IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,406,187
Granted Patent B2
US 12,406,187 · App. 17/785,311 · Granted Sep 2, 2025

Methods and systems for embryo classification using morpho-kinetic signatures

Inventor: Itay Erlich (Mevo Horon, IL)
Assignee: FAIRTILITY, LTD.
G06N3/084G06F18/24133G06N3/045G06N7/01G06T7/0012G06V10/82G06V20/69G06V20/698G16H50/20A61B17/435A61D19/00G06T2207/30044
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,406,187
App. No.
17/785,311
Granted
Sep 2, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Methods and systems are described for improvements in embryo selection. These improvements are achieved by analyzing a series of images of a developing embryo (e.g., time-lapse images) as opposed to a single static image. For example, due to the difficulty in identifying clear distinctions between morphological states based on static images as well as the unpredictability of morpho-kinetic development of an embryo, the system analyzes the development of an embryo as a whole over a given time frame (e.g., fertilization to blastulation), which provides a better prediction of the viability of a given embryo. The analysis may take the form of a morpho-kinetic signature, which itself may be used for classifying embryos.

Claims (90)

1. A method of classifying morpho-kinetic signatures in embryos, the method comprising:

receiving, using control circuitry, a first morpho-kinetic signature of a first embryo, wherein the first morpho-kinetic signature is a representation of morpho-kinetic events in the first embryo as a function of time;

labeling, using the control circuitry, the first morpho-kinetic signature with a known classification, wherein the known classification corresponds to a preimplantation genetic screening result or a likelihood of viability;

training, using the control circuitry, an artificial neural network to detect the known classification based on the first morpho-kinetic signature;

receiving, using the control circuitry, a second morpho-kinetic signature of a second embryo with an unknown classification, wherein the second morpho-kinetic signature is a representation of morpho-kinetic events in the second embryo as a function of time;

receiving additional information including a preimplantation genetic diagnosis or a preimplantation genetic screening data;

inputting, using the control circuitry, the additional information along with the second morpho-kinetic signature into the trained artificial neural network; and

receiving, using the control circuitry, a prediction from the trained artificial neural network that the second morpho-kinetic signature corresponds to the known classification, wherein when the known classification is the likelihood of viability that the prediction comprises a prediction score corresponding to the likelihood of viability.

2. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

receiving a first output from an initial artificial neural network indicating that the first embryo has a first classification at a first time point;

receiving a second output from the initial artificial neural network indicating the first embryo has a second classification at a second time point; and

aggregating the first output and the second output to generate the first morpho-kinetic signature.

3. The method of claim 2 , further comprising:

receiving an annotated image of a training data embryo, wherein the annotated image has a known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature in the annotated image;

training the initial artificial neural network to classify images with the known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature in the first classification;

receiving a first image of the first embryo;

inputting the first image into the initial artificial neural network; and

receiving, using the control circuitry, the first output from the initial artificial neural network indicating that the first image includes the known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature.

4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

receiving known implantation data indicating that the first embryo has a first classification at a first time point;

generating a bootstrap label based on the known implantation data, wherein the bootstrap label corresponds to a second classification at a second time point; and

aggregating the first classification and the second classification to generate the first morpho-kinetic signature.

5. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

generating the first morpho-kinetic signature of the first embryo based on known implantation data; and

determining the known classification for the first embryo based on a comparison of the first morpho-kinetic signature and a third morpho-kinetic signature, wherein the third morpho-kinetic signature corresponds to a third embryo that was implanted with the first embryo, and wherein the first embryo was viable and the third embryo was not viable.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event is an appearance of a morphological features in the first embryo and a rate of development for the morphological feature.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event is a cell split, a development of a morula, a start of blastulation, a pronuclei appearance, or a pronuclei fading.

8. The method of claim 1 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event is an achievement of a Garner expansion degree.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event corresponds to a fragmentation percent at two cells, a fragmentation percent at four cells, a fragmentation percent at eight cells, blastomers symmetry at two cells, blastomers symmetry at four cells, blastomers symmetry at eight cells, inner cell mass quality, trophectoderm quality, cavity shape, cavity area, cavity percentage, and/or zona pellucida thickness.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event includes a first appearance of a morphological feature among other morphological features and a clear separation of the morphological feature from the other morphological features.

