Next Article in Journal
Human IL-23R Cytokine-Binding Homology Region-Fc Fusion Protein Ameliorates Psoriasis via the Decrease of Systemic Th17 and ILC3 Cell Responses
Next Article in Special Issue
Association of Obesity with DNA Methylation Age Acceleration in African American Mothers from the InterGEN Study
Previous Article in Journal
Wnt Binding Affinity Prediction for Putative Frizzled-Type Cysteine-Rich Domains
Previous Article in Special Issue
Epigenetic Regulation of Adipogenic Differentiation by Histone Lysine Demethylation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 20
Issue 17
10.3390/ijms20174169
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Epigenetics and Neurological Disorders in ART

by
Marina La Rovere
1,
Marica Franzago
2,3 and
Liborio Stuppia
1,3,*
1
Department of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, “G. d’Annunzio” University, 66100 Chieti-Pescara, Italy
2
Department of Medicine and Aging, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, “G. d’Annunzio” University, 66100 Chieti-Pescara, Italy
3
Aging Center Studies-Translational Medicine (CeSI-Met), “G. d’Annunzio” University, 66100 Chieti-Pescara, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20(17), 4169; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174169
Submission received: 30 July 2019 / Revised: 21 August 2019 / Accepted: 23 August 2019 / Published: 26 August 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Epigenetics in Metabolic and Neurological Disorders)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
About 1–4% of children are currently generated by Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) in developed countries. These babies show only a slightly increased risk of neonatal malformations. However, follow-up studies have suggested a higher susceptibility to multifactorial, adult onset disorders like obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases in ART offspring. It has been suggested that these conditions could be the consequence of epigenetic, alterations, due to artificial manipulations of gametes and embryos potentially able to alter epigenetic stability during zygote reprogramming. In the last years, epigenetic alterations have been invoked as a possible cause of increased risk of neurological disorders, but at present the link between epigenetic modifications and long-term effects in terms of neurological diseases in ART children remains unclear, due to the short follow up limiting retrospective studies. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge about neurological disorders promoted by epigenetics alterations in ART. Based on data currently available, it is possible to conclude that little, if any, evidence of an increased risk of neurological disorders in ART conceived children is provided. Most important, the large majority of reports appears to be limited to epidemiological studies, not providing any experimental evidence about epigenetic modifications responsible for an increased risk.

1. Introduction

Almost 40 years as have passed since the first report of a child born by the use of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) [1] and more than 25 years from the first application of the Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) [2]. These two major breakthroughs, representing crucial steps in the field of Assisted Reproduction Techniques (ART), generated a new era for the human reproduction. In fact, since their first pioneering applications, an increasing number of couples attend ART protocols to generate a baby and it has been estimated that more than 200,000 infants are annually born worldwide by this technology, for a total of over 5 million children, accounting for 1% of births in the US and 4.3% of births in Europe and Australia [3].
Several concerns about the safety of ART had been initially raised by different authors, who suggested an increased risk of malformations in the offspring generated by in vitro fertilization [4,5]. However, after a more careful analysis of epidemiological data, it has been verified that ART is associated with a small increase in birth defect, being the anomaly rate at birth 3–4% versus 2–3% in natural reproduction [6,7]. Anyway, this slightly increased risk does not appear to discourage couples to undergo ART when this approach represents the only possibility to generate a child.
More recently, novel attention has been devoted to the health risk in ART offspring due to the evidence of an increased prevalence of imprinting disorders, such as Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome (BWS) [8]. In particular, it was evidenced that BWS patients born after ART more frequently showed epigenetic than genetic alterations as compared to BWS children born by natural fertilization [9]. Subsequently, an increasing amount of data reinforced the hypothesis of an epigenetic disturbance induced by ART, related both to the poor quality of gametes and to the technical procedures used during in vitro fertilization [10].
These observations lead to crucial questions concerning the safety of ART, namely: Are children generated by IVF actually at risk of late onset rather than at birth diseases? Does this risk involve also neurological disorders? Which mechanisms are involved?
To give an answer to these questions, here we report a detailed analysis of literature reports about ART and risk of late onset, mostly neurological, diseases, with particular attention to the epigenetic mechanisms involved in these risks. In particular, this review will be mainly focused on the effects of alterations in DNA methylation, since the majority of literature is centered on this kind of epigenetic modification.

2. Risk of Late Onset Diseases in ART Conceived Children

Evidence for an increased susceptibility to late onset diseases in the offspring generated by ART has been provided both by animal models and in human [11,12]. In animals generated by ART, several studies demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the prevalence of different adult onset disorders as compared to those generated by natural fertilization. In details, Calle et al. (2012) evidenced reduced fertility in mice produced by in vitro culture, which in turn transmitted organomegaly and glucose intolerance to their male offspring [13]. Cardiovascular dysfunction with shortened life span was evidenced by Rexhaj et al. (2013), who detected higher arterial blood pressure due to impaired endothelial-dependent artery vasodilation [14]. Donjacour et al. (2014) showed sex-related alterations in glucose metabolism and systolic blood pressure in male mice produced after IVF and suboptimal embryo culture conditions [15].
Significant cardiovascular changes have been subsequently detected also in human newborn generated by ART, with higher systemic blood pressure levels in IVF and ICSI children as compared to those spontaneously conceived, even after correction for birth weight, gestational age and body size [16,17,18]. Further evidence came from the studies of Liu et al. (2015), demonstrating significant changes in cardiac systolic and diastolic function during childhood in ART generated children, thus suggesting an increased risk of early onset myocardial alterations in this population [19]. Kosteria et al. (2017) investigated the proteomic profile of ICSI children, evidencing the presence of abnormal expression of proteins mostly involved in acute phase reaction, blood coagulation, complement pathway activation and iron and lipid metabolism [20]. Finally, in a systematic review and meta-analysis, Xiao-Yan et al. (2017) demonstrated the presence in ART children of a minor yet statistically significant increase in blood pressure, a suboptimal cardiac diastolic function, and a higher vessel thickness, suggesting an increased risk of cardiovascular disease [21].
Although cardiovascular function appears to represent the main condition affected by ART, to the availability of a longer follow up have evidenced other adult onset dysfunctions. In fact, Belva et al. (2016) described a reduced sperm concentration in ICSI children as compared to boys spontaneously conceived, as well as a two-fold lower total sperm count and total motile count [22]. On the other end, inconsistent results have been showed by studies investigating the risk of neurological defects in ART conceived children. This topic will be specifically treated in the paragraph “Are ART conceived children at increased risk of neurological disorders?”.

