Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (27)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thompson, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, J. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thompson, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Robinson, J. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 17, No. 11, 2783-2786, November 2002
© 2002 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Debate continued

Epigenetic risks related to assisted reproductive technologies

Short- and long-term consequences for the health of children conceived through assisted reproduction technology: more reason for caution?

Jeremy G. Thompson1, Karen L. Kind, Claire T. Roberts, Sarah A. Robertson and Jeffrey S. Robinson

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia

Does the manipulation of gametes and embryos as practised in human IVF invoke perturbations in fetal and neonatal phenotype? There is increasing evidence that the answer is ‘yes’, although the degree of perturbation may be less acute than observed in other species. However, the long-term consequences are not known, and may prove to be considerable. There is now a substantial body of evidence from animal models suggesting that assisted reproductive technologies (ART) are associated with altered outcomes in fetal and neonatal development. Epigenetic modification of gene expression is an attractive hypothesis that accounts for these differences and is one of a number of causal pathways that may be activated by cellular stress invoked during manipulation. Here we widen the debate to propose that environment-induced cellular stress also acts to modify fetal and placental gene expression, potentially also contributing to phenotype skewing after ART.

Key words: embryo culture/epigenetic/fetal development/gene expression/placenta

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Reproductive Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville Road, Woodville, South Australia, 5011. E-mail: jeremy.thompson{at}adelaide.edu.au


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Physiol. GenomicsHome page
J. Adjaye, R. Herwig, T. C. Brink, D. Herrmann, B. Greber, S. Sudheer, D. Groth, J. W. Carnwath, H. Lehrach, and H. Niemann
Conserved molecular portraits of bovine and human blastocysts as a consequence of the transition from maternal to embryonic control of gene expression
Physiol Genomics, October 19, 2007; 31(2): 315 - 327.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Reproductive SciencesHome page
N. Nikolettos, B. Asimakopoulos, and I. S. Papastefanou
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection-An Assisted Reproduction Technique That Should Make Us Cautious About Imprinting Deregulation
Reproductive Sciences, July 1, 2006; 13(5): 317 - 328.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Biol. Reprod.Home page
T. P. Fleming, W. Y. Kwong, R. Porter, E. Ursell, I. Fesenko, A. Wilkins, D. J. Miller, A. J. Watkins, and J. J. Eckert
The Embryo and Its Future
Biol Reprod, October 1, 2004; 71(4): 1046 - 1054.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
D. Lucifero, J.R. Chaillet, and J. M. Trasler
Potential significance of genomic imprinting defects for reproduction and assisted reproductive technology
Hum. Reprod. Update, January 1, 2004; 10(1): 3 - 18.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Mol GenetHome page
E. Geuns, M. De Rycke, A. Van Steirteghem, and I. Liebaers
Methylation imprints of the imprint control region of the SNRPN-gene in human gametes and preimplantation embryos
Hum. Mol. Genet., November 15, 2003; 12(22): 2873 - 2879.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
R. D. Lambert
Safety issues in assisted reproductive technology: Aetiology of health problems in singleton ART babies
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2003; 18(10): 1987 - 1991.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol Hum ReprodHome page
D.J. Kennaway, T.J. Varcoe, and V.J. Mau
Rhythmic expression of clock and clock-controlled genes in the rat oviduct
Mol. Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2003; 9(9): 503 - 507.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.