Genetic counselling and ethical issues with chromosome microarray analysis in prenatal testing

The effect of opting-in versus opting-out forming on the rate of reported variants of questionable significance in prenatal microarray

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of patient-selected opt-in versus opt-out option on the rate of reported variants of uncertain clinical significance (VOUS) and high-frequency low-penetrant (HFLP) findings in prenatal microarray testing.

METHODS

A standard microarray consent form in Israel includes a requirement to note patient choice to be or not to be informed about the presence of VOUS and HFLP variants. The original form was designed as an opting-out method, in which the women had to actively mark if they did not want to be informed about questionable findings. In the authors' Genetic Institute, the form was changed for an opting-in option in October 2019. In this study we have compared the rates of reported VOUS and HFLP variants between the opt-in and opt-out periods.

RESULTS

Of the 1014 prenatal CMA tests, 590 (58.2%) were performed in the opt-out period. A significant decrease in the rate of women requesting to be informed of VOUS findings was noted (66.8% in opt-out period vs 34.0% in opt-in period), yielding a relative risk (RR) of 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.53). Rate of women preferring to be informed of HFLP variants decreased from 75.3% to 48.1% (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.45-0.60).

DISCUSSION

We present a simple and effective method to decrease the rate of reported findings of questionable significance in the prenatal setting. These results are important not only for microarray results, but also for next-generation sequencing techniques, such as whole exome or genome sequencing.

High-resolution PGT-A results in incidental identification of patients with small pathogenic copy number variants

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate whether a high-throughput high-resolution PGT-A method can detect copy number variants (CNVs) that could have clinical implications for patients and their embryos.

METHODS

A prospective analysis of PGT-A cases was conducted using a high-resolution SNP microarray platform with over 820,000 probes. Cases where multiple embryos possessed the same segmental imbalance were identified, and preliminary PGT-A reports were issued recommending either parental microarray or conventional karyotyping to identify CNVs or translocations.

RESULTS

Analysis of 6080 sequential PGT-A cases led to identification of 41 cases in which incidental findings were observed (0.7%) and parental testing was recommended. All cases, in which parental studies were completed, confirmed the original PGT-A incidental findings. In 2 of the cases, parental studies indicated a pathogenic variant with clinical implications for the associated embryos. In one of these cases, the patient was identified as a carrier of a duplication in chromosome 15q11.2:q11.2 (SNRPN + +), which is associated with autism spectrum disorder. In the second case, the patient was heterozygous positive for an interstitial deletion of 3p26.1:p26.3, which is associated with 3p deletion syndrome and had clinical implications for the patient and associated embryos. In each case, parental studies were concordant with PGT-A findings and revealed the presence of an otherwise unknown CNV.

CONCLUSION

High-throughput high-resolution SNP array-based PGT-A has the ability to detect previously unknown and clinically significant parental deletions, duplications, and translocations. The use of cost-effective SNP array-based PGT-A methods may improve the effectiveness of PGT by identifying and preventing previously unknown pathogenic CNVs in children born to patients seeking in vitro fertilization.

Challenges and Pragmatic Solutions in Pre-Test and Post-Test Genetic Counseling for Prenatal Exome Sequencing

The yield of genetic prenatal diagnosis has been notably improved by introducing whole genome chromosomal microarray (CMA) and prenatal exome sequencing (pES). However, together with increased numbers of diagnoses made, the need to manage challenging findings such as variants of unknown significance (VUS) and incidental findings (IF) also increased. We have summarized the current guidelines and recommendations and we have shown current solutions used in our tertiary center in the Netherlands. We discuss four of the most common clinical situations: fetus with normal pES results, fetus with a pathogenic finding explaining the fetal phenotype, fetus with a variant of uncertain clinical significance fitting the phenotype and fetus with a variant leading to an incidental diagnosis. Additionally, we reflect on solutions in order to facilitate genetic counseling in an NGS-era.

Do reproductive history and information given through genetic counselling influence patients' decisions on mosaic embryo transfer?

OBJECTIVE

To assess patients' and embryonic characteristics that may have an influence on the decision to transfer a mosaic embryo.

METHOD

Single centre retrospective cohort study including 1247 PGT-A cycles. Demographic and clinical factors associated with a decision to transfer a mosaic embryo were studied. Female age, number of previous cycles, previous availability of euploid embryos, history of miscarriages and parity as well as percentage of mosaicism, type of anomaly and chromosome risk were studied in relation to decision-making. Outcomes after mosaic embryo transfer were assessed.

RESULTS

To date, in 7.9% of cycles (99/1247), patients have had to make a decision on the fate of their mosaic embryos. In 23.2% of cycles (23/99), patients decided to transfer. In most cases (79.8%; 79/99), patients underwent genetic counselling before the decision. None of the variables analysed were associated with the patients' decision, although parity and the high-degree mosaicism (>50%) seemed to be negatively associated with the decision to transfer (18.2% vs. 29.8%, p = 0.294; 10% vs. 32.2%, p = 0.052).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither reproductive history nor information on mosaic embryo characteristics through counselling seems to be determinative for patients when deciding to transfer a mosaic embryo. Promising and increasing data on clinical outcomes after mosaic embryo transfer will be of utmost importance to soften risk perception regarding mosaic embryos and give a better, simplified and more evidence-based counselling.