11. The method of claim 1 , wherein each morpho-kinetic event of the morpho-kinetic events is represented as a float value in a vector.

12. The method of claim 1 , wherein the first morpho-kinetic signature is based on a series of time-lapse images of the morpho-kinetic events in the first embryo.

13. A system for classifying morpho-kinetic signatures in embryos, the system comprising:

memory configured to store an artificial neural network; and

control circuitry configured to:

receive a first morpho-kinetic signature of a first embryo, wherein the first morpho-kinetic signature is a representation of morpho-kinetic events in the first embryo as a function of time;

label the first morpho-kinetic signature with a known classification, wherein the known classification corresponds to a preimplantation genetic screening result or a likelihood of viability;

train the artificial neural network to detect the known classification based on the first morpho-kinetic signature;

receive a second morpho-kinetic signature of a second embryo with an unknown classification, wherein the second morpho-kinetic signature is a representation of morpho-kinetic events in the second embryo as a function of time;

receiving additional information including a preimplantation genetic diagnosis or a preimplantation genetic screening data;

input the additional information along with the second morpho-kinetic signature into the trained artificial neural network; and

receive a prediction from the trained artificial neural network that the second morpho-kinetic signature corresponds to the known classification, wherein when the known classification is the likelihood of viability that the prediction comprises a prediction score corresponding to the likelihood of viability.

14. The system of claim 13 , the control circuitry further configured to:

receive a first output from an initial artificial neural network indicating that the first embryo has a first classification at a first time point;

receive a second output from the initial artificial neural network indicating the first embryo has a second classification at a second time point; and

aggregate the first output and the second output to generate the first morpho-kinetic signature.

15. The system of claim 14 , the control circuitry further configured to:

receive an annotated image of a training data embryo, wherein the annotated image has a known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature in the annotated image;

train the initial artificial neural network to classify images with the known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature in the first classification;

receive a first image of the first embryo;

input the first image into the initial artificial neural network; and

receive, using the control circuitry, the first output from the initial artificial neural network indicating that the first image includes the known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature.

16. The system of claim 13 , the control circuitry further configured to:

receive known implantation data indicating that the first embryo has a first classification at a first time point;

generate a bootstrap label based on the known implantation data, wherein the bootstrap label corresponds to a second classification at a second time point; and

aggregate the first classification and the second classification to generate the first morpho-kinetic signature.

17. The system of claim 13 , the control circuitry further configured to:

generate the first morpho-kinetic signature of the first embryo based on known implantation data; and

determine the known classification for the first embryo based on a comparison of the first morpho-kinetic signature and a third morpho-kinetic signature, wherein the third morpho-kinetic signature corresponds to a third embryo that was implanted with the first embryo, and wherein the first embryo was viable and the third embryo was not viable.

18. The system of claim 13 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event is an appearance of a morphological features in the first embryo and a rate of development for the morphological feature.

19. The system of claim 13 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event includes a first appearance of a morphological feature among other morphological features and a clear separation of the morphological feature from the other morphological features.

20. The system of claim 13 , wherein the first morpho-kinetic signature is based on a series of time-lapse images of the morpho-kinetic events in the first embryo.

21. A non-transitory computer-readable medium for classifying morpho-kinetic signatures in embryos comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause operations comprising:

receiving a first morpho-kinetic signature of a first embryo, wherein the first morpho-kinetic signature is a representation of morpho-kinetic events in the first embryo as a function of time;

labeling the first morpho-kinetic signature with a known classification, wherein the known classification corresponds to a preimplantation genetic screening result or a likelihood of viability;

training an artificial neural network to detect the known classification based on the first morpho-kinetic signature;

receiving a second morpho-kinetic signature of a second embryo with an unknown classification, wherein the second morpho-kinetic signature is a representation of morpho-kinetic events in the second embryo as a function of time;

receiving additional information including a preimplantation genetic diagnosis or a preimplantation genetic screening data;

inputting the additional information along with the second morpho-kinetic signature into the trained artificial neural network; and

receiving a prediction from the trained artificial neural network that the second morpho-kinetic signature corresponds to the known classification, wherein when the known classification is the likelihood of viability that the prediction comprises a prediction score corresponding to the likelihood of viability.