3. Epigenetic Alterations in ART

The above described effects of ART on the long-life health of children are likely related to epigenetic mechanisms. In fact, early studies on animal models evidenced that ovulation induction, eggs manipulation and embryo culture are all able to induce altered DNA methylation in the offspring generated by ART [23,24,25,26,27].
Recent studies have confirmed the majority of data obtained in animal models also in human.
Choux et al. (2018) recently demonstrated that DNA methylation of imprinted loci and transposable elements (TE) were significantly lower in ART placentas than in control placentas [28]. Even though all of the newborns investigated in this study were healthy, authors raised the question about of the potential long-term effects of these epigenetic modifications [28].
Among the possible causes of epigenetic modifications in ART, superovulation has been invoked as a possible factor. In fact, Velker et al. (2017) observed that superovulation with low and high hormone treatment resulted in disruption of imprinted methylation at the maternal Mest allele in blastocysts [29]. In addition, related to cultured embryos during preimplantation mouse development, both the Fast and Slow culture groups experienced a significant loss of maternal Mest methylation compared to in vivo-derived controls [29]. These results suggested that Mest gDMR methylation was less stable in ART-produced pre implantation embryos than other imprinted gDMRs.
In addition to the epigenetic alterations, induced on female gamete by ovarian stimulation and eggs manipulation, a further effect of culture conditions in ART is represented by epigenetic modifications induced in the embryo during the progression from conception through first cleavage to morula and blastocyst stages. In natural conception, this progression occurs in the oviductal fluid making the embryo highly sensitive to several maternal conditions (diet, presence of metabolic and inflammatory dysfunctions) [10,30], while in IVF, it occurs “in vitro”, being thus susceptible to variations in cell culture medium composition, O2, pH and temperature [31].
Also, the process of embryo transfer can induce loss of methylation on the maternal allele of the KvDMR1 locus (one of the possible causes of BWS in human) [32]. In this view, the design of new devices for the embryo transfer, able to avoid the exposure of the embryos to even subtle variations in their environmental conditions has been suggested [33].
Besides culture conditions, also the quality of the gametes used in ART can represent a risk factor for epigenetic defects, since it has been demonstrated that sperm of oligozoospermic man can show the presence of DNA methylation changes at imprinted loci [34,35,36]. In this view, it has been recently suggested that a careful assessment of spermatozoal parameters is essential to achieve embryo development [37].
Choufani et al. (2018) using genome-wide profiling, examined the extent of epigenetic abnormalities in matched placentas from an ART/infertility group and control singleton pregnancies from a prospective longitudinal birth cohort, suggesting the importance of considering both sex and paternal factors [38]. Placentas from pregnancies conceived with IVF/ ICSI showed distinct epigenetic profiles as compared to those conceived with ovulation induction or intrauterine insemination [38]. Moreover, the authors observed a sub-group, enriched for paternal infertility and older paternal age, amongst the IVF/ICSI placentas, suggesting an interaction of infertility and techniques in perturbing the placental epigenome [38].
Another interesting topic is the one considering the relationship between parental constitutional genetic variants and epigenetic alterations after ART. In fact, Marjonen et al. (2018) recently evidenced that the presence of the rs10732516 polymorphism within the H19 imprinting control regions (ICR) is able to affect the effects of ART in a parent-of-origin manner through DNA methylation changes in placental tissue [39].
A possible application of the increased knowledge about embryo DNA methylation and ART has been suggested by Li et al., (2017) who evidenced a direct relation of global methylation and embryo quality, suggesting DNA methylome as a potential biomarker in blastocyst selection in ART [40].
Since epigenetic alterations have been suggested to play a possible role in the increased risk of long-life diseases in ART children described in the previous section, their involvement in the susceptibility of other conditions is currently under investigation. In particular, great attention has been devoted to the risk of neurological disorders, since recent studies have evidenced that some of these conditions can be related to epigenetic dysfunctions.

4. Epigenetic Bases of Neurological Disorders

The first evidence of an involvement of epigenetic mechanisms in brain development, behavior and neurological disorders came from the studies on genomic imprinting (monoallelic parental depended gene expression), which, although involving a small portion of the human genome, plays a crucial role in the control of placental function and brain development. It must be stressed that genomic imprinting represents a very peculiar kind of epigenetic control of gene expression. In fact, the parental-specific expression of imprinted genes is regulated by allele-specific epigenetic marks which are established during gametogenesis and maintained throughout life. Imprinted genes reside in clusters throughout the genome, regulated by imprinting control regions (ICRs) that are methylated in a sex-specific manner during gametogenesis. This methylation is maintained after fertilization when most of the genome is being reprogrammed [41]. More than 300 imprinted genes are expressed in mouse brain, two third of which involving 26 brain regions [42,43].
Several imprinted genes (such as Peg3, Peg1, Zack1 and Nnat) are co-expressed in hypothalamus and placenta [43], with the placental genome directly affecting maternal hypothalamic function in order to stimulate post-partum maternal care and milk letdown [44]. Since in the same period the hypothalamus of the fetus is developing as well, this mechanism allows selection pressure to operate across two generations. [45]. In human, alterations of the genomic imprinting are responsible for a small group of syndromes such as, Prader–Willi syndrome (PWS) and Angelman syndrome (AS) [46]. PWS is a neuroendocrine and behavioral disorder due to loss of function of the paternally imprinted genes in the 15q11–q13 region, characterized by hypotonia and feeding difficulties after birth, replaced after the first months by hyperphagia and undiscerning eating, with development of morbid obesity. PWS patients also display hypogonadism, cognitive delays, low levels of testosterone, gonadotropins, GH and IGF1 [47,48].
Developmental delay, microcephaly, intellectual disability with absent or limited speech, gait ataxia and behavioral profile with happy demeanor are the typical signs of AS [49], caused by loss of maternal expression of UBE3A.
In addition to the genomic imprinting, other epigenetic factors play key roles in promoting cellular development, plasticity, differentiation and stress responses within the nervous system [50], and epigenetic processes are now often invoked as involved in the pathogenesis of a number of nervous system diseases [51]. One of the most important example is provided by the model of the Rett Syndrome, a progressive neurodevelopmental disease affecting females, characterized by repetitive and stereotypic hand movements replacing purposeful hand use, gait ataxia, seizures and autistic features [52]. This disease is caused by an X-linked gene encoding MeCP2, whose function is to bind methylated DNA and to repress transcription in a methyl-CpG-dependent manner.
Other crucial genes involved in the regulation of cerebral homeostasis can be affected in their function by epigenetic alterations. Among these, great attention has been devoted to the BDNF gene, a member of the family of neurotrophine proteins, that plays a fundamental role in the development, maintenance and plasticity of the central nervous system [53]. BDNF performs its function both in prenatal age and in adult neurogenesis and plays a critical role in learning, memory and cognition in the cerebral cortex and the hippocampus. Several studies reported a deregulation of the expression of BDNF by alterations of DNA methylation and non-coding RNA in different neurological diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD), Parkinson’s disease (PD), Huntington’s disease (HD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) [54,55]. More recently, BDNF dysregulation has been described also mediated by histone modifications [56].
Epigenetic dysfunctions in AD have been identified in vitro, in animals models and in human patients [57,58,59]. Mastroeni et al. (2010) showed a clear decrease in DNA methylation markers in cortical neurons in AD patients as compared to normal elderly controls, but this variation was not found in the cerebellum, a region that is generally not involved in the disease [60].
Regarding PD, early studies had been focused on the analysis of the promoter methylation levels of genes responsible for the monogenic, early onset, rare forms of PD, by analyzing DNA methylation in post-mortem brain tissue and peripheral blood, with inconsistent results [61]. However, more recent studies have investigated the epigenetic structure of the SNCA gene, encoding the α-synuclein protein, considered as an important component of Lewy’s bodies, a typical neuropathological trait of PD patients. DNA methylation of this gene may be involved in the pathogenesis of the disease through structural changes or by overexpression of the protein, with consequent accumulation and protein aggregation [62]. Moreover, Guhathakurta et al. (2017) discovered that this gene contains several transcriptionally activate histone modifications and associated potential transcription factor binding sites in the non-coding areas, that strongly suggests alternative mechanisms of regulation pathways [63].
Another field of interest is represented by the relationship between epigenetic modifications and intellectual disability (ID) Currently, more than 500 genes have been identified as involved in ID etiology, often affecting the same metabolic pathway [64]. Several of these genes encodes for epigenetic regulators such as chromatin factors, which are directly involved in the regulation of chromatin structure at level of genes fundamental in neurodevelopment [65]. For example, some of these belong to DEAD/H ATPase family, which has a key role in positioning of nucleosomes. This family of proteins can be further divided into four subfamilies, SWI/SNF, INO80/SWR1, ISWI, and CHD ATPases [66]. Mutations in genes encoding SWI/SNF family proteins have been associated in Coffin–Siris syndrome, which is characterized by variable phenotypic manifestations including ID [67].
The influence of epigenetic modifications has also been reported in other neurological disorders, such as epilepsy. In fact, convulsions in epileptic subjects can generate epigenetic changes in the brain in gene expression patterns, contributing in turn to the distinctive features of epilepsy [68]. Some studies have shown that the induction of convulsions in animal models lead to overexpression of REST/NRSF both at mRNA and protein levels [69,70]. This protein acts as a transcription repressor of a large subset of genes during neurogenesis, suggesting that convulsion can cause an imbalance in the epigenetic mechanisms that control important processes in brain.
Another contributes to the knowledge about the epigenetic modifications in epileptic subjects came from a study by Kobow et al. (2013), who reported a global hypermethylation in chronic epileptic rats. This study demonstrated that in presence of a ketogenic diet there was a reduction in the frequency of seizures and a change in the DNA methylation levels, suggesting a close correlation between nutrition and epigenetic modifications [71].
Miller-Delaney et al. (2012), reported changes in methylation patterns both in epileptic animals and in those with epileptic tolerance. Epileptic tolerance is an endogenous protective mechanism in brain in response to a previous exposure to a non-damaging crisis before the epileptic status. Interestingly, an altered DNA methylation of several genes has been observed both in the presence of an endogenous tolerance and in the epileptic seizure without preconditioning. In fact, 321 genes showed more than 90% of their promoters hypomethylated. Among these, new genes never associated before with epilepsy, such as the polychrome Phc2 gene were identified [72].
Particular attention has been devoted to the hypothesis that epigenetic mechanisms could be related to neurodevelopmental disorders, including Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).
Sun et al. (2016) focused on the signature of histone acetylation analyzing global acetylome in brain samples of post-mortem human ASD patients compared to normal control brain samples, evidencing a common acetylomic marks in more than 68% of the syndromic samples in more than 5000 cis-regulatory elements. Furthermore, there was a strong increase of gene expression related to ion channels, synaptic function and epilepsy/neuronal excitability, which had already been described as dysregulated in ASD [73].
Although these emerging data support a correlation between epigenetics and susceptibility to ASD, other studies affirm the opposite, highlighting how current knowledge is not sufficient yet to definitively clarify this association. In fact, Ginsberg et al. (2012) investigated the whole genome gene expression and DNA methylation by microarrays in post-mortem brain tissue between ASD patients and control subjects, reporting no significant changes in DNA methylation inside the two group [74]. Therefore, the authors concluded that the changes detected in gene expression in ASD may be the result of other regulatory mechanisms involved, other than methylation.
For this reason, further studies should be promoted to shed light on the mechanisms by which these epigenetic modifications are effectively implicated in neurological disorders and in particular how different environmental factors can mediate these changes.

