Bayesian classification for the selection of in vitro human embryos using morphological and clinical data

In vitro fertilization (IVF) is a medically assisted reproduction technique that enables infertile couples to achieve successful pregnancy. Given the uncertainty of the treatment, we propose an intelligent decision support system based on supervised classification by Bayesian classifiers to aid to the selection of the most promising embryos that will form the batch to be transferred to the woman's uterus. The aim of the supervised classification system is to improve overall success rate of each IVF treatment in which a batch of embryos is transferred each time, where the success is achieved when implantation (i.e. pregnancy) is obtained. Due to ethical reasons, different legislative restrictions apply in every country on this technique. In Spain, legislation allows a maximum of three embryos to form each transfer batch. As a result, clinicians prefer to select the embryos by non-invasive embryo examination based on simple methods and observation focused on morphology and dynamics of embryo development after fertilization. This paper proposes the application of Bayesian classifiers to this embryo selection problem in order to provide a decision support system that allows a more accurate selection than with the actual procedures which fully rely on the expertise and experience of embryologists. For this, we propose to take into consideration a reduced subset of feature variables related to embryo morphology and clinical data of patients, and from this data to induce Bayesian classification models. Results obtained applying a filter technique to choose the subset of variables, and the performance of Bayesian classifiers using them, are presented.

[1]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  Steps toward Artificial Intelligence , 1995, Proceedings of the IRE.

[2]  J. Tesarik,et al.  The probability of abnormal preimplantation development can be predicted by a single static observation on pronuclear stage morphology. , 1999, Human reproduction.

[3]  G. Patrizi,et al.  Experimental results on the recognition of embryos in human assisted reproduction. , 2004, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[4]  Robert B. Ash,et al.  Information Theory , 2020, The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society.

[5]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems - networks of plausible inference , 1991, Morgan Kaufmann series in representation and reasoning.

[6]  Pedro Larrañaga,et al.  Feature selection in Bayesian classifiers for the prognosis of survival of cirrhotic patients treated with TIPS , 2005, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[7]  Francisco Matorras,et al.  The implantation of every embryo facilitates the chances of the remaining embryos to implant in an IVF programme: a mathematical model to predict pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[8]  Lutz Hamel,et al.  Comparing data mining and logistic regression for predicting IVF outcome , 2003 .

[9]  David D. Lewis,et al.  Naive (Bayes) at Forty: The Independence Assumption in Information Retrieval , 1998, ECML.

[10]  Pat Langley,et al.  Selection of Relevant Features and Examples in Machine Learning , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[11]  Pedro Larrañaga,et al.  Feature Subset Selection by Bayesian network-based optimization , 2000, Artif. Intell..

[12]  Céline Rouveirol,et al.  Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Machine Learning , 1998 .

[13]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  Supervised and Unsupervised Discretization of Continuous Features , 1995, ICML.

[14]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Case-based reasoning in IVF: prediction and knowledge mining , 1998, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[15]  Thomas G. Dietterich.  Approximate Statistical Tests for Comparing Supervised Classification Learning Algorithms , 1998, Neural Computation.

[16]  Nir Friedman,et al.  Bayesian Network Classifiers , 1997, Machine Learning.

[17]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[18]  C. N. Liu,et al.  Approximating discrete probability distributions with dependence trees , 1968, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[19]  Marco Zaffalon.  The naive credal classifier , 2002 .

[20]  Mehran Sahami,et al.  Learning Limited Dependence Bayesian Classifiers , 1996, KDD.

[21]  Richard O. Duda,et al.  Pattern classification and scene analysis , 1974, A Wiley-Interscience publication.

[22]  M Afnan,et al.  Assessment of early cleaving in vitro fertilized human embryos at the 2-cell stage before transfer improves embryo selection. , 2001, Fertility and sterility.

[23]  C. Ohmann,et al.  Bayes theorem and conditional dependence of symptoms: different models applied to data of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. , 1988, Methods of information in medicine.

[24]  Brian R. Gaines,et al.  Current Trends in Knowledge Acquisition , 1990 .

[25]  Doug Fisher,et al.  Learning from Data: Artificial Intelligence and Statistics V , 1996 .

[26]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Dynamic conditional random fields: factorized probabilistic models for labeling and segmenting sequence data , 2004, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[27]  L. Veeck,et al.  An Atlas of Human Gametes and Conceptuses : An Illustrated Reference for Assisted Reproductive Technology , 1999 .

[28]  L. Nieddu,et al.  Pattern recognition methods in human‐assisted reproduction , 2004 .

[29]  K Petersen,et al.  The impact of the zona pellucida thickness variation of human embryos on pregnancy outcome in relation to suboptimal embryo development. A prospective randomized controlled study. , 2001, Human reproduction.

[30]  R. Saith,et al.  Relationships between the developmental potential of human in-vitro fertilization embryos and features describing the embryo, oocyte and follicle. , 1998, Human reproduction update.

[31]  K Petersen,et al.  Embryo morphology or cleavage stage: how to select the best embryos for transfer after in-vitro fertilization. , 1997, Human reproduction.

[32]  M. Stone.  Cross‐Validatory Choice and Assessment of Statistical Predictions , 1976 .

[33]  Pat Langley,et al.  Induction of Selective Bayesian Classifiers , 1994, UAI.

[34]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[35]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[36]  C. Giorgetti,et al.  Embryo score is a better predictor of pregnancy than the number of transferred embryos or female age. , 2001, Fertility and sterility.

[37]  Ivan Bratko,et al.  ASSISTANT 86: A Knowledge-Elicitation Tool for Sophisticated Users , 1987, EWSL.

[38]  K. Zollner,et al.  The use of a detailed zygote score after IVF/ICSI to obtain good quality blastocysts: the German experience. , 2002, Human reproduction.

[39]  R. Alvero,et al.  The morphology of human pronuclear embryos is positively related to blastocyst development and implantation. , 2000, Human reproduction.

[40]  Igor Kononenko,et al.  Semi-Naive Bayesian Classifier , 1991, EWSL.

[41]  Hiroshi Motoda,et al.  Feature Selection for Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining , 1998, The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science.

[42]  J Cohen,et al.  Human embryo fragmentation in vitro and its implications for pregnancy and implantation. , 1999, Fertility and sterility.

[43]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  Wrappers for Feature Subset Selection , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[44]  J D Fisch,et al.  The Graduated Embryo Score (GES) predicts blastocyst formation and pregnancy rate from cleavage-stage embryos. , 2001, Human reproduction.

[45]  R. Kurzawa,et al.  Methods of embryo scoring in in vitro fertilization. , 2004, Reproductive biology.

[46]  Shehua Shen,et al.  The morphology of 2 pronuclear (2PN) embryos is related to the quality of day 3 embryos , 2002 .

[47]  Michael J. Pazzani,et al.  Searching for Dependencies in Bayesian Classifiers , 1995, AISTATS.