Views of adults with 22q11 deletion syndrome on reproductive choices

Should genes for non-syndromic hearing loss be included in reproductive genetic carrier screening: Views of people with a personal or family experience of deafness

Many commercial reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) panels include genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL), however little is known about the general acceptability of their inclusion. Although some couples wish to avoid having a deaf child, there are effective interventions and supports available for deafness, and no consensus on whether it is appropriate to reproductively screen NSHL genes. This study explored views of people with personal experience of deafness regarding carrier screening for genes associated with NSHL. We interviewed 27 participants; 14 who identified as deaf and 13 hearing parents of a deaf child. Thematic analysis was undertaken on transcripts of interviews. The findings reveal the complexity of attitudes within these groups. Some vacillated between the wish to support prospective parents' reproductive autonomy and concerns about potential harms, especially the expression of negative messages about deafness and the potential loss of acceptance in society. While some participants felt carrier screening could help prospective parents to prepare for a deaf child, there was little support for reproductive screening and termination of pregnancy. Participants emphasized the need for accurate information about the lived experience of deafness. The majority felt deafness is not as severe as other conditions included in RGCS, and most do not consider deafness as a disability. People with personal experience of deafness have diverse attitudes towards RGCS for deafness informed by their own identify and experience, and many have concerns about how it should be discussed and implemented in a population wide RGCS program.

Late-Onset 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome With Mild Cardiac Phenotype: A Unique Adult Presentation Diagnosed at 45 Years of Age

This case report presents a detailed exploration of an adult-onset 22q11 deletion syndrome, a rare genetic disorder typically diagnosed in children. The report highlights the diagnostic challenges posed by this atypical presentation, emphasizing the need for clinicians to consider such conditions in differential diagnoses, especially in adults. This case is remarkable for its late onset and mild symptoms, which significantly deviated from the common pediatric presentation, including hypocalcemia due to hypoparathyroidism and a fenestrated atrial septal defect without significant hemodynamic implications. The importance of recognizing the broad phenotypic variability of the syndrome and the implications for clinical practice are discussed, providing insights into the genetic and phenotypic diversity of the condition. In conclusion, this case illuminates the diverse clinical spectrum of adult-onset 22q11 deletion syndrome, emphasizing its relevance to clinical practice.

Reproductive Outcomes in Adults with 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

The 22q11.2 microdeletion and its associated conditions could affect reproductive outcomes but there is limited information on this important area. We investigated reproductive outcomes in a sample of 368 adults with typical 22q11.2 deletions (median age 32.8, range 17.9–76.3 years; 195 females), and without moderate-severe intellectual disability, who were followed prospectively. We examined all reproductive outcomes and possible effects of diagnosis as a transmitting parent on these outcomes. We used logistic regression to investigate factors relevant to reproductive fitness (liveborn offspring). There were 63 (17.1%) individuals with 157 pregnancy outcomes, 94 (60.3%) of which involved live births. Amongst the remainder involving a form of loss, were seven (5.77%) stillbirths, significantly greater than population norms (p < 0.0001). For 35 (55.6%) individuals, diagnosis of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) followed diagnosis of an offspring, with disproportionately fewer individuals had major congenital heart disease (CHD) in that transmitting parent subgroup. The regression model indicated that major CHD, in addition to previously identified factors, was a significant independent predictor of reduced reproductive fitness. There was evidence of persisting diagnostic delay and limited prenatal genetic testing. The findings indicate that pregnancy loss is an important health issue for adults with 22q11.2DS. CHD and/or its absence is a factor to consider in reproductive outcome research. Further studies are warranted to better appreciate factors that may contribute to reproductive outcomes, including technological advances. The results suggest the need for ongoing efforts to provide optimal education and supports to individuals with 22q11.2DS, and their clinicians, around reproductive issues and early diagnosis.

An examination of adaptive behavior and functional outcomes in adults with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: A parental perspective

22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11DS) is a genetic syndrome caused by a chromosomal microdeletion. It affects approximately 1 in 850-992 pregnancies, and its clinical manifestations include congenital heart disease, gastrointestinal symptoms, and psychiatric illnesses. The study examined the relationship between adaptive behavior and functional outcomes, educational attainment, employment, and independent living, and whether age, gender, intellectual disability, presence of psychiatric disorder, and close friendships could predict levels of adaptive behavior. Parents of adults with 22q11DS (n = 101; 48 male and 54 female) completed the Waisman Activities of Daily Living Scale, demographic details, and questions elicited employment, education, and relationships status. Analysis conducted in SPSS, included descriptive statistics, measures of association, Analysis of Variance, logistic and linear regressions. Differences in levels of overall adaptive behavior were found regarding employment and living status, but not in educational attainment. Having close friendships was associated with adaptive behavior as well as the likelihood of living independently. Further research is needed, ideally using prospective designs and purposive sampling strategies. This needs to examine how social and communication deficits impact relationship building and how they are affected by the clinical manifestations of 22q11DS. It also needs to focus on how different social structures interface with levels of adaptive behavior.