5. Are ART Conceived Children at Increased Risk of Neurological Disorders?

As above described, a clear evidence exists that (i) ART protocols can induce epigenetic modifications affecting embryo development and long-life health of the offspring; (ii) epigenetic modifications can be involved in the pathogenesis of neurological disorders.
As a consequence, the next question is: Are children generated by ART at the increased risk of neurological disorders during their life?
Early results on animal models suggested the possibility of long-term, even transgenerational consequences of ART on neurodevelopment and behavior of adult mice [11] (Table 1). Ecker et al. (2004) explored behavioral consequences of embryo culture in 129S6SvEvTacC57BL6J F1 mouse model, evidencing small but significant specific behavioral alterations in the elevated zero maze and Morris water maze tasks in adults derived from cultured embryos, likely as a consequence of a hippocampus dysfunction [75].
In the same period, Fernandez-Gonzalez et al. (2004) evidenced that mice derived from embryos cultured with Foetal Calf Serum (FCS) showed specific behavioral alterations in anxiety and deficiencies in implicit memories. Interestingly, these embryos at the blastocyst stage showed lower expression of H19 mRNA, although the differences were non-significant [76]. This result appears to be in agreement with previous studies evidencing a significantly higher level of methylation in fetuses produced from the culture of embryos in the presence of FCS [27].
More recently, Wu et al (2014) investigated the possible effect of blastomere biopsy in mice development, evidencing poorer spatial learning ability, increased neuron degeneration and altered expression of proteins involved in neural degeneration or dysfunction in the brain in aged biopsied mice as compared to aged control mice. At molecular levels, these authors detected a genome-wide low methylation in the brains of adult biopsied mice, with most of the involved genes associated with neural disorders. Authors concluded that an abnormal neural development and function in mice generated after blastomere biopsy is present, and that an impaired epigenetic reprogramming during early embryo development may be invoked as the mechanism leading to the impairment of the nervous system in the biopsied mice [77].
These results on animal models prompted researchers to investigate the risk of neurological disorders in children conceived by ART. Different and often inconsistent results have been obtained based on the investigated neurological defect [78] (Table 2).
An increased risk of Cerebral Palsy (CP) in ART conceived children has been reported by different authors. A study by Stromberg et al. (2002) [79] carried out on children conceived after IVF and followed up to 12 years evidenced an increased risk of CP (OR: 3.7), a finding confirmed by Lidegaard et al. (2005) [80] evidencing an 80% increased risk of CP in IVF children. Subsequently, other studies, although confirming the increasing risk of CP in ART conceived children, evidenced that this association was less evident after adjustment for multiple pregnancies preterm delivery or gestational age [81,82]. On the other hand, Liang Zhu et al. (2010) evidenced that in their series children born after ART had an increased risk of CP even after adjustment for preterm birth and multiplicity [83]. By analyzing in details a number of possible factors which co-vary both with IVF and with CP and after adjustment for year of birth, maternal age, parity, and smoking, Källén et al. (2010) concluded that ART is associated only to a moderately increased risk for CP, likely as a consequence of an increased risk of neonatal morbidity associated with multiple births [84].
Based on these results, it has been suggested that the increased risk of CP which is partly due to multiple births, partly to the neonatal morbidity seen after IVF, with a possible role played also by parental subfertility. A very recent study by Goldsmith et al. (2018) confirm this hypothesis, by evidencing that, despite the two-fold increase of CP after ART, after stratification for gestational age and plurality a residual risk remains in singletons born very preterm [85].
These observations overall seem to rule out a possible epigenetic mechanism in the pathogenesis of CP in ART conceived children, also considering the very limited data about epigenetic analysis carried out in in these children. However, a very recent report of Mohandas et al. (2018), carried out by genome-wide analysis of DNA methylation in 15 monozygotic twin pairs who later became discordant for CP, identified 33 Differentially Methylated Probes (DMPs) associated with CP in genes involved in immune signaling pathways or previously linked to epileptic encephalopathy [86]. Authors suggested a potential role for immune dysfunction in CP. Nevertheless, this study did not analyze children conceived by ART, and the presence of DMPs associated with CP does not indicate for sure a possible epigenetic dysfunction in CP.
The possible risk of intellectual disability in children conceived by ART represents another issue addressed by several studies. The majority of the reported cases appear to be reassuring, showing a minimal effect of the ART procedure in comparison to birth weight, gestational age, socio-economic status and parental educational in increasing the risk of intellectual disability [87,88,89,90]. However, it has been stressed that many of the reported studies have methodological limitations and that very limited data are available on adolescents and young adults conceived by ART [90]. Thus, further studies on longer follow up are required to fill these gaps and confirm the lack of increased risk of intellectual disability in ART conceived children.
Finally, several studies have investigated the association between ART and increased risk of autism or autism spectrum disorders (ASD), again with different results.
An early Danish study by Maimburg et al. (2007) suggested a decreased risk for developing infantile autism in ART children, even after adjustment for known risk factors associated with assisted conception and infantile autism [91]. Subsequently, another Danish study evidenced a slightly increased risk of ASD in ART children, that on the other hand disappeared after adjustment for maternal age, educational level, parity, smoking, birth weight and multiplicity [92]. The lack of association between ART and autism was further confirmed by other studies [87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94], but more recently additional studies have reported different results, raising again the question about a possible increased risk of ASD in ART conceived children. Kissin et al. (2015), although not detecting an overall increased prevalence of ASD in ART conceived as compared to normally conceived children, found a higher incidence during the first 5 years of life in children generated by ICSI as compared with IVF [95]. These results could suggest that also the type of technique chosen for fertilization could lead to different effects on the neurological development of the fetus. Liu et al., (2017), in a meta-analysis carried out on 3 cohort studies and 8 case-control studies, suggested a higher risk of ASD (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.09–1.68, p = 0.007) in children generated by ART [96]. These authors suggested the presence of epigenetic changes induced by hormone exposure, semen preparation, freezing of embryos and gametes, use of culture media, growth conditions for embryos, and delayed insemination. However, this study did not analyze at molecular levels the presence of epigenetic alterations in ASD children conceived by ART, and such an association remains only a hypothesis.
Catford et al. (2017) carried out a systematic review of health outcomes of ICSI-conceived offspring beyond the neonatal period compared to IVF-conceived offspring with reassuring results related to neurodevelopment during infancy and childhood; whilst, data on neurodevelopmental disorders, growth, physical health and childhood cancer were inconclusive or limited [97]. Then, Levin (2018) showed that neurologic morbidity was significantly more common in IVF (3.7%) and OI (4.1%) offspring (up to 18 years) as compared with those following spontaneous pregnancies (3.1%; p = 0.017) [98]. In addition, Davidovitch (2018) observed that IVF treatment compared with spontaneous conception was not significantly associated with the ASD risk, whereas progesterone hormone treatment was associated with an increased risk of ASD (RR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.22, 1.86) compared to the group with no progesterone treatment [99]. The authors suggested that this effect may possibly reflect epigenetic modifications [99].
Although accumulating data suggest that individuals conceived by ART may have an increased risk of chronic metabolic disorders, to date, the human studies are small and not conclusive [100,101,102]. The methodological discrepancies among studies is due to inclusion criteria of subjects, sample size, sampling of the comparison group, parental characteristics and also the ART technique employed [103]. The health implications of IVF are under-studied, therefore longitudinal follow-up is clearly warranted to understand the potential long-term effects in ART offspring [12].

