Cumulus cell co-culture in media drops does not improve rescue in vitro maturation of vitrified-warmed immature oocytes

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether co-culture with vitrified-warmed cumulus cells (CCs) in media drops improves rescue in vitro maturation (IVM) of previously vitrified immature oocytes. Previous studies have shown improved rescue IVM of fresh immature oocytes when cocultured with CCs in a three-dimensional matrix. However, the scheduling and workload of embryologists would benefit from a simpler IVM approach, particularly in the setting of time-sensitive oncofertility oocyte cryopreservation (OC) cases. Although the yield of developmentally competent mature metaphase II (MII) oocytes is increased when rescue IVM is performed before cryopreservation, it is unknown whether maturation of previously vitrified immature oocytes is improved after coculture with CCs in a simple system not involving a three-dimensional matrix.

Design: Randomized controlled trial.

Setting: Academic hospital.

Patients: A total of 320 (160 germinal vesicles [GVs] and 160 metaphase I [MI]) immature oocytes and autologous CC clumps were vitrified from patients who were undergoing planned OC or intracytoplasmic sperm injection from July 2020 until September 2021.

Interventions: On warming, the oocytes were randomized to culture in IVM media with CCs (+CC) or without CCs (-CC). Germinal vesicles and MI oocytes were cultured in 25 μL (SAGE IVM medium) for 32 hours and 20-22 hours, respectively.

Main outcome measures: Oocytes with a polar body (MII) were randomized to confocal microscopy for analysis of spindle integrity and chromosomal alignment to assess nuclear maturity or to parthenogenetic activation to assess cytoplasmic maturity. Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous variables and the chi square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables assessed statistical significance. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

Results: Patient demographic characteristics were similar for both the GV and MI groups after randomization to +CC vs. -CC. No statistically significant differences were observed between +CC vs. -CC groups regarding the percentage of MII from either GV (42.5% [34/80] vs. 52.5% [42/80]; RR 0.81; 95% CI: 0.57-1.15]) or MI (76.3% [61/80]; vs. 72.5% [58/80]; RR 1.05; 95% CI: 0.88-1.26]) oocytes. An increased percentage of GV-matured MIIs underwent parthenogenetic activation in the +CC group (92.3% [12/13] vs. 70.8% [17/24]), but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.30; 95% CI: 0.97-1.75), whereas the activation rate was identical for MI-matured oocytes (74.3% [26/35] vs. 75.0% [18/24], CC+ vs. CC-; RR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.74-1.32). No significant differences were observed between +CC vs. -CC groups for cleavage of parthenotes from GV-matured oocytes (91.7% [11/12] vs. 82.4% [14/17]) or blastulation (0 for both) or for MI-matured oocytes (cleavage: 80.8% [21/26] vs. 94.4% [17/18]; blastulation: 0 [0/26] vs. 16.7% [3/18]). Further, no significant differences were observed between +CC vs. -CC for GV-matured oocytes regarding incidence of bipolar spindles (38.9% [7/18] vs. 33.3% [5/15]) or aligned chromosomes (22.2% [4/18] vs. 0.0 [0/15]); or for MI-matured oocytes (bipolar spindle: 38.9% [7/18] vs. 42.9% [2/28]); aligned chromosomes (35.3% [6/17] vs. 24.1% [7/29]).

Conclusions: Cumulus cell co-culture in this simple two-dimensional system does not improve rescue IVM of vitrified, warmed immature oocytes, at least by the markers assessed here. Further work is required to assess the efficacy of this system given its potential to provide flexibility in a busy, in vitro fertilization clinic.

Keywords: cumulus cells; fertility preservation; in vitro fertilization (IVF); rescue in vitro maturation (IVM); vitrification.