Molecular Approaches in Fetal Malformations, Dynamic Anomalies and Soft Markers: Diagnostic Rates and Challenges-Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

Fetal malformations occur in 2-3% of pregnancies. They require invasive procedures for cytogenetics and molecular testing. "Structural anomalies" include non-transient anatomic alterations. "Soft markers" are often transient minor ultrasound findings. Anomalies not fitting these definitions are categorized as "dynamic". This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic yield and the rates of variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) in fetuses undergoing molecular testing (chromosomal microarray (CMA), exome sequencing (ES), genome sequencing (WGS)) due to ultrasound findings. The CMA diagnostic yield was 2.15% in single soft markers (vs. 0.79% baseline risk), 3.44% in multiple soft markers, 3.66% in single structural anomalies and 8.57% in multiple structural anomalies. Rates for specific subcategories vary significantly. ES showed a diagnostic rate of 19.47%, reaching 27.47% in multiple structural anomalies. WGS data did not allow meta-analysis. In fetal structural anomalies, CMA is a first-tier test, but should be integrated with karyotype and parental segregations. In this class of fetuses, ES presents a very high incremental yield, with a significant VUSs burden, so we encourage its use in selected cases. Soft markers present heterogeneous CMA results from each other, some of them with risks comparable to structural anomalies, and would benefit from molecular analysis. The diagnostic rate of multiple soft markers poses a solid indication to CMA.

Dealing with uncertain results from chromosomal microarray and exome sequencing in the prenatal setting: An international cross-sectional study with healthcare professionals

Objectives

To conduct qualitative interviews with healthcare providers working in different countries to understand their experiences of dealing with uncertain results from prenatal chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) and exome sequencing (ES).

Methods

Semi‐structured interviews with 31 healthcare providers who report or return prenatal CMA and/or ES results (clinicians, genetic counsellors and clinical scientists) in six countries with differing healthcare systems; Australia (4), Denmark (5), Netherlands (6), Singapore (4), Sweden (6) and United Kingdom (6). The topic guide explored the main sources of uncertainty and their management.

Results

There was variation in reporting practices both between and across countries for variants of uncertain significance, however, there was broad agreement on reporting practices for incidental findings. There was also variation in who decides what results are reported (clinical scientists or clinicians). Technical limitations and lack of knowledge (to classify variants and of prenatal phenotypes) were significant challenges, as were turnaround times and lack of guidelines.

Conclusion

Health professionals around the globe are dealing with similar sources of uncertainty, but managing them in different ways, Continued dialogue with international colleagues on ways of managing uncertain results is important to compare and contrast the benefits and limitations of the different approaches.

What's already known about this topic?

Chromosome microarray analysis and exome sequencing have increased diagnostic yield over karyotyping but have increased the incidence of uncertain results.

What does this study add?

Our findings highlight variation in reporting practices both between and across countries for variants of uncertain significance, although there is broad agreement on reporting practices for incidental findings.

International guidelines may help to standardise how we define and categorise variants, however, global uniformity on the management of uncertain results may not be a realistic or desirable goal.

Couples experiences of receiving uncertain results following prenatal microarray or exome sequencing: A mixed-methods systematic review

Background

Tests in pregnancy such as chromosomal microarray analysis and exome sequencing are increasing diagnostic yield for fetal structural anomalies, but have greater potential to result in uncertain findings. This systematic review investigated the experiences of prospective parents about receiving uncertain results from these tests.

Methods

A systematic search of three electronic databases was conducted. Data extraction was performed for studies that met the eligibility and quality criteria. Results were synthesised following the principles of thematic analysis.

Results

Fourteen studies (10 qualitative, 4 quantitative) were included. Findings were grouped into three overarching themes. Sources of uncertainty included the testing procedure, the diagnosis and prognosis, and health professionals' own uncertainty. The clinical impact of the uncertainty included parents struggling to make clinical decisions with the information available, the emotional impact included decisional‐regret, shock, worry and feeling overwhelmed. To manage the uncertainty, parents sought support from healthcare professionals, friends, family, the internet and other parents as well as remaining hopeful.

Conclusions

Prospective parents experience a myriad of uncertainties in the prenatal setting, which must be handled sensitively. Future research should explore optimal ways of managing uncertainty to minimise harm. Recommendations are made for discussing uncertainty during pre‐ and post‐test counseling.

Detection of copy number variants with chromosomal microarray in 10 377 pregnancies at a single laboratory

Introduction

Invasive prenatal testing with chromosomal microarray analysis may be a relevant option for all pregnant women, but there is only moderate‐quality evidence for such an offer. We intended to study the prevalence of copy number variants (CNVs) in prenatal samples using a single SNP‐array platform stratified by indication.

Material and methods

A cross‐sectional study was performed based on a cohort. From January 2015 to December 2017, a total of 10 377 prenatal samples were received for prenatal single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)‐array in the laboratory of the Genetics Generation Advancement Corporation. Indications for chromosomal microarray analysis studies included the confirmation of an abnormal karyotype, ultrasound abnormalities, advanced maternal age and parental anxiety. CNVs and region of homozygosity identified by the SNP‐array were analyzed.

Results

Of 10 377 cases, 689 had ultrasound abnormalities and 9688 were ascertained to have other indications. The overall prevalence of CNVs was 2.1% (n = 223/10 377, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9‐2.4), but the prevalence was 4.4% (95% CI 3.0‐6.1) for cases referred with abnormal ultrasound findings and 2.0% (95% CI 1.7‐2.3) for other indications. Of the 223 CNVs detected, 42/10 377 were pathogenic (0.4%, 95% CI 0.3‐0.6), 84 were susceptibility CNV (0.8%, 95% CI 0.6‐1.0) and 97 were variants of uncertain significance (0.9%, 95% CI 0.8‐1.1). Using an SNP‐based platform allowed for the detection of paternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 14 in a fetus with ultrasound abnormality.

Conclusions

With an indication of advanced maternal age but normal ultrasound scans, the prevalence of pathogenic CNVs was 0.4% and that of susceptibility CNV 0.7%. As CNVs are independent of maternal age, the prevalence is likely the same for younger women. Thus, this study provides further evidence that chromosomal microarray analysis should be available for all women who wish to receive diagnostic testing, as this risk is above the cut‐off of 1:300 for Down syndrome, leading to the suggestion of invasive testing. A chromosomal microarray analysis based on SNP‐array platform is preferable, as it can also detect uniparental disomy in addition to copy number variants.

Maternity health care professionals' views and experiences of fetal genomic uncertainty: A review

The field of prenatal screening and diagnosis for fetal anomalies has been marked by a rapid succession of technological advances, including most notably, chromosomal microarray analysis, and next generation sequencing. Despite the diagnostic advantages of these technologies, their incorporation into prenatal testing has created additional challenges of revealing genomic variants of unknown or uncertain significance, and secondary findings. While detailed posttest counseling about uncertain variants is best performed by medical geneticists, many of the screening and diagnostic tests that lead to this information are actually ordered by general maternity health care professionals (HCPs), such as obstetricians, midwives, and family physicians. Maternity HCPs support pregnant women through to the conclusion of their pregnancy and the postpartum period, and thus are close observers of the psychosocial impart of fetal genomic uncertainty on women and their families. While there have been many studies exploring the handling of genomic uncertainty by genetics HCPs, there has been relatively less attention paid to maternity HCPs without speciality training in genetics. This review explores the current literature surrounding nongenetic maternity HCPs' views and experiences of genomic uncertainty and returning uncertain results in the prenatal setting.

Dispelling Myths about Antenatal TAPS: A Call for Action for Routine MCA-PSV Doppler Screening in the United States

In the United States, routine middle cerebral artery peak systolic velocity (MCA-PSV) Doppler screening for the detection of antenatal twin anemia-polycythemia sequence (TAPS) is not recommended. The current and only national clinical guideline from the highly-influential Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine states that, “There is no evidence that monitoring for TAPS with MCA PSV Doppler at any time, including > 26 weeks, improves outcomes, so that this additional screening cannot be recommended at this time.” We argue this recommendation has disproportionate influence on patients and the care they are offered and receive. We use current evidence to highlight and dispel pervasive myths surrounding antenatal TAPS and the value of routine MCA-PSV screening. An ethical framework that illustrates the importance of giving patients the opportunity for routine screening is presented. Findings demonstrate that: (1) both spontaneous and post-laser TAPS is a serious, potentially life-threatening complication, (2) treatment for TAPS is effective and includes expectant management, intrauterine transfusion (IUT), or surgery, (3) and routine MCA-PSV, which has satisfactory diagnostic accuracy, is currently the only way to provide early detection of TAPS. We conclude that routine TAPS screening is a medically proven valuable resource that should be offered to patients in need and to the clinicians who are trying to act toward their benefit.

CGH analysis in Colombian patients: findings of 1374 arrays in a seven-year study

Background

Array-based comparative genome hybridization (array CGH) is a first-line test used in the genetic evaluation of individuals with multiple anomalies, developmental delays, and cognitive deficits. In this study, we analyzed clinical indications and findings of array CGH tests of Colombian individuals forwarded to a reference laboratory over a period of seven years in order to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the test in our population.

Results

The results of 1374 array CGH analyses of Colombian individuals were referred to the Andean Reference Institute in Colombia (Instituto de Referencia Andino) during a 7-year period (2009–2015). Chromosomal imbalances were detected in 488 cases (35%), whereas 121 cases were classified as nonpathogenic variants, 65 cases (4.7%) were classified as variants of uncertain significance, and 302 cases (22%) were classified as abnormal or pathogenic. The most common findings in the abnormal and/or pathogenic set were deletions, followed by duplications and complex rearrangements. Variants in the carrier status of autosomal recessive diseases were identified as incidental findings in 29 subjects (2%).

Conclusions

Clinical indications preceding the referral of aCGH in Colombian patients are not standardized and result in unexpected pathogenic variants as well as secondary findings that need careful interpretation. Development of local infrastructure will probably improve the communication between all stakeholders, to ensure accurate clinical diagnoses.

Detection of copy number variants using chromosomal microarray analysis for the prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart defects with normal karyotype

BACKGROUND

With the increasing availability of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for congenital heart defect (CHD), genetic testing now faces new challenges due to results with uncertain clinical impact. Studies are needed to better define the penetrance of genetic variants. The aim of the study was to examine the association between CMA and CHDs in fetuses with normal karyotype.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 190 fetuses with normal karyotype that underwent CMA after a diagnosis of CHD by fetal ultrasound. Invasive prenatal diagnosis was performed between January 2015 and December 2016 at the first affiliated hospital of Air Force Medical University.

RESULTS

Chromosomal microarray analysis detected pathogenic copy number variants (pCNVs) in 13/190 (6.84%) fetuses, likely pCNVs in 5/190 (2.63%), and variants of unknown significance (VOUS) in 14/190 (7.37%). Among those with pCNVs, none (0%) yielded a normal live birth. Among those with likely pCNVs, 2/5 (40.0%) yielded a live birth. Among the fetuses with VOUS, 10/14 (71.5%) yielded a live birth.

CONCLUSION

These results highlight the usefulness of CMA for prenatal genetic diagnosis of fetuses with CHDs and normal karyotype. In fetuses with CHD, the application of CMA could increase the detection rate of pCNVs causing CHDs. In this study, some VOUS were likely pathogenic, but additional studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Application of chromosomal microarray to investigate genetic causes of isolated fetal growth restriction

Background

Application of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) to investigate the genetic characteristics of fetal growth restriction (FGR) without ultrasonic structural anomalies at 18–32 weeks.

Methods

This study includes singleton fetuses with the estimated fetal weight (EFW) using the formula of Hadlock C below the 10th percentile for gestational age. FGRs without structural anomalies were selected, and the ones at high risk of noninvasive prenatal testing for trisomy 13, 18 and 21 would be excluded. The cases were divided into two groups: early-onset group (< 24^+ 0 weeks) and late-onset group (24–33 weeks). All patients were offered invasive prenatal testing with CMA and karyotype analysis.

Results

CMA detected 10 pathogenic copy number variants and 2 variant of uncertain significance case. CMA has a 5.5% (7/127) incremental yield of pathogenic chromosomal abnormalities over karyotyping. The positive detected rate was 9.6% (5/52) in early-onset group and 9.3% (7/75) in late-onset group respectively.