6. Discussion

Currently, there is an ongoing debate as to whether techniques and processes such as controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, IVF, ICSI, embryo cryopreservation, pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) could cause alteration of gamete, embryo and fetal developments [104]. Since the ARTs procedures require multiple manipulations to the gamete and embryo during critical windows of epigenetic reprograming, the association between ART and aberrant epigenetic modifications, mostly evidenced in animal models, is not surprising [105]. In particular, embryo biopsy and PGT-A could improve the rate of implantation and clinical pregnancy [106], especially for the older patient population, despite the concerns over the neurodegeneration and dysfunction in the offspring raised in the past by some studies [77,107,108]. For example, Wu et al. (2014) showed an abnormal neural development and function in mice generated after blastomere biopsy, suggesting that the altered epigenetic reprogramming during early embryo development may be the latent mechanism, which results in a hypomethylation status in the brain [77]. Recently, it has been made progress in exploring the effects of embryo culture, culture media, and oxygen tension on epigenetic regulation, although in humans it is difficult (and with ethical implications) to isolate the role of embryo culture on epigenetic perturbations in the developing embryo [105]. In addition, other factors such as temperature, osmolality, pH, and embryo density during culture may potentially impose stress and have significant epigenetic consequences.
Many studies have investigated and are currently investigating the potential risk of ART for the long-life health of children conceived by this technique due to the presence of epigenetic alterations [103,109]. Although concerns about the risk of some diseases have been supported by experimental data, very little evidence has been reported about an increased risk of neurological disorders. Despite early reports on animal models evidencing an increased risk of behavioral, other that metabolic, problems in the offspring generated by in vitro fertilization, the large majority of the studies on the neurodevelopment of children born at full term after ART consistently show that these children are in a comparable condition to normally conceived children, especially when considering more recent surveys [103]. More detailed information will be likely provided by studies reporting longer follow up, especially for children conceived by ICSI. Anyway, at present, alterations in the neurological development do not appear to represent a problem for ART conceived children and should not discourage couples to attend this procedure to get a pregnancy.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Edwards, R.G.; Steptoe, P.C. A Matter of Life. The Story of IVF—A Medical Breakthrough; Hutchinson: London, UK, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  2. Palermo, G. Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet 1992, 340, 17–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Hoorsan, H.; Mirmiran, P.; Chaichian, S.; Moradi, Y.; Hoorsan, R.; Jesmi, F. Congenital Malformations in Infants of Mothers Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technologies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Study. J. Prev. Med. Public Health 2017, 50, 347–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Winston, R.M.; Hardy, K. Are we ignoring potential dangers of in vitro fertilization and related treatments? Nat. Cell Biol. 2002, 4, s14–s18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Hansen, M.; Kurinczuk, J.J.; Bower, C.; Webb, S. The Risk of Major Birth Defects after Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection and in Vitro Fertilization. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002, 346, 725–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Simpson, J.L. Birth defects and assisted reproductive technologies. Semin. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014, 19, 177–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Qin, J.; Sheng, X.; Wang, H.; Liang, D.; Tan, H.; Xia, J. Assisted reproductive technology and risk of congenital malformations: A meta-analysis based on cohort studies. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2015, 292, 777–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Uyar, A.; Seli, E. The impact of assisted reproductive technologies on genomic imprinting and imprinting disorders. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014, 26, 210–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Grafodatskaya, D.; Cytrynbaum, C.; Weksberg, R. The health risks of ART. EMBO Rep. 2013, 14, 129–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  10. Lane, M.; Robker, R.L.; Robertson, S.A. Parenting from before conception. Science 2014, 345, 756–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. El Hajj, N.; Haaf, T. Epigenetic disturbances in in vitro cultured gametes and embryos: Implications for human assisted reproduction. Fertil. Steril. 2013, 99, 632–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Vrooman, L.A.; Bartolomei, M.S. Can assisted reproductive technologies cause adult-onset disease? Evidence from human and mouse. Reprod. Toxicol. 2017, 68, 72–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Calle, A.; Miranda, A.; Fernandez-Gonzalez, R.; Pericuesta, E.; Laguna, R.; Gutierrez-Adan, A. Male mice produced by in vitro culture have reduced fertility and transmit organomegaly and glucose intolerance to their male off- spring. Biol. Reprod. 2012, 87, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Rexhaj, E.; Paoloni-Giacobino, A.; Rimoldi, S.F.; Fuster, D.G.; Anderegg, M.; Somm, E.; Bouillet, E.; Allemann, Y.; Sartori, C.; Scherrer, U. Mice generated by in vitro fertilization exhibit vascular dysfunction and shortened life span. J. Clin. Investig. 2013, 123, 5052–5060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Donjacour, A.; Liu, X.; Lin, W.; Simbulan, R.; Rinaudo, P.F. In Vitro Fertilization Affects Growth and Glucose Metabolism in a Sex-Specific Manner in an Outbred Mouse Model1. Biol. Reprod. 2014, 90, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Belva, F.; Henriet, S.; Liebaers, I.; Van Steirteghem, A.; Celestin-Westreich, S.; Bonduelle, M. Medical outcome of 8-year-old singleton ICSI children (born 32 weeks’ gestation) and a spontaneously conceived comparison group. Hum. Reprod. 2007, 22, 506–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Belva, F.; Roelants, M.; De Schepper, J.; Roseboom, T.J.; Bonduelle, M.; Devroey, P.; Painter, R.C. Blood pressure in ICSI-conceived adolescents. Hum. Reprod. 2012, 27, 3100–3108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Van Weissenbruch, M.M.; Vermeiden, J.P.W.; Van Leeuwen, F.E.; De Waal, H.A.D.-V.; Ceelen, M. Cardiometabolic Differences in Children Born After in Vitro Fertilization: Follow-Up Study. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2008, 93, 1682–1688. [Google Scholar] [Green Version]
  19. Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Gu, H.-T.; Feng, Q.-L.; Liu, J.-Y.; Zhou, J.; Yan, F. Association Between Assisted Reproductive Technology and Cardiac Alteration at Age 5 Years. JAMA Pediatr. 2015, 169, 603–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Kosteria, I.; Tsangaris, G.T.; Gkourogianni, A.; Anagnostopoulos, A.; Papadopoulou, A.; Papassotiriou, I.; Loutradis, D.; Chrousos, G.P.; Kanaka-Gantenbein, C. Proteomics of Children Born After Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Reveal Indices of an Adverse Cardiometabolic Profile. J. Endocr. Soc. 2017, 1, 288–301. [Google Scholar]
