy018.Google Scholar
Zandstra, H, Van Montfoort, AP, Dumoulin, JC. Does the type of culture medium used influence birthweight of children born after IVF? Hum Reprod. 2015;30(3), 530–542.Google Scholar
Duranthon, V, Chavatte-Palmer, P. Long term effects of ART: What do animals tell us? Mol Reprod Dev. 2018;85(4), 348–368.Google Scholar
Ealy, AD, Wooldridge, LK, McCoski, SR. BOARD INVITED REVIEW: post-transfer consequences of in vitro-produced embryos in cattle. J Anim Sci. 2019;97(6), 2555–2568.Google Scholar
Glujovsky, D, Farquhar, C, Quinteiro Retamar, AM, Alvarez Sedo, CR, Blake, D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub5(6), CD002118.Google Scholar
Maheshwari, A, Pandey, S, Amalraj Raja, E, Shetty, A, Hamilton, M, Bhattacharya, S. Is frozen embryo transfer better for mothers and babies? Can cumulative meta-analysis provide a definitive answer? Hum Reprod Update. 2018;24(1), 35–58.Google Scholar
Castillo, CM, Horne, G, Fitzgerald, CT, Johnstone, ED, Brison, DR, Roberts, SA. The impact of IVF on birthweight from 1991 to 2015: a cross-sectional study. Hum Reprod. 2019;34(5), 920–931.Google Scholar
Pelkonen, S, Gissler, M, Koivurova, S, et al. Physical health of singleton children born after frozen embryo transfer using slow freezing: a 3-year follow-up study. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(10), 2411–2418.Google Scholar
Kimber, SJ, Sneddon, SF, Bloor, DJ, et al. Expression of genes involved in early cell fate decisions in human embryos and their regulation by growth factors. Reproduction. 2008;135(5), 635–647.Google Scholar
Nassan, FL, Chavarro, JE, Tanrikut, C. Diet and men’s fertility: does diet affect sperm quality? Fertil Steril. 2018;110(4), 570–577.Google Scholar
Watkins, AJ, Sirovica, S, Stokes, B, Isaacs, M, Addison, O, Martin, RA. Paternal low protein diet programs preimplantation embryo gene expression, fetal growth and skeletal development in mice. Biochimica et biophysica acta. 2017;1863(6), 1371–1381.Google Scholar
Lambrot, R, Xu, C, Saint-Phar, S, et al. Low paternal dietary folate alters the mouse sperm epigenome and is associated with negative pregnancy outcomes. Nat Commun. 2013;4, 2889; doi: 10.1038/ncomms3889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, HL, Paganopoulou, P, Akhtar, S, et al. Paternal diet impairs F1 and F2 offspring vascular function through sperm and seminal plasma specific mechanisms in mice. J Physiol. 2019; doi: 10.1113/JP278270.Google Scholar
McPherson, NO, Fullston, T, Kang, WX, et al. Paternal under-nutrition programs metabolic syndrome in offspring which can be reversed by antioxidant/vitamin food fortification in fathers. Sci Rep. 2016;6, 27010.Google Scholar
Pang, TYC, Short, AK, Bredy, TW, Hannan, AJ. Transgenerational paternal transmission of acquired traits: stress-induced modification of the sperm regulatory transcriptome and offspring phenotypes. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2017;14, 140–147.Google Scholar
Campbell, JM, Lane, M, Owens, JA, Bakos, HW. Paternal obesity negatively affects male fertility and assisted reproduction outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;31(5), 593–604.Google Scholar
Hammoud, SS, Nix, DA, Hammoud, AO, Gibson, M, Cairns, BR, Carrell, DT. Genome-wide analysis identifies changes in histone retention and epigenetic modifications at developmental and imprinted gene loci in the sperm of infertile men. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(9), 2558–2569.Google Scholar
Aston, KI, Uren, PJ, Jenkins, TG, et al. Aberrant sperm DNA methylation predicts male fertility status and embryo quality. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(6), 1388–1397 e1381–1385.Google Scholar
Benchaib, M, Braun, V, Ressnikof, D, et al. Influence of global sperm DNA methylation on IVF results. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(3), 768–773.Google Scholar
Colaco, S, Sakkas, D. Paternal factors contributing to embryo quality. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018; doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1304-4.Google Scholar
Chen, Q, Yan, M, Cao, Z, et al. Sperm tsRNAs contribute to intergenerational inheritance of an acquired metabolic disorder. Science. 2016;351(6271), 397–400.Google Scholar
Morgan, HL, Watkins, AJ. The influence of seminal plasma on offspring development and health. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2020;97, 131–137.Google Scholar
Robillard, PY, Hulsey, TC, Perianin, J, Janky, E, Miri, EH, Papiernik, E. Association of pregnancy-induced hypertension with duration of sexual cohabitation before conception. Lancet. 1994;344(8928), 973–975.Google Scholar
Bromfield, JJ, Schjenken, JE, Chin, PY, Care, AS, Jasper, MJ, Robertson, SA. Maternal tract factors contribute to paternal seminal fluid impact on metabolic phenotype in offspring. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(6), 2200–2205.Google Scholar
Watkins, AJ, Dias, I, Tsuro, H, et al. Paternal diet programs offspring health through sperm- and seminal plasma-specific pathways in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(40), 10064–10069.Google Scholar
Lane, M, Robker, RL, Robertson, SA. Parenting from before conception. Science. 2014;345(6198), 756–760.Google Scholar
Lane, M, Gardner, DK. Understanding cellular disruptions during early embryo development that perturb viability and fetal development. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2005;17(3), 371–378.Google Scholar
Feil, D, Henshaw, RC, Lane, M. Day 4 embryo selection is equal to day 5 using a new embryo scoring system validated in single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod. 2008;23(7), 1505–1510.Google Scholar
Mitchell, M, Schulz, SL, Armstrong, DT, Lane, M. Metabolic and mitochondrial dysfunction in early mouse embryos following maternal dietary protein intervention. Biol Reprod. 2009;80(4), 622–630.Google Scholar
McPherson, NO, Shehadeh, H, Fullston, T, Zander-Fox, DL, Lane, M. Dietary micronutrient supplementation for 12 days in obese male mice restores sperm oxidative stress. Nutrients. 2019;11(9): 2196; doi: 10.3390/nu11092196.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×