22. The computer-readable medium of claim 21 , the operations further comprising:

receiving a first output from an initial artificial neural network indicating that the first embryo has a first classification at a first time point;

receiving a second output from the initial artificial neural network indicating the first embryo has a second classification at a second time point; and

aggregating the first output and the second output to generate the first morpho-kinetic signature.

23. The computer-readable medium of claim 22 , the operations further comprising:

receiving an annotated image of a training data embryo, wherein the annotated image has a known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature in the annotated image;

training the initial artificial neural network to classify images with the known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature in the first classification;

receiving a first image of the first embryo;

inputting the first image into the initial artificial neural network; and

receiving, using the control circuitry, the first output from the initial artificial neural network indicating that the first image includes the known morphological or morpho-kinetic feature.

24. The computer-readable medium of claim 21 , the operations further comprising:

receiving known implantation data indicating that the first embryo has a first classification at a first time point;

generating a bootstrap label based on the known implantation data, wherein the bootstrap label corresponds to a second classification at a second time point; and

aggregating the first classification and the second classification to generate the first morpho-kinetic signature.

25. The computer-readable medium of claim 21 , the operations further comprising:

generating the first morpho-kinetic signature of the first embryo based on known implantation data; and

determining the known classification for the first embryo based on a comparison of the first morpho-kinetic signature and a third morpho-kinetic signature, wherein the third morpho-kinetic signature corresponds to a third embryo that was implanted with the first embryo, and wherein the first embryo was viable and the third embryo was not viable.

26. The computer-readable medium of claim 21 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event is an appearance of a morphological features in the first embryo and a rate of development for the morphological feature.

27. The computer-readable medium of claim 21 , wherein a morpho-kinetic event includes a first appearance of a morphological feature among other morphological features and a clear separation of the morphological feature from the other morphological features.

28. The computer-readable medium of claim 21 , wherein the first morpho-kinetic signature is based on a series of time-lapse images of the morpho-kinetic events in the first embryo.

Assignments (2)
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Aug 3, 2023
From: FAIRTILITY LTD
To: KREOS CAPITAL VII AGGREGATOR SCSP
Reel/Frame 064476/0986 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 14, 2022
From: ERLICH, ITAY
To: FAIRTILITY LTD.
Reel/Frame 060196/0101 →
Continuity (3)
Provisional Application 63036612 · Jun 9, 2020
Provisional Application 62963795 · Jan 21, 2020
Related Publication 20230028645A1 · Jan 26, 2023
References Cited (23)
US 10510143B1 · Zhou et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10942170B2 · Tan · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20100331611A1 · Konje · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20140087415A1 · Ramsing et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140128667A1 · Ramsing · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140220618A1 · Wirka et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140349334A1 · Chavez · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20150268227A1 · Tan · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160078275A1 · Wang · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20200320708A1 · Ma et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210249135A1 · Rimestad · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210390697A1 · Marder Gilboa · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220392062A1 · Chavez Badiola · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230028645A1 · Erlich · 2023 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2020001914A1 · 2020 [cited by examiner]
WO 2020058931A1 · 2020 [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in PCT Patent Application No. PCT/IB2021/050420, dated May 21, 2021. [cited by applicant]
Yoav, Kan-Tor et al.: “Automated Evaluation of Human Embryo Blastulation and Implantation Potential using Deep-Learning”, Advanced Intelligent Systems, Jul. 1, 2020 (Jul. 1, 2020), vol. 2, Iss. 10, pp. 1-12. [cited by applicant]
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion issued in PCT Patent Application No. PCT/IB/050420, dated Aug. 4, 2022. [cited by applicant]
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion issued in PCT Patent Application No. PCT/IB/050421, dated Aug. 4, 2022. [cited by applicant]
Lau et al. 2019, “Embryo staging with weakly-supervised region selection and dynamically-decoded predictions,” https://doi.org/ 10.48550/arXiv.1904.04419. [cited by applicant]
Silva-Rodrfguez et al. 2019, “Predicting the Success of Blastocyst Implantation from Morphokinetic Parameters Estimated through CNNs and Sum of Absolute Differences,” 2019 27th European Signal Processing Conference (EU … [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action issued in related U.S. Appl. No. 17/786,878, dated Nov. 4, 2024. [cited by applicant]