  21. Guo, X.-Y.; Liu, X.-M.; Jin, L.; Wang, T.-T.; Ullah, K.; Sheng, J.-Z.; Huang, H.-F. Cardiovascular and metabolic profiles of offspring conceived by assisted reproductive technologies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil. Steril. 2017, 107, 622–631.e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bonduelle, M.; Roelants, M.; Michielsen, D.; Verheyen, G.; Tournaye, H.; Belva, F.; Van Steirteghem, A. Semen quality of young adult ICSI offspring: The first results. Hum. Reprod. 2016, 31, 2811–2820. [Google Scholar]
  23. Bowman, P.; McLaren, A. Viability and growth of mouse embryos after in vitro culture and fusion. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 1970, 23, 693–704. [Google Scholar]
  24. Roemer, I.; Reik, W.; Dean, W.; Klose, J. Epigenetic inheritance in the mouse. Curr. Biol. 1997, 7, 277–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Dean, W.; Bowden, L.; Aitchison, A.; Klose, J.; Moore, T.; Meneses, J.J.; Reik, W.; Feil, R. Altered imprinted gene methylation and expression in completely ES cell-derived mouse fetuses: Association with aberrant phenotypes. Development 1998, 125, 2273–2282. [Google Scholar]
  26. Doherty, A.S.; Mann, M.R.; Tremblay, K.D.; Bartolomei, M.S.; Schultz, R.M. Differential Effects of Culture on Imprinted H19 Expression in the Preimplantation Mouse Embryo1. Biol. Reprod. 2000, 62, 1526–1535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Khosla, S.; Dean, W.; Brown, D.; Reik, W.; Feil, R. Culture of Preimplantation Mouse Embryos Affects Fetal Development and the Expression of Imprinted Genes1. Biol. Reprod. 2001, 64, 918–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Choux, C.; Binquet, C.; Carmignac, V.; Bruno, C.; Chapusot, C.; Barberet, J.; Lamotte, M.; Sagot, P.; Bourc’his, D.; Fauque, P. The epigenetic control of transposable elements and imprinted genes in newborns is affected by the mode of conception: ART versus spontaneous conception without underlying infertility. Hum. Reprod. 2018, 33, 331–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Velker, B.A.M.; Denomme, M.M.; Krafty, R.T.; Mann, M.R.W. Maintenance of Mest imprinted methylation in blastocyst-stage mouse embryos is less stable than other imprinted loci following superovulation or embryo culture. Environ. Epigenet. 2017, 3, dvx015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Leese, H.J.; Hugentobler, S.A.; Gray, S.M.; Morris, D.G.; Sturmey, R.G.; Whitear, S.-L.; Sreenan, J.M. Female reproductive tract fluids: Composition, mechanism of formation and potential role in the developmental origins of health and disease. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 2008, 20, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gardner, D.K.; Kelley, R.L. Impact of the IVF laboratory environment on human preimplantation embryo phenotype. J. Dev. Orig. Health Dis. 2017, 8, 418–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rivera, R.M.; Stein, P.; Weaver, J.R.; Mager, J.; Schultz, R.M.; Bartolomei, M.S. Manipulations of mouse embryos prior to implantation result in aberrant expression of imprinted genes on day 9.5 of development. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2008, 17, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Canovas, S.; Ross, P.J.; Kelsey, G.; Coy, P. DNA Methylation in Embryo Development: Epigenetic Impact of ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies). BioEssays 2017, 39, 1700106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Marques, J.; Costa, P.; Vaz, B.; Carvalho, F.; Fernandes, S.; Barros, A.; Sousa, M. Abnormal methylation of imprinted genes in human sperm is associated with oligozoospermia. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2008, 14, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Filipponi, D.; Feil, R. Perturbation of genomic imprinting in oligozoospermia. Epigenetics 2009, 4, 27–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kobayashi, H.; Hiura, H.; John, R.M.; Sato, A.; Otsu, E.; Kobayashi, N.; Suzuki, R.; Suzuki, F.; Hayashi, C.; Utsunomiya, T.; et al. DNA methylation errors at imprinted loci after assisted conception originate in the parental sperm. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2009, 17, 1582–1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Colaco, S.; Sakkas, D. Paternal factors contributing to embryo quality. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2018, 35, 1953–1968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Choufani, S.; Turinsky, A.L.; Melamed, N.; Greenblatt, E.; Brudno, M.; Bérard, A. Impact of assisted reproduction, infertility, sex and paternal factors on the placental DNA methylome. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2019, 28, 372–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Marjonen, H.; Auvinen, P.; Kahila, H.; Tšuiko, O.; Kõks, S.; Tiirats, A.; Viltrop, T.; Tuuri, T.; Soderstrom-Anttila, V.; Suikkari, A.-M.; et al. rs10732516 polymorphism at the IGF2/H19 locus associates with genotype-specific effects on placental DNA methylation and birth weight of newborns conceived by assisted reproductive technology. Clin. Epigenet. 2018, 10, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Li, G.; Yu, Y.; Fan, Y.; Li, C.; Xu, X.; Duan, J.; Li, R.; Kang, X.; Ma, X.; Chen, X.; et al. Genome wide abnormal DNA methylome of human blastocyst in assisted reproductive technology. J. Genet. Genom. 2017, 44, 475–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rhon-Calderon, E.A.; Vrooman, L.A.; Riesche, L.; Bartolomei, M.S. The effects of Assisted Reproductive Technologies on genomic imprinting inthe placenta. Placenta 2019, 84, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Gregg, C.; Zhang, J.; Butler, J.E.; Haig, D.; Dulac, C. Sex-Specific Parent-of-Origin Allelic expression in the Mouse Brain. Science 2010, 329, 682–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Keverne, E. Significance of epigenetics for understanding brain development, brain evolution and behaviour. Neuroscience 2014, 264, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Keverne, E.B. Trophoblast regulation of maternal endocrine function and behaviour. In Biology and Pathology of Trophoblast; Moffett, A., Loke, C., McLaren, A., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2006; pp. 148–163. [Google Scholar]
  45. Harris, A.; Seckl, J. Glucocorticoids, prenatal stress and the programming of disease. Horm. Behav. 2011, 59, 279–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Peters, J. The role of genomic imprinting in biology and disease: An expanding view. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2014, 15, 517–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Miller, J.L.; Goldstone, A.P.; Couch, J.A.; Shuster, J.; He, G.; Driscoll, D.J.; Liu, Y.; Schmalfuss, I.M. Pituitary abnormalities in Prader–Willi syndrome and early onset morbid obesity. Am. J. Med. Genet. Part A 2008, 146, 570–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Cassidy, S.B.; Schwartz, S.; Miller, J.L.; Driscoll, D.J. Prader-Willi syndrome. Genet. Med. 2012, 14, 10–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Buiting, K. Prader-Willi syndrome and Angelman syndrome. Am. J. Med. Genet. Part C Semin. Med. Genet. 2010, 154, 365–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Qureshi, I.A.; Mehler, M.F. Understanding Neurological Disease Mechanisms in the Era of Epigenetics. JAMA Neurol. 2013, 70, 703–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Qureshi, I.A.; Mehler, M.F. Epigenetic Mechanisms Underlying the Pathogenesis of Neurogenetic Diseases. Neurotherapeutics 2014, 11, 708–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Kubota, T.; Miyake, K.; Hirasawa, T. Role of epigenetics in Rett syndrome. Epigenomics 2013, 5, 583–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chao, M.V.; Rajagopal, R.; Lee, F.S. Neurotrophin signalling in health and disease. Clin. Sci. (Lond.) 2006, 110, 167–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zheleznyakova, G.Y.; Cao, H.; Schiöth, H.B. BDNF DNA methylation changes as a biomarker of psychiatric disorders: Literature review and open access database analysis. Behav. Brain Funct. 