What is a 'serious' genetic condition? The perceptions of people living with genetic conditions

Despite no consensus on the definition of ‘seriousness’, the concept is regularly used in policy and practice contexts to categorise conditions, determine access to genetic technologies and uses of selective pregnancy termination. Whilst attempts have been made to create taxonomies of genetic condition seriousness to inform clinical and policy decision-making, these have often relied on condition appraisals made by health and genetics professionals. The views of people with genetic conditions have been largely under-represented. This study explores the concept of seriousness through the perspectives of people with a range of ‘clinically serious’ conditions (fragile X conditions, spinal muscular atrophy, cystic fibrosis, haemophilia, thalassaemia). Attitudes towards suffering, quality of life (QoL) and selective pregnancy termination were elucidated from 45 in-depth qualitative interviews and 469 postal/online surveys. The majority of participants reported good health/wellbeing, and the capacity for good QoL, despite experiencing suffering with their condition. Notably, participants with later-onset conditions held more negative views of their health and QoL, and were more likely to view their condition as an illness, than those with early-onset conditions. These participants were more likely to see their condition as part of their identity. Whilst most participants supported prenatal screening, there was little support for selective termination. Moreover, social environment emerged as a critical mediator of the experience of the condition. The complex and rich insights of people living with genetic conditions might usefully be incorporated into future genetic taxonomies of ‘seriousness’ to ensure they more accurately reflect the lived reality of those with genetic conditions.

Comparison of Patients' Ethical Perspectives of Preimplantation Embryo Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT-A) vs. Monogenic Disorders (PGT-M)

What are the ethical perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing in patients using/considering PGT-A compared to those using/considering PGT-M? A 17-item questionnaire administered online was used to assess ethical perspectives in US patients who recently used/considered PGT-A (n=80) vs. those who used/considered PGT-M (n=72). Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square, and Fisher exact tests were conducted with STATA. Most PGT-A and PGT-M users/considerers supported using PGT to screen for diseases fatal in childhood (86-89%) and those causing lifelong disabilities (76-79%) and opposed using PGT to screen for non-medical physical (80-87%) or intellectual traits (74-86%). Both groups agreed that PGT aids in parental decision-making, although some expressed concern over its potential to lead to unforeseen consequences for society and the PGT offspring. More PGT-M than PGT-A users/considerers opposed implanting genetically abnormal embryos when requested by parents (29% PGT-A vs. 56% PGT-M, p = 0.007). For embryo disposition, more PGT-A users/considerers favored freezing (95% PGTA vs. 82% PGT-M, p = 0.018) or donating genetically normal embryos to research (73% PGT-A vs. 57% PGT-M, p = 0.044), while more PGT-M users/considerers supported donating embryos with known genetic abnormalities to research (56% PGT-A vs. 81% PGT-M, p = 0.001). Regardless of the reason for using PGT, users generally agreed on the acceptable and unacceptable uses for it, as well as the potential societal impact. PGT-M users/considerers expressed more opposition than PGT-A users/considerers to implanting embryos with a genetic alteration when requested by the parents.

Attitudes toward population screening among people living with fragile X syndrome in the UK: 'I wouldn't wish him away, I'd just wish his fragile X syndrome away'

In an age of expanded genetic screening, fragile X syndrome is increasingly considered a candidate condition, given its prevalence, the absence of curative interventions, and its impact on families. However, relatively little research has explored the views of families and people living with fragile X syndrome toward population screening. This study reports on in-depth interviews with 19 participants: 3 with people diagnosed with a fragile X condition (fragile X syndrome = 2, FXTAS = 1) and 16 people with fragile X syndrome in their family (11 parents, 2 grandparents, 1 spouse, 1 sibling, and 1 aunt) living in the UK. This study reveals the complexity of attitudes within this group and the existence of genuine ambivalence toward different population screening programs. While the overwhelming majority believed that preconception and newborn genetic screening should be made available to the general public, the notion of prenatal screening was far more controversial, with only five participants expressing support for such a program. Expressivist concerns were highlighted equally both by those who supported prenatal screening, as by also those who did not. Participants who supported prenatal screening drew clear distinctions between people with fragile X syndrome and the condition itself, in order to neutralize expressivist concerns and existential threat. However, for others, this division was challenging to maintain. Impairment effects associated with fragile X syndrome, more specifically, its implications for behavior, intellect, and personality, made it harder for some participants to conceptually separate the person from their condition. This study concludes that screening remains a complex issue for families living with genetic conditions and that expressivist concerns affect, and are managed by, families living with different types of disability in contrasting ways. Screening for conditions that affect personality, behavior, and intellect produces unique iterations of expressivism, identity, and stigmatization that families produce specific, and creative, strategies to navigate.