Views of American OB/GYNs on the ethics of prenatal whole-genome sequencing

Optimising Exome Prenatal Sequencing Services (EXPRESS): a study protocol to evaluate rapid prenatal exome sequencing in the NHS Genomic Medicine Service

Background

Prenatal exome sequencing (ES) for the diagnosis of fetal anomalies was implemented nationally in England in October 2020 by the NHS Genomic Medicine Service (GMS). is the GMS is based around seven regional Genomic Laboratory Hubs (GLHs). Prenatal ES has the potential to significantly improve NHS prenatal diagnostic services by increasing genetic diagnoses and informing prenatal decision-making. Prenatal ES has not previously been offered routinely in a national healthcare system and there are gaps in knowledge and guidance.

Methods

Our mixed-methods evaluation commenced in October 2020, aligning with the start date of the NHS prenatal ES service . Study design draws on a framework developed in previous studies of major system innovation. There are five interrelated workstreams. Workstream-1 will use interviews and surveys with professionals, non-participant observations and documentary analysis to produce in-depth case studies across all GLHs. Data collection at multiple time points will track changes over time. In Workstream-2 qualitative interviews with parents offered prenatal ES will explore experiences and establish information and support needs. Workstream-3 will analyse data from all prenatal ES tests for nine-months to establish service outcomes (e.g. diagnostic yield, referral rates, referral sources). Comparisons between GLHs will identify factors (individual or service-related) associated with any variation in outcomes. Workstream-4 will identify and analyse practical ethical problems. Requirements for an effective ethics framework for an optimal and equitable service will be determined. Workstream-5 will assess costs and cost-effectiveness of prenatal ES versus standard tests and evaluate costs of implementing an optimal prenatal ES care pathway. Integration of findings will determine key features of an optimal care pathway from a service delivery, parent and professional perspective.

Discussion

The proposed formative and summative evaluation will inform the evolving prenatal ES service to ensure equity of access, high standards of care and benefits for parents across England.

Implementing Expanded Prenatal Genetic Testing: Should Parents Have Access to Any and All Fetal Genetic Information?

Prenatal genetic testing is becoming available for an increasingly broad set of diseases, and it is only a matter of time before parents can choose to test for hundreds, if not thousands, of genetic conditions in their fetuses. Should access to certain kinds of fetal genetic information be limited, and if so, on what basis? We evaluate a range of considerations including reproductive autonomy, parental rights, disability