2016, 12, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. You, H.J.; Park, J.H.; Pareja-Galeano, H.; Lucia, A.; Shin, J.I. Targeting MicroRNAs Involved in the BDNF Signaling Impairment in Neurodegenerative Diseases. NeuroMol. Med. 2016, 18, 540–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Chen, K.-W.; Chen, L. Epigenetic Regulation of BDNF Gene during Development and Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Chouliaris, C.; Rutten, B.P.; Kenis, G. Epigenetic regulation in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease. Prog. Neurobiol. 2010, 90, 498–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Mastroeni, D.; Grover, A.; Delvaux, E.; Whiteside, C.; Coleman, P.D.; Rogers, J. Epigenetics Mechanisms in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiol. Aging 2011, 32, 1161–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Nunez-Iglesias, J.; Liu, C.-C.; Morgan, T.E.; Finch, C.E.; Zhou, X.J. Joint Genome-Wide Profiling of miRNA and mRNA Expression in Alzheimer’s Disease Cortex Reveals Altered miRNA Regulation. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e8898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Mastroeni, D.; Grover, A.; Delvaux, E.; Whiteside, C.; Coleman, P.D.; Rogers, J. Epigenetic changes in Alzheimer’s disease: Decrements in DNA methylation. Neurobiol. Aging 2010, 31, 2025–2037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Coppedè, F. Genetics and epigenetics of Parkinson’s disease. Sci. World J. 2012, 2012, 489830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kaidery, N.A.; Tarannum, S.; Thomas, B. Epigenetic Landscape of Parkinson’s Disease: Emerging Role in Disease Mechanisms and Therapeutic Modalities. Neurotherapeutics 2013, 10, 698–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Guhathakurta, S.; Bok, E.; Evangelista, B.A.; Kim, Y.-S. Deregulation of α-synuclein in Parkinson’s disease: Insight from epigenetic structure and transcriptional regulation of SNCA. Prog. Neurobiol. 2017, 154, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Van Bokhoven, H. Genetic and epigenetic networks in intellectual disabilities. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2011, 45, 81–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kleefstra, T.; Schenck, A.; Kramer, J.M.; Van Bokhoven, H. The genetics of cognitive epigenetics. Neuropharmacology 2014, 80, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hargreaves, D.C.; Crabtree, G.R. ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling: Genetics, genomics and mechanisms. Cell Res. 2011, 21, 396–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Tsurusaki, Y.; Okamoto, N.; Ohashi, H.; Kosho, T.; Imai, Y.; Hibi-Ko, Y.; Kaname, T.; Naritomi, K.; Kawame, H.; Wakui, K.; et al. Mutations affecting components of the SWI/SNF complex cause Coffin–Siris syndrome. Nat Genet 2012, 44, 376–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Roopra, A.; Dingledine, R.; Hsieh, J. Epigenetics and epilepsy. Epilepsia 2012, 53, 2–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Formisano, L.; Noh, K.M.; Miyawaki, T.; Mashiko, T.; Bennett, M.V.; Zukin, R.S. Ischemic insults promote epigenetic reprogramming of mu opioid receptor expression in hippocampal neurons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 4170–4175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Noh, K.M.; Hwang, J.Y.; Follenzi, A.; Athanasiadou, R.; Miyawaki, T.; Greally, J.M.; Bennett, M.V.; Zukin, R.S. Repressor element-1 silencing transcription factor (REST) dependent epigenetic remodeling is critical to ischemia-induced neuronal death. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, E962–E971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Kobow, K.; Kaspi, A.; Harikrishnan, K.N.; Kiese, K.; Ziemann, M.; Khurana, I.; Fritzsche, I.; Hauke, J.; Hahnen, E.; Coras, R.; et al. Deep sequencing reveals increased DNA methylation in chronic rat epilepsy. Acta Neuropathol. 2013, 126, 741–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Miller-Delaney, S.F.C.; Das, S.; Sano, T.; Jimenez-Mateos, E.M.; Bryan, K.; Buckley, P.G.; Stallings, R.L.; Henshall, D.C. Differential DNA Methylation Patterns Define Status Epilepticus and Epileptic Tolerance. J. Neurosci. 2012, 32, 1577–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Sun, W.; Poschmann, J.; Del Rosario, R.C.-H.; Parikshak, N.N.; Hajan, H.S.; Kumar, V.; Ramasamy, R.; Belgard, T.G.; Elanggovan, B.; Wong, C.C.Y.; et al. Histone Acetylome-wide Association Study of Autism Spectrum Disorder. Cell 2016, 167, 1385–1397.e11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Ginsberg, M.R.; Rubin, R.A.; Falcone, T.; Ting, A.H.; Natowicz, M.R. Brain Transcriptional and Epigenetic Associations with Autism. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e44736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Ecker, D.J.; Stein, P.; Xu, Z.; Williams, C.J.; Kopf, G.S.; Bilker, W.B.; Abel, T.; Schultz, R.M. Long-term effects of culture of preimplantation mouse embryos on behavior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 1595–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Fernández-Gonzalez, R.; Moreira, P.; Bilbao, A.; Jiménez, A.; Pérez-Crespo, M.; Ramírez, M.A.; De Fonseca, F.R.; Pintado, B.; Gutierrez-Adan, A. Long-term effect of in vitro culture of mouse embryos with serum on mRNA expression of imprinting genes, development, and behavior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 5880–5885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Wu, Y.; Lv, Z.; Yang, Y.; Dong, G.; Yu, Y.; Cui, Y.; Tong, M.; Wang, L.; Zhou, Z.; Zhu, H.; et al. Blastomere biopsy influences epigenetic reprogramming during early embryo development, which impacts neural development and function in resulting mice. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 2014, 71, 1761–1774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Källén, B. The risk of neurodisability and other long-term outcomes for infants born following ART. Semin. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014, 19, 239–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Strömberg, B.; Dahlquist, G.; Ericson, A.; Finnström, O.; Köster, M.; Stjernqvist, K. Neurological sequelae in children born after in-vitro fertilisation: A population-based study. Lancet 2002, 359, 461–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Lidegaard, Ø.; Pinborg, A.; Andersen, A.N. Imprinting diseases and IVF: Danish National IVF cohort study. Hum. Reprod. 2005, 20, 950–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Hvidtjørn, D.; Grove, J.; Schendel, D.E.; Vaeth, M.; Ernst, E.; Nielsen, L.F.; Thorsen, P. Cerebral Palsy Among Children Born After in Vitro Fertilization: The Role of Preterm Delivery—A Population-Based, Cohort Study. Pediatrics 2006, 118, 475–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hvidtjørn, D.; Grove, J.; Schendel, D.; Svaerke, C.; Schieve, L.A.; Uldall, P.; Ernst, E.; Jacobsson, B.; Thorsen, P. Multiplicity and early gestational age contribute to an increased risk of cerebral palsy from assisted conception: A population-based cohort study. Hum. Reprod. 2010, 25, 2115–2123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Zhu, J.L.; Hvidtjørn, D.; Basso, O.; Obel, C.; Thorsen, P.; Uldall, P.; Olsen, J. Parental infertility and cerebral palsy in children. Hum. Reprod. 2010, 25, 3142–3145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Källén, A.J.; Finnström, O.O.; Lindam, A.P.; Nilsson, E.M.; Nygren, K.G.; Olausson, P.M. Cerebral palsy in children born after in vitro fertilization. Is the risk decreasing? Eur. J. Paediatr. Neurol. 