Prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis: a survey of prenatal genetic counselors' experiences and attitudes

Lack of consensus among healthcare professionals at a large academic medical center on the use of exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis

Prenatal exome sequencing (ES) is increasingly used for prenatal diagnosis because emerging data indicate it has incremental diagnostic benefit in pregnancies with fetal anomalies without identified genetic abnormalities by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the medical community's attitude toward the clinical utility and use of exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis and to address differences in attitudes and responses by type of practitioner, level of training, and years passed since last full-time training. We analyzed the answers of 109 trainees and professionals in the fields of genetic counseling, laboratory science, and medicine to an online survey addressing these topics. Multiple-choice questions asked participants about their awareness of prenatal ES and what genetic test they would choose to order in certain scenarios. Likert-scale questions assessed participants' opinions of statements asserting when prenatal ES should be used for diagnostic testing. Attitude toward the use of prenatal ES statistically differed (p < 0.05) by type of participant and level of training. Practicing genetic counselors and physicians were more selective in their recommendations for prenatal ES than laboratory scientists. Genetic counseling students and practicing genetic counselors felt similarly about indications for the use of prenatal ES, whereas medical students were more liberal in their recommendations for prenatal ES than practicing physicians. This study shows a lack of consensus among the medical community regarding the clinical utility and indications for prenatal ES.

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.

The utilization of prenatal microarray: A survey of current genetic counseling practices and barriers

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated what prenatal genetic counselor's (GCs) practices, attitudes, and barriers are in regards to prenatal microarray since the publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) guidelines for microarray use.

METHODS

This was a survey-based cross-sectional study of English-speaking, board certified or eligible GCs who currently practice prenatal genetic counseling.

RESULTS

Of 192 respondents, 183 (95%) have incorporated chromosome microarray (CMA) into clinical practice, with 64% believing that the benefits of CMA outweigh the harms and 52% agreeing that CMA should be offered to all women regardless of indication. Those who reported being experts/comfortable in their knowledge of CMA (85%) and familiar with current clinical guidelines (86%) were significantly more likely to offer CMA to patients undergoing invasive testing and patients with fetal anomalies. Patient-specific concerns were the largest reported barrier (51%) when GCs do not offer CMA to patients.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates GCs follow guidelines for CMA use when specific indications are involved, but further guidelines are needed regarding CMA use for other routine indications where utility of CMA is not clearly understood. On this basis, ACOG and SMFM should continue revising their guidelines as more information comes to light regarding utility of prenatal CMA for all indications, and organizations like the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) should consider publishing guidelines on prenatal CMA that are specialized to the GCs sphere of practice.

Are all chromosome microarrays the same? What clinicians need to know

Microarray testing is the recommended first-tier diagnostic test for women who undergo invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures. It is well-established that microarray analysis provides information regarding copy number for changes (or copy number variants, CNVs) that may be below the resolution level of standard chromosome analysis, and that such CNVs are not related to maternal age. What may not be appreciated by ordering providers, however, are the technical differences among laboratories with respect to the established laboratory cutoff values for reporting, the definition of targeted versus nontargeted regions, and how these differences may affect the interpretation and reporting of findings which, in turn, affects counseling and possible follow-up testing of family members. Here, we provide a detailed explanation of these technical factors and clarify how they practically impact diagnostic results.

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.

"Something Extra on Chromosome 5": Parents' Understanding of Positive Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) Results

This study aims to explore how couples' understanding of the nature and consequences of positive prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) results impacts decision-making and concern about pregnancy. We interviewed 28 women and 12 male partners after receiving positive results and analyzed the transcripts to assess their understanding and level of concern about the expected clinical implications of results. Participant descriptions were compared to the original laboratory interpretation. When diagnosed prenatally, couples' understanding of the nature and consequences of copy number variants (CNVs) impacts decision-making and concern. Findings suggest women, but less so partners, generally understand the nature and clinical implications of prenatal CMA results. Couples feel reassured, perhaps sometimes falsely so, when a CNV is inherited from a "normal" parent and experience considerable uncertainty when a CNV is de novo, frequently precipitating a search for additional information and guidance. Five factors influenced participants' concern including: the pattern of inheritance, type of possible phenotypic involvement, perceived manageability of outcomes, availability and strength of evidence about outcomes associated with the CNV, and provider messages about continuing the pregnancy. A good understanding of results is vital as couples decide whether or not to continue with their pregnancy and seek additional information to assist in pregnancy decision-making.

What results to disclose, when, and who decides? Healthcare professionals' views on prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis

Objectives

This study explored the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the UK about what information should be disclosed, when; and whether women/parents should be given a choice as to what they wish to know.

Methods

Q‐methodology was used to assess the views of 40 HCPs (genetic HCPs, fetal medicine experts, lab‐scientists).

Results

Most participants agreed that variants of unknown clinical significance should not be disclosed. Participants were divided between those who considered variants of uncertain clinical significance helpful for parents and clinicians, and those who considered them harmful. Although recognising the potential disadvantages of disclosing risks for adult‐onset conditions, participants thought it would be difficult to withhold such information once identified. Participants largely supported some parental involvement in determining which results should be returned. Most participants believed that information obtained via CMA testing in pregnancy should either be disclosed during pregnancy, or not at all.

Conclusion

HCPs taking part in the study largely believed that variants that will inform the management of the pregnancy, or are relevant to other family members, should be reported. Recent UK guidelines, published after this research was completed, reflect these opinions. © 2016 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

What's already known about this topic?

Empirical data on healthcare professionals' (HCPs) and parents' experience with prenatal CMA are scarce.

Published data mainly focused on issues around uncertain results obtained via CMA, and on genetic health professionals.

The two main difficulties expressed by genetic counsellors associated with testing were interpreting uncertain results, and termination of pregnancies based on uncertain results

What does this study add?

It is the first study examining attitudes of a wide range of professionals involved in CMA testing: laboratory professionals, fetal medicine experts, and genetic health professionals.

We describe what types of results professionals think should or should not be disclosed and with whom they consider the onus for such decision making should lie.

These views are reflected in the recent UK guidelines about CMA testing.

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.

A new direction for prenatal chromosome microarray testing: software-targeting for detection of clinically significant chromosome imbalance without equivocal findings

Purpose. To design and validate a prenatal chromosomal microarray testing strategy that moves away from size-based detection thresholds, towards a more clinically relevant analysis, providing higher resolution than G-banded chromosomes but avoiding the detection of copy number variants (CNVs) of unclear prognosis that cause parental anxiety.

Methods. All prenatal samples fulfilling our criteria for karyotype analysis (n = 342) were tested by chromosomal microarray and only CNVs of established deletion/duplication syndrome regions and any other CNV >3 Mb were detected and reported. A retrospective full-resolution analysis of 249 of these samples was carried out to ascertain the performance of this testing strategy.

Results. Using our prenatal analysis, 23/342 (6.7%) samples were found to be abnormal. Of the remaining samples, 249 were anonymized and reanalyzed at full-resolution; a further 46 CNVs were detected in 44 of these cases (17.7%). None of these additional CNVs were of clear clinical significance.

Conclusion. This prenatal chromosomal microarray strategy detected all CNVs of clear prognostic value and did not miss any CNVs of clear clinical significance. This strategy avoided both the problems associated with interpreting CNVs of uncertain prognosis and the parental anxiety that are a result of such findings.

An exploration of genetic counselors' needs and experiences with prenatal chromosomal microarray testing

Because of the higher yield over traditional chromosomal analysis, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is being used increasingly in prenatal diagnosis. Unfortunately, the clinical implication of many copy number variants found on prenatal CMA is uncertain, complicating genetic counseling. Recognizing that uncertain results will be encountered frequently as more of the genome is assayed prenatally, we set out to understand the experiences and needs of genetic counselors when counseling patients about uncertain prenatal microarray results, their comfort with various aspects of prenatal genetic counseling, and their interest in additional education and training about prenatal microarray testing. We first interviewed 10 genetic counselors about their experiences of providing pre- and post-test genetic counseling about prenatal CMA. Based on the findings from the counselor interviews, we developed items for a survey to assess the prevalence of genetic counselors' attitudes towards, experience and comfort with, and educational needs regarding prenatal CMA. Based on surveys completed by 193 prenatal genetic counselors, we found that when there is an uncertain CMA result, only 59% would be comfortable providing genetic counseling and only 43% would be comfortable helping a patient make a decision about pregnancy termination. Being less comfortable was associated with seeing fewer patients having prenatal CMA testing. Respondents expressed a high degree of interest in additional education about prenatal CMA and counseling about uncertain results. Further genetic counselor education and training aimed at improving counselors' personal comfort with uncertain results and communicating about them with patients is needed.

Implementation of high-resolution SNP arrays in the investigation of fetuses with ultrasound malformations: 5 years of clinical experience

Chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) has proven to be a powerful tool in postnatal patients with intellectual disabilities, and it is increasingly used in prenatal diagnosis. However, its diagnostic capabilities in prenatal diagnosis vary, and clinical experiences have failed to establish a consensus regarding CMA indications, the design and resolution of microarrays, and the notification and interpretation of copy number variations (CNVs). We present our 5 years of clinical experience using whole-genome high-resolution single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays to investigate 446 fetuses that had structural malformations detected with ultrasound but for which standard karyotyping analysis showed normal karyotypes. CMA revealed genomic CNVs in 323 (72.4%) cases and clinically significant CNVs in 11.4% of the fetuses (51/446), including 2 cases of uniparental disomy (UPD) as well as 1 case of cryptic mosaic monosomy of chromosome X. Variants of unknown significance (VOUS) existed in 2.0% of the tested fetuses (9/446). Our results demonstrate the value of whole-genome high-resolution SNP arrays in fetuses with congenital malformations and give a higher detection rate of clinically significant genomic imbalance, especially for detecting UPD. Sufficient communication between technicians and genetic counselors, along with parental testing and comparison with data from in-house or international sources, can significantly reduce VOUS.

A prospective study of the clinical utility of prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in fetuses with ultrasound abnormalities and an exploration of a framework for reporting unclassified variants and risk factors

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical utility of chromosomal microarrays for prenatal diagnosis by a prospective study of fetuses with abnormalities detected on ultrasound.

METHODS

Patients referred for prenatal diagnosis due to ultrasound anomalies underwent analysis by array comparative genomic hybridization as the first-tier diagnostic test.

RESULTS

A total of 383 prenatal samples underwent analysis by array comparative genomic hybridization. Array analysis revealed causal imbalances in a total of 9.6% of patients (n = 37). Submicroscopic copy-number variations were detected in 2.6% of patients (n = 10/37), and arrays added valuable information over conventional karyotyping in 3.9% of patients (n = 15/37). We highlight a novel advantage of arrays; a 500-kb paternal insertional translocation is the likely driver of a de novo unbalanced translocation, thus improving recurrence risk calculation in this family. Variants of uncertain significance were revealed in 1.6% of patients (n = 6/383).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate the added value of chromosomal microarrays for prenatal diagnosis in the presence of ultrasound anomalies. We advocate reporting back only copy-number variations with known pathogenic significance. Although this approach might be considered opposite to the ideal of full reproductive autonomy of the parents, we argue why providing all information to parents may result in a false sense of autonomy.