Conclusions

When FGR without structural anomaly is diagnosed before 33 weeks, an invasive prenatal procedure is strongly recommended. CMA can identify a 5.5% (7/127) incremental detection rate of pathogenic chromosomal abnormalities, which would impact clinical management for FGR.

Offering pregnant women different levels of genetic information from prenatal chromosome microarray: a prospective study

This study aimed to examine the choice pregnant women make about the amount of fetal genetic information they want from chromosome microarray. Women having invasive prenatal testing in the absence of fetal structural abnormality were recruited in Victoria, Australia. A decision aid for women described 'targeted' analysis as reporting only copy number variants implicated in a highly penetrant and well-described phenotype and 'extended' as additionally reporting variants of uncertain or unknown significance. Participant's choice and demographics were collected by survey before chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis; psychological data were also collected then and again about 10 days after receiving results. High-resolution single-nucleotide polymorphism array analysis was performed, and a clinical review committee assessed variants for reporting before returning results to participants. Sixty-six participants (59.5%) chose extended analysis and 45 (40.5%) targeted. Choosing extended information was associated with (1) indication for prenatal diagnosis: maternal age alone (adjusted odds ratio (adjOR) 9.6, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4-66.0, p= 0.02), or 'other' indication (adjOR 7.1, 95% CI: 1.5-33.1, p= 0.01)); (2) >12 months to conceive (adjOR 4.1, 95% CI: 1.0-17.7, p= 0.05); and (3) Asian background (adjOR 4.67, 95% CI: 1.0-21.0, p= 0.04). No adverse psychological impact occurred in either group. We conclude that offering pregnant women different levels of fetal genetic analysis is warranted, alongside decision support.

Ethical considerations in prenatal testing: Genomic testing and medical uncertainty

Prenatal diagnostic testing has recently progressed from karyotype to routinely available chromosomal microarray, and the potential for fetal whole exome sequencing, both through invasive diagnostic testing and, in some cases, non-invasive prenatal testing. These tests bring beneficence through providing a higher diagnostic yield, often with lower risks of miscarriage than previously available testing, but also raise the question of harms related to an increase in uncertain and unknown results. Some parents-to-be report a desire to learn as much information as possible prenatally, and there may be beneficence in providing them with this information. However, the potential uncertainty these tests may create may raise anxiety and may complicate pregnancy decision-making for both patients and providers. This article reviews current prenatal technologies and the growing research on the clinical and ethical aspects of uncertainty as it relates to expanding prenatal testing options.

Choosing between Higher and Lower Resolution Microarrays: do Pregnant Women Have Sufficient Knowledge to Make Informed Choices Consistent with their Attitude?

Developments in prenatal testing allow the detection of more findings. SNP arrays in prenatal diagnosis (PND) can be analyzed at 0.5 Mb resolution detecting more clinically relevant anomalies, or at 5 Mb resolution. We investigated whether women had sufficient knowledge to make informed choices regarding the scope of their prenatal test that were consistent with their attitude. Pregnant women could choose between testing at 5 or at 0.5 Mb array. Consenting women (N = 69) received pre-test genetic counseling by phone and filled out the Measure of Informed Choice questionnaire designed for this study. Choices based on sufficient knowledge and consistent with attitude were considered informed. Sixty-two percent of the women made an adequately informed choice, based on sufficient knowledge and attitude-consistent with their choice of microarray resolution. Women who made an informed choice, opted for 0.5 Mb array resolution more often. There were no differences between women making adequately informed or less informed choices regarding level of experienced anxiety or doubts. Over time on T0 and T1, anxiety and doubts significantly decreased. While previous studies demonstrated that knowledge is an important component in informed decision-making, this study underlines that a consistent attitude might be equally important for decision-making. We advocate more focus on attitude-consistency and deliberation as compared to only a strong focus on knowledge.

A Framework for Unrestricted Prenatal Whole-Genome Sequencing: Respecting and Enhancing the Autonomy of Prospective Parents

Noninvasive, prenatal whole genome sequencing (NIPW) may be a technological reality in the near future, making available a vast array of genetic information early in pregnancy at no risk to the fetus or mother. Many worry that the timing, safety, and ease of the test will lead to informational overload and reproductive consumerism. The prevailing response among commentators has been to restrict conditions eligible for testing based on medical severity, which imposes disputed value judgments and devalues those living with eligible conditions. To avoid these difficulties, we propose an unrestricted testing policy, under which prospective parents could obtain information on any variant of known significance after a careful informed consent process that uses an interactive decision aid to deliver a mandatory presentation on the purposes, techniques, and limitations of genomic testing, as well as optional resources for reflection and consultation. This process would encourage thoughtful, informed deliberation by prospective parents before deciding whether or how to use NIPW.

Recent advances in prenatal genetic screening and testing

The introduction of new technologies has dramatically changed the current practice of prenatal screening and testing for genetic abnormalities in the fetus. Expanded carrier screening panels and non-invasive cell-free fetal DNA-based screening for aneuploidy and single-gene disorders, and more recently for subchromosomal abnormalities, have been introduced into prenatal care. More recently introduced technologies such as chromosomal microarray analysis and whole-exome sequencing can diagnose more genetic conditions on samples obtained through amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling, including many disorders that cannot be screened for non-invasively. All of these options have benefits and limitations, and genetic counseling has become increasingly complex for providers who are responsible for guiding patients in their decisions about screening and testing before and during pregnancy.

Known unknowns: building an ethics of uncertainty into genomic medicine

Background

Genomic testing has reached the point where, technically at least, it can be cheaper to undertake panel-, exome- or whole genome testing than it is to sequence a single gene. An attribute of these approaches is that information gleaned will often have uncertain significance. In addition to the challenges this presents for pre-test counseling and informed consent, a further consideration emerges over how - ethically - we should conceive of and respond to this uncertainty. To date, the ethical aspects of uncertainty in genomics have remained under-explored.

Discussion

In this paper, we draft a conceptual and ethical response to the question of how to conceive of and respond to uncertainty in genomic medicine. After introducing the problem, we articulate a concept of ‘genomic uncertainty’. Drawing on this, together with exemplar clinical cases and related empirical literature, we then critique the presumption that uncertainty is always problematic and something to be avoided, or eradicated. We conclude by outlining an ‘ethics of genomic uncertainty’; describing how we might handle uncertainty in genomic medicine. This involves fostering resilience, welfare, autonomy and solidarity.

Conclusions

Uncertainty will be an inherent aspect of clinical practice in genomics for some time to come. Genomic testing should not be offered with the explicit aim to reduce uncertainty. Rather, uncertainty should be appraised, adapted to and communicated about as part of the process of offering and providing genomic information.

What Do Parents Think about Chromosomal Microarray Testing? A Qualitative Report from Parents of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

Background. Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) is increasingly utilized to detect copy number variants among children and families affected with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). However, CMA is controversial due to possible ambiguous test findings, uncertain clinical implications, and other social and legal issues related to the test. Methods. Participants were parents of children with ASD residing in the North Eastern region of North Carolina, USA. We conducted individual, face-to-face interviews with 45 parents and inquired about their perceptions of CMA. Results. Three major themes dominated parents' perceptions of CMA. None of the parents had ever heard of the test before and the majority of the parents postulated positive attitudes toward the test. Parents' motivations in undergoing the test were attributed to finding a potential cause of ASD, to being better prepared for having another affected child, and to helping with future reproductive decisions. Perceived barriers included the cost of testing, risk/pain of CMA testing, and fear of test results. Conclusion. This study contributes to the understanding of psychosocial aspects and cultural influences towards adoption of genetic testing for ASD in clinical practice. Genetic education can aid informed decision-making related to CMA genetic testing among parents of children with ASD.

Making the most of uncertainty: Treasuring exceptions in prenatal diagnosis

Throughout the 20th century, human genetics research was driven by the identification of new variants. As pioneering geneticist William Bateson put it, novel variants were "exceptions" to "treasure". With the rise of human chromosomal analysis in the postwar period, the identification of genetic variants became increasingly significant to clinical and prenatal diagnosis. Human geneticists had long sought a broader sampling of human genetic variation, from a largely "normal" population. The expansion of prenatal diagnosis in the late 20th century offered a new resource for identifying novel genetic variants. In the prenatal diagnostic setting however, many of the exceptions to be treasured were of uncertain clinical significance, which raised anxiety among parents. In the early 1990s, providers reported that specific uncertain results from chorionic villus sampling (CVS) facilitated prenatal diagnoses that were not previously possible. Based on this, some prenatal diagnostic providers began to embrace uncertainty, when properly managed to reduce anxiety, rather than prevent it. The potential to produce uncertainty in prenatal diagnosis grew with whole genome microarray in the 2000s. Rather than outcomes to avoid, or accept as inevitable, providers presented uncertain results as starting points for research to improve the scope prenatal diagnosis, and bring future certainty.

The Psychological Impact of Prenatal Diagnosis and Disclosure of Susceptibility Loci: First Impressions of Parents' Experiences

Genomic microarray may detect susceptibility loci (SL) for neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism and epilepsy, with a yet unquantifiable risk for the fetus. The prenatal disclosure of susceptibility loci is a topic of much debate. Many health care professionals fear that reporting susceptibility loci may put a psychological burden on pregnant couples. It is our policy to disclose prenatal susceptibility loci as we recognize them as actionable for prospective parents. The aim of this report was to evaluate the psychological impact of disclosing a prenatal diagnosis of susceptibility loci. The psychological impact of disclosing susceptibility loci was evaluated in the first patients who received such results. Eight out of 15 women who had a susceptibility locus disclosed and four of their partners consented to share their experiences through a telephonic evaluation (n = 12). Follow-up time ranged from 3 to 15 months after their prenatal test result. The reporting of susceptibility loci was initially ‘shocking’ for five parents while the other seven felt ‘worried’. Ten out of 12 participants indicated they would like to be informed about the susceptibility locus again, two were unsure. Most had no enduring worries. Participants unanimously indicated that pregnant couples should have an individualized pre-test choice about susceptibility loci (non)disclosure. We observed no negative psychological impact with the prenatal diagnosis and disclosure of SL on participants. A key factor in mitigating parental anxiety with SL disclosure appears to be post-test genetic counseling. Our report confirms that pregnant women and their partners prefer an individualized choice regarding the scope of prenatal testing.

It's complicated - Factors predicting decisional conflict in prenatal diagnostic testing

BACKGROUND

The technologies currently available to detect the presence of foetal genetic abnormalities are complex, and undergoing prenatal diagnostic testing can have wide-ranging repercussions. Before individuals can decide with certainty whether or not to take these tests, they first need to grasp the many psychosocial and clinical dimensions of prenatal genetic testing.

OBJECTIVE

To test a model integrating key psychosocial and clinical factors as predictors of decisional conflict in decisions about whether or not to undergo prenatal genetic testing.

METHOD

Adults (n = 457) read one of four hypothetical scenarios asking them to imagine expecting a child and considering the option of a prenatal test able to detect a genetic condition; age of condition onset (birth vs. adulthood) and its curability (no cure vs. curable) were manipulated. Participants completed measures of decisional conflict, perceived benefits from normal results, test response efficacy, condition coherence, child-related worry, perceived disagreement with the other parent's preference, motivation to comply with doctors' perceived preferences, and parity.

RESULTS

Prenatal testing decisional conflict was positively predicted by perceiving normal results as beneficial, doubting the test's reliability, lacking understanding of the genetic condition, worrying about the health of the foetus, perceiving differences of opinion from partner/spouse, wanting to follow doctors' preferences, and being childless.

DISCUSSION

These results, of growing relevance given the increasing availability of new technologies in pregnancy care, can inform communication strategies that facilitate couples' decision making.

CONCLUSION

This study provides insights into factors that might complicate prenatal testing decision making.

Pre- and post-test genetic counseling for chromosomal and Mendelian disorders

Genetic carrier screening, prenatal screening for aneuploidy, and prenatal diagnostic testing have expanded dramatically over the past 2 decades. Driven in part by powerful market forces, new complex testing modalities have become available after limited clinical research. The responsibility for offering these tests lies primarily on the obstetrical care provider and has become more burdensome as the number of testing options expands. Genetic testing in pregnancy is optional, and decisions about undergoing tests, as well as follow-up testing, should be informed and based on individual patients' values and needs. Careful pre- and post-test counseling is central to supporting informed decision-making. This article explores three areas of technical expansion in genetic testing: expanded carrier screening, non-invasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies using cell-free DNA, and diagnostic testing using fetal chromosomal microarray testing, and provides insights aimed at enabling the obstetrical practitioner to better support patients considering these tests.

Prenatal whole-exome sequencing: parental attitudes

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to survey the opinions of expectant parents regarding prenatal whole-exome sequencing.

METHODS

The study used a questionnaire that focused on acceptability of prenatal whole-exome sequencing to individuals who pursued first-trimester prenatal screening in a tertiary academic medical center. A total of 186 expectant individuals completed the questionnaire. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Eighty-three percent of the participants answered that prenatal whole-exome sequencing should be offered, 14.8% were neutral, and only 2.2% disagreed. Fifty-four percent of the participants were interested in having prenatal whole-exome sequencing for their fetus, 40.1% were neutral, and 6.6% disagreed. The majority of participants expressed a desire to know about treatable (96.2%) and non-treatable (86.3%) childhood conditions, and most said the same for treatable (76.0%) and non-treatable (74.3%) adult-onset conditions. Over half of the participants (59.7%) indicated a maximum acceptable turnaround time of 3 weeks or less for prenatal whole-exome sequencing.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of respondents felt prenatal whole-exome sequencing should be offered. Moreover, the majority wanted to know prenatally about treatable and non-treatable childhood and adult conditions.

Comparing genetic counselor's and patient's perceptions of needs in prenatal chromosomal microarray testing

OBJECTIVE

Chromosome microarray analysis is poised to take a significant place in the prenatal setting given its increased yield over standard karyotyping, but concerns regarding ethical and counseling challenges remain, especially associated with the risk of uncertain and incidental findings. Guidelines recommend patients receiving prenatal screening to undergo genetic counseling prior to testing, but little is known about women's specific pre-testing and post-testing informational needs, as well as their preference for return of various types of results.

METHODS

The present study surveys 199 prenatal genetic counselors who have counseled patients undergoing chromosome microarray analysis testing and 152 women who have undergone testing on the importance of understanding pre-test information, return of various types of results, and resources made available following an abnormal finding.

RESULTS

Counselors and patients agree on many aspects, although findings indicate patients consider all available information very important, while genetic counselors give more varying ratings.

CONCLUSION

Counseling sessions would benefit from information personalized to a patient's particular needs and a shared decision-making model, to reduce informational overload and avoid unnecessary anxiety. Additionally, policies regarding the return of various types of results are needed. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

408 kb 15q11.2 microduplication by array comparative genomic hybridization in a fetus presenting with exomphalos, micrognathia, tetralogy of Fallot and normal karyotype: a genetic counseling dilemma in paternal carrier status

Exomphalos may be associated with chromosomal abnormalities and syndromes. Severe exomphalos (herniation of liver, midgut and spleen) associated with increased nuchal translucency was seen at first trimester screening test. Karyotype by chorionic villus sampling showed normal male fetus. Follow up scan at 16 and 18 weeks of gestation confirmed the severe exomphalos and detected micrognathia and tetralogy of Fallot. Array comparative genomic hybridization (a-CGH) further demonstrated a 408 kb 15q11.2 microduplication, with the father-to-be as healthy carrier. This is the first case of an association between 15q11.2 micorduplication and fetal sonographic anomalies. Genetic counseling for estimation of recurrent risk of congenital anomalies is discussed.

Pregnant couples at increased risk for common aneuploidies choose maximal information from invasive genetic testing

Genomic array detects more pathogenic chromosome aberrations than conventional karyotyping (CK), including genetic variants associated with a susceptibility for neurodevelopmental disorders; susceptibility loci (SL). Consensus regarding the scope of invasive prenatal diagnosis (PND) pregnant couples should be offered is lacking. This study examined pregnant couples' preferences, doubts and satisfaction regarding the scope of invasive PND. Eighty-two couples choosing prenatal screening (PNS) and 59 couples choosing invasive PND were offered a choice between 5 (comparable to CK) and 0.5 Mb resolution array analysis outcomes, the latter with or without reporting SL. A pre-test self-report questionnaire and post-test telephone interview assessed their choices in-depth. Actual (PND) and hypothetical (PNS) choices differed significantly (p < 0.001). Ninety-five percent of the couples in the PND group chose 0.5 Mb array, vs 69% in the PNS group. Seven percent of the PND group wished not to be informed of SL. Ninety percent was satisfied with their choice and wished to decide about the scope themselves. Pregnant couples wish to make their own choices regarding the scope of invasive PND. It therefore seems justified to offer them a choice in both the resolution of array and disclosure of SL.

High-resolution microarray in the assessment of fetal anomalies detected by ultrasound

AIMS

The main aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of using high-resolution microarray to assist with prenatal diagnosis of ultrasound-detected fetal abnormality and to describe the frequency of abnormal results in different categories of fetal anomalies.

METHODS

Prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on women diagnosed with a fetal anomaly (ies) between February 2009 and December 2011 who were offered testing by microarray analysis (Affymetrix 2.7M SNP) and fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) instead of standard karyotyping. Fetal anomalies were categorised according to organ system involvement.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighteen women consented to testing with microarray. Eleven of one hundred eighteen (9.3%) cases had aneuploidy detected by FISH. Of the remaining 107, 23 (21.5%) had an abnormality detected on microarray, only three of which would have been detected using the combination of six-probe FISH and banded karyotype. The maximum expected yield for six-probe FISH and karyotype was thus 14/118 (11.8%), compared to 34/118 (28.8%), P < 0.0001. Of the 23 abnormalities detected with microarray, 10 (43%) were pathogenic, six (26%) were long continuous stretches of homozygosity and seven (30%) were of uncertain significance. The maximum yield was in cases with cardiovascular (100%); multiple (40%); central nervous system (CNS) (25%) and skeletal (9%) abnormalities.

CONCLUSION

This study has confirmed the feasibility of translation of microarray into clinical practice. 11.8% (14/118) of the cases would have a genetic basis of an abnormality with a FISH and banded karyotype. This figure is approximately tripled to 28.8% (34/118) if we offer FISH and microarray. High yield for imbalances are multiple, cardiovascular, CNS and skeletal abnormalities.

Counseling Challenges with Variants of Uncertain Significance and Incidental Findings in Prenatal Genetic Screening and Diagnosis

Prenatal genetic screening and testing provides prospective parents information about the health of their fetus. It is offered to find or address an increased risk for chromosomal abnormalities or other genetic conditions in the fetus or to identify the cause of fetal structural abnormalities detected by prenatal imaging. Genome-wide tests, such as the already widely-used chromosomal microarray analysis and emerging diagnostic whole exome and whole genome sequencing, have improved the ability to detect clinically significant findings, but have also increased the chance of detecting incidental findings and variants of uncertain significance. There is an extensive ongoing discussion about optimal strategies for diagnostic laboratories to report such findings and for providers to communicate them with patients. While consensus opinions and guidelines are beginning to appear, they often exclude the prenatal setting, due to its unique set of challenging considerations. These include more limited knowledge of the impact of genetic variants when prospectively detected in an ongoing pregnancy, the absence or limitations of detecting clinically recognizable phenotypes at the time of testing and the different decision-making processes that will ensue from testing. In this review, we examine these challenges within the medical ethical framework unique to prenatal care.

Screening for intellectual disability using high-resolution CMA technology in a retrospective cohort from Central Brazil

Intellectual disability is a complex, variable, and heterogeneous disorder, representing a disabling condition diagnosed worldwide, and the etiologies are multiple and highly heterogeneous. Microscopic chromosomal abnormalities and well-characterized genetic conditions are the most common causes of intellectual disability. Chromosomal Microarray Analysis analyses have made it possible to identify putatively pathogenic copy number variation that could explain the molecular etiology of intellectual disability. The aim of the current study was to identify possible submicroscopic genomic alterations using a high-density chromosomal microarray in a retrospective cohort of patients with otherwise undiagnosable intellectual disabilities referred by doctors from the public health system in Central Brazil. The CytoScan HD technology was used to detect changes in the genome copy number variation of patients who had intellectual disability and a normal karyotype. The analysis detected 18 CNVs in 60% of patients. Pathogenic CNVs represented about 22%, so it was possible to propose the etiology of intellectual disability for these patients. Likely pathogenic and unknown clinical significance CNVs represented 28% and 50%, respectively. Inherited and de novo CNVs were equally distributed. We report the nature of CNVs in patients from Central Brazil, representing a population not yet screened by microarray technologies.

Exome Sequencing in Fetuses with Structural Malformations

Prenatal diagnostic testing is a rapidly advancing field. An accurate diagnosis of structural anomalies and additional abnormalities in fetuses with structural anomalies is important to allow “triage” and designation of prognosis. This will allow parents to make an informed decision relating to the pregnancy. This review outlines the current tests used in prenatal diagnosis, focusing particularly on “new technologies” such as exome sequencing. We demonstrate the utility of exome sequencing above that of conventional karyotyping and Chromosomal Microarray (CMA) alone by outlining a recent proof of concept study investigating 30 parent-fetus trios where the fetus is known to have a structural anomaly. This may allow the identification of pathological gene anomalies and consequently improved prognostic profiling, as well as excluding anomalies and distinguishing between de novo and inherited mutations, in order to estimate the recurrence risk in future pregnancies. The potential ethical dilemmas surrounding exome sequencing are also considered, and the future of prenatal genetic diagnosis is discussed.

The Psychological Challenges of Replacing Conventional Karyotyping with Genomic SNP Array Analysis in Prenatal Testing

Pregnant couples tend to prefer a maximum of information about the health of their fetus. Therefore, we implemented whole genome microarray instead of conventional karyotyping (CK) for all indications for prenatal diagnosis (PND). The array detects more clinically relevant anomalies, including early onset disorders, not related to the indication and more genetic anomalies of yet unquantifiable risk, so-called susceptibility loci (SL) for mainly neurodevelopmental disorders. This manuscript highlights the psychological challenges in prenatal genetic counselling when using the array and provides counselling suggestions. First, we suggest that pre-test decision counselling should emphasize deliberation about what pregnant couples wish to learn about the future health of their fetus more than information about possible outcomes. Second, pregnant couples need support in dealing with SL. Therefore, in order to consider the SL in a proportionate perspective, the presence of phenotypes associated with SL in the family, the incidence of a particular SL in control populations and in postnatally ascertained patients needs highlighting during post-test genetic counselling. Finally, the decision that couples need to make about the course of their pregnancy is more complicated when the expected phenotype is variable and not quantifiable. Therefore, during post-test psychological counseling, couples should concretize the options of continuing and ending their pregnancy; all underlying feelings and thoughts should be made explicit, as well as the couple’s resources, in order to attain adequate decision-making. As such, pre- and post-test counselling aids pregnant couples in handling the uncertainties that may accompany offering a broader scope of genetic PND using the array.

Is high fetal nuchal translucency associated with submicroscopic chromosomal abnormalities on array CGH?

OBJECTIVE

To examine the possible association between high fetal nuchal translucency thickness (NT) and pathogenic chromosomal copy number variants (CNVs) detected by array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) in pregnancies with normal fetal karyotype.

METHODS

Array CGH was carried out in stored samples of chorionic villi from 215 singleton pregnancies resulting in live births in which chorionic villus sampling at 11-13 weeks' gestation for high fetal NT (≥ 3.5 mm) had demonstrated normal karyotype.

RESULTS

Median fetal NT was 4.0 (range, 3.5-9.5) mm. Array CGH detected additional CNVs in 1.4% (95% CI, 0.5-4.0) of the cases, but none of these was a known pathogenic CNV.

CONCLUSION

High fetal NT in the absence of sonographically detectable defects may not be associated with pathogenic CNVs.

Prenatal chromosomal microarray for the Catholic physician

Prenatal chromosomal microarray (CMA) is a test that is used to diagnose certain genetic problems in the fetus. While the test has been used in the pediatric setting for several years, it is now being introduced for use in the prenatal setting. The test offers great hope for detection of certain genetic defects in the fetus so that early intervention can be performed to improve the outcome for that individual. As with many biotechnical advances, CMA comes with certain bioethical issues that need to be addressed prior to its implementation. This paper is intended to provide guidance to all those that provide counseling regarding genetic testing options during pregnancy.

Microarrays as a diagnostic tool in prenatal screening strategies: ethical reflection

Genomic microarray analysis is increasingly being applied as a prenatal diagnostic tool. Microarrays enable searching the genome at a higher resolution and with higher sensitivity than conventional karyotyping for identifying clinically significant chromosomal abnormalities. As yet, no clear guidelines exist on whether microarrays should be applied prenatally for all indications or only in selected cases such as ultrasound abnormalities, whether a targeted or genome-wide array should be used, and what these should include exactly. In this paper, we present some ethical considerations on the prenatal use of microarrays. There is a strong consensus, at least in Western countries, that the aim of prenatal screening for foetal abnormalities should be understood as facilitating autonomous reproductive choice for prospective parents. The tests offered should be valid and useful to reach that purpose. Against this background, we address several ethical issues raised by the prenatal application of microarrays. First, we argue that the general distinction between a targeted and a genome-wide microarray needs to be scrutinised. Then we examine whether microarrays are 'suitable tests' to serve either a screening or a diagnostic purpose. Given the wide range of findings possibly generated by microarrays, the question arises whether microarrays actually promote or interfere with autonomous reproductive decision-making. Moreover, if variants of unknown clinical significance are identified, this adds to the burden and complexity of reproductive decision-making. We suggest a qualified use of microarrays in the prenatal context.

Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism in over 1600 cases using array comparative genomic hybridization as a first line test

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the detection of chromosomal mosaicism in chorionic villus (CVS) and amniotic fluid (AF) samples using array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction.

METHODS

All patients undergoing invasive prenatal testing by aCGH at a specialist prenatal screening service were included in the study. A total of 1609 samples (953 CVS and 656 AF) underwent quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction and targeted aCGH without concurrent conventional G-banded karyotyping.

RESULTS

Chromosomal mosaicism was detected in 20 of the 1609 cases (1.24%); of which 17 were derived from 953 CVS (1.78%), and three from 656 AF (0.46%). Mosaicism was observed at a level as low as 9%. Four cases were likely confined placental mosaicism, 12 were likely true fetal mosaicism, and four cases were unable to be classified into either group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the use of aCGH as a first line test is able to identify chromosomal mosaicism down to 9%, which is lower than the level reliably detected using standard cytogenetic analysis. aCGH avoids the disadvantages of culturing, which include culture bias, artifact, and culture failure.

Whole-genome array CGH evaluation for replacing prenatal karyotyping in Hong Kong

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of whole-genome array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) in prenatal diagnosis in Hong Kong.

Methods

Array CGH was performed on 220 samples recruited prospectively as the first-tier test study. In addition 150 prenatal samples with abnormal fetal ultrasound findings found to have normal karyotypes were analyzed as a ‘further-test’ study using NimbleGen CGX-135K oligonucleotide arrays.

Results

Array CGH findings were concordant with conventional cytogenetic results with the exception of one case of triploidy. It was found in the first-tier test study that aCGH detected 20% (44/220) clinically significant copy number variants (CNV), of which 21 were common aneuploidies and 23 had other chromosomal imbalances. There were 3.2% (7/220) samples with CNVs detected by aCGH but not by conventional cytogenetics. In the ‘further-test’ study, the additional diagnostic yield of detecting chromosome imbalance was 6% (9/150). The overall detection for CNVs of unclear clinical significance was 2.7% (10/370) with 0.9% found to be de novo. Eleven loci of common CNVs were found in the local population.

Conclusion

Whole-genome aCGH offered a higher resolution diagnostic capacity than conventional karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis either as a first-tier test or as a ‘further-test’ for pregnancies with fetal ultrasound anomalies. We propose replacing conventional cytogenetics with aCGH for all pregnancies undergoing invasive diagnostic procedures after excluding common aneuploidies and triploidies by quantitative fluorescent PCR. Conventional cytogenetics can be reserved for visualization of clinically significant CNVs.

Chromosomal Microarrays in Prenatal Diagnosis: Time for a Change of Policy?

Microarrays have replaced conventional karyotyping as a first-tier test for unbalanced chromosome anomalies in postnatal cytogenetics mainly due to their unprecedented resolution facilitating the detection of submicroscopic copy number changes at a rate of 10-20% depending on indication for testing. A number of studies have addressed the performance of microarrays for chromosome analyses in high risk pregnancies due to abnormal ultrasound findings and reported an excess detection rate between 5% and 10%. In low risk pregnancies, clear pathogenic copy number changes at the submicroscopic level were encountered in 1% or less. Variants of unclear clinical significance, unsolicited findings, and copy number changes with variable phenotypic consequences are the main issues of concern in the prenatal setting posing difficult management questions. The benefit of microarray testing may be limited in pregnancies with only moderately increased risks (advanced maternal age, positive first trimester test). It is suggested to not change the current policy of microarray application in prenatal diagnosis until more data on the clinical significance of copy number changes are available.