2010, 14, 526–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Goldsmith, S.; Mcintyre, S.; Badawi, N.; Hansen, M. Cerebral palsy after assisted reproductive technology: A cohort study. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 2018, 60, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Mohandas, N.; Bass-Stringer, S.; Maksimovic, J.; Crompton, K.; Loke, Y.J.; Walstab, J.; Reid, S.M.; Amor, D.J.; Reddihough, D.; Craig, J.M. Epigenome-wide analysis in newborn blood spots from monozygotic twins discordant for cerebral palsy reveals consistent regional differences in DNA methylation. Clin. Epigenet. 2018, 10, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Bay, B.; Mortensen, E.L.; Kesmodel, U.S. Assisted reproduction and child neurodevelopmental outcomes: A systematic review. Fertil. Steril. 2013, 100, 844–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Abdel-Mannan, O.; Sutcliffe, A. I was born following ART: How will I get on at school? Semin. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014, 19, 245–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Punamäki, R.L.; Tiitinen, A.; Lindblom, J.; Unkila-Kallio, L.; Flykt, M.; Vänskä, M.; Poikkeus, P.; Tulppala, M. Mental health and developmental outcomes for children born after ART: A comparative prospective study on child gender and treatment type. Hum. Reprod. 2016, 31, 100–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Rumbold, A.R.; Moore, V.M.; Whitrow, M.J.; Oswald, T.K.; Moran, L.J.; Fernandez, R.C.; Barnhart, K.T.; Davies, M.J. The impact of specific fertility treatments on cognitive development in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review. Hum. Reprod. 2017, 32, 1489–1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Maimburg, R.D.; Vaeth, M. Do children born after assisted conception have less risk of developing infantile autism? Hum. Reprod. 2007, 22, 1841–1843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Hvidtjørn, D.; Grove, J.; Schendel, D.; Schieve, L.A.; Svaerke, L.; Ernst, E.; Thorsen, P. Risk of autism spectrum disorder in children born after assisted conception: A population-based follow-up study. J Epidemiol. Community Health 2011, 65, 497–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Lehti, V.; Brown, A.S.; Gissler, M.; Rihko, M.; Suominen, A.; Sourander, A. Autism spectrum disorder in IVF children: A national case control study in Finland. Hum. Reprod. 2013, 28, 812–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Conti, E.; Mazzotti, S.; Calderoni, S.; Saviozzi, I.; Guzzetta, A. Are children born after assisted reproductive technology at increased risk of autism spectrum disorders? A systematic review. Hum. Reprod. 2013, 28, 3316–3327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Kissin, D.M.; Zhang, Y.; Boulet, S.L.; Fountain, C.; Bearman, P.; Schieve, L.; Yeargin-Allsopp, M.; Jamieson, D.J. Association of assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment and parental infertility diagnosis with autism in ART-conceived children. Hum. Reprod. 2015, 30, 454–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Liu, L.; Gao, J.; He, X.; Cai, Y.; Wang, L.; Fan, X. Association between assisted reproductive technology and the risk of autism spectrum disorders in the offspring: A meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 46207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Catford, S.R.; McLachlan, R.I.; O’Bryan, M.K.; Halliday, J.L. Long-term follow-up of intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection conceived offspring compared with in vitro fertilization-conceived offspring: A systematic review of health outcomes beyond the neonatal period. Andrology 2017, 5, 610–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Levin, S.; Sheiner, E.; Wainstock, T.; Walfisch, A.; Segal, I.; Landau, D.; Sergienko, R.; Levitas, E.; Harlev, A. Infertility Treatments and Long-Term Neurologic Morbidity of the Offspring. Am. J. Perinatol. 2018, 36, 949–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Davidovitch, M.; Chodick, G.; Shalev, V.; Eisenberg, V.H.; Dan, U.; Reichenberg, A.; Sandin, S.; Levine, S.Z. Infertility treatments during pregnancy and the risk of autism spectrum disorder in the offspring. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 2018, 86, 175–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Sakka, S.D.; Loutradis, D.; Kanaka-Gantenbein, C.; Margeli, A.; Papastamataki, M.; Papassotiriou, I.; Chrousos, G.P. Absence of insulin resistance and low-grade inflammation despite early metabolic syndrome manifestations in children born after in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 2010, 94, 1693–1699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Scherrer, U.; Rimoldi, S.F.; Rexhaj, E.; Stuber, T.; Duplain, H.; Garcin, S.; De Marchi, S.F.; Nicod, P.; Germond, M.; Allemann, Y.; et al. Systemic and Pulmonary Vascular Dysfunction in Children Conceived by Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Circulation 2012, 125, 1890–1896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Chen, M.; Wu, L.; Zhao, J.; Wu, F.; Davies, M.J.; Wittert, G.A.; Norman, R.J.; Robker, R.L.; Heilbronn, L.K. Altered Glucose Metabolism in Mouse and Humans Conceived by IVF. Diabetes 2014, 63, 3189–3198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  103. Chen, M.; Heilbronn, L.K.; Heilbronn, L. The health outcomes of human offspring conceived by assisted reproductive technologies (ART). J. Dev. Orig. Health Dis. 2017, 8, 388–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Amoako, A.A.; Nafee, T.M.; Ola, B. Epigenetic Influences during the Periconception Period and Assisted Reproduction. Single Mol. Single Cell Seq. 2017, 1014, 15–39. [Google Scholar]
  105. Mani, S.; Mainigi, M. Embryo Culture Conditions and the Epigenome. Semin. Reprod Med. 2018, 36, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Fang, R.; Yang, W.; Zhao, X.; Xiong, F.; Guo, C.; Xiao, J.; Chen, L.; Song, X.; Wang, H.; Chen, J.; et al. Chromosome screening using culture medium of embryos fertilised in vitro: A pilot clinical study. J. Transl. Med. 2019, 17, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Middelburg, K.J.; van der Heide, M.; Houtzager, B.; Jongbloed-Pereboom, M.; Fidler, V.; Bos, A.F.; Kok, J.; Hadders-Algra, M.; PGS Follow-up Study Group. Mental, psychomotor, neurologic, and behavioral outcomes of 2-year old children born afterpreimplantation genetic screening: Follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2011, 96, 165–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Zhao, H.-C.; Zhao, Y.; Li, M.; Yan, J.; Li, L.; Li, R.; Liu, P.; Yu, Y.; Qiao, J. Aberrant Epigenetic Modification in Murine Brain Tissues of Offspring from Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis Blastomere Biopsies1. Biol. Reprod. 2013, 89, 117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Stuppia, L.; Franzago, M.; Ballerini, P.; Gatta, V.; Antonucci, I. Epigenetics and male reproduction: The consequences of paternal lifestyle on fertility, embryo development, and children lifetime health. Clin. Epigenetics 2015, 7, 120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Rodent studies related to neural development derived from cultured embryos.
Table 1. Rodent studies related to neural development derived from cultured embryos.
Author Year
[Reference]		Animal ModelMethod Main Findings
Ecker
2004
[75]		129S6/SvEvTac/C57BL/6J F(1) mouse Behavioral testing Small but significant long-term alterations in behavior
(anxiety, locomotor activity, spatial memory)
Fernandez-Gonzalez
2004
[76]		superovulated female B6CBAF1 mice developmental and behavior testsBehavioral alterations in anxiety and displayed deficiencies in implicit memories in mice derived from embryos cultured with FCS
 
Influence of the mRNA expression of multiple growth-related imprinted genes in blastocysts cultured in the presence of FCS
Khosla
2001
[27] 		superovulation induced in (C57BL/6J 3 CBA/Ca) F1 femalesGene Expression
 
DNA Methylation		Reduction of weight in M16+FCS fetuses
 
decreased expression of the imprinted H19 and IGF2 genes associated with a gain of DNA methylation at an imprinting control region upstream of H19
 
increased expression of the imprinted gene Grb10.
Wu
2014
[77]		ICR miceSpatial learning assay
 
pole climbing test
 
MeDIP
QRT- PCR
 
Western blotting
Microarray		In aged biopsied mice:
 
-Poor spatial learning ability
-Increased neuron degeneration
-Alteration of proteins expression involved in neural degeneration
 
-Low methylation in the brains
FCS, fetal calf serum; MeDIP, Methylated DNA immunoprecipitation; QRT-PCR, Quantitative real-time PCR.
Table
Table 2. Human Studies related to neurological disorders in ART-conceived offspring.
Table 2. Human Studies related to neurological disorders in ART-conceived offspring.
Author Year
[Reference]		Study DesignSample size
(n Children)		Main Findings
Stromberg
2002
[79]		population-based retrospective cohort 5680 IVF 11360 NC.
 
2060 IVF twins
4120 NC		More likely to need habilitation services in IVF children (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3–2.2).
IVF Children and IVF singletons had an increased risk of cerebral palsy [3.7 (2.0–6.6)] and 2.8 (1.3–5.8) respectively].
 
IVF twins did not differ from control twins with respect to risk of neurological sequelae.
Lidegaard
2005
[80]		follow-up 6052 IVF
442 349 NC		80% increased risk of cerebral palsy in IVF singletons.
 
Equal frequencies of childhood cancers, mental diseases, congenital syndromes and developmental disturbances
Hvidtjørn
2006
[81]		 population-based, cohort 9255 IVF
394713 NC 		Increased risk of CP in IVF children
Zhu
2010
[83]		Cohort3617 IVF/ICSI
3000 OI (with or without IUI),
13462 unplanned pregnancies		Increased risk of CP in IVF/ICS Children
Källén
2010
[84] 		Case-control31.587 IVF
2,623.517 NC		A doubled risk for CP among IVF children
Goldsmith
2018
[85]		Cohort study203352 NC
1306 IVF
621 ICSI		increased two-fold of CP prevalence in IVF/ICSI mediated mostly by preterm and multiple births
 
similar clinical outcomes between ART and NC children with CP
Punamäki
2016
[89]		Prospective follow-up
(7–8-year)		278 NC
 
ART group: 164 IVF,
76 ICSI		Lower levels of cognitive problems in ART boys than in the NC boys
Higher levels of cognitive problems in ART girls than in the NC girls
IVF/ICSI children did not differ in terms of mental health or developmental outcomes
No significant gender differences within the ART group
Maimburg
2007
[91]		Case-control473 infantile autism
473 controls
(33 ART = 10 cases and 23 controls)		Lower risk of developing infantile autism in the ART children
Hvidtjørn
2011
[92]		Population-based follow-up
(4–13 years (median 9 years)).		588 967 NC
14 991 IVF
18 148 OI		No ASD risk in ART children
Lehti
2013
[93]		Case-control4164 autistic cases
16 582 controls
 
In the whole sample: 63 IVF and 229 no IVF		No significant association between IVF and ASDs or its subtypes childhood autism, Asperger’s syndrome or other pervasive developmental disorder
Kissin
2015
[95]		Population-based retrospective cohort 42383 ART
(5-year observation period) 		The incidence of autism diagnosis remained at 0.8% among singletons, 1.2% among multiples
 
A higher incidence of autism diagnosis in ICSI compared with conventional IVF and a lower when parents had
unexplained infertility (among singletons) or tubal factor infertility
(among multiples) compared with other types of infertility
Levin
2018
[98]		Population-based
cohort		237.863 NC
2.603 IVF
1.721 OI		Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders and headaches were more common in the OI group, sleep disorders in the IVF group
Autism and CP comparable between the groups
Davidovitch
2018
[99]		Cohort108.548 male offspringNo association between IVF treatment and ASD
Association between progesterone hormone treatment and increased risk of ASD
CP, Cerebral Palsy; IUI, intrauterine insemination; OI, ovulation induction; NC, naturally conceived controls; ASDs, autism spectrum disorders.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

La Rovere, M.; Franzago, M.; Stuppia, L. Epigenetics and Neurological Disorders in ART. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4169. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174169

AMA Style

La Rovere M, Franzago M, Stuppia L. Epigenetics and Neurological Disorders in ART. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2019; 20(17):4169. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174169

Chicago/Turabian Style

La Rovere, Marina, Marica Franzago, and Liborio Stuppia. 2019. "Epigenetics and Neurological Disorders in ART" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 20, no. 17: 4169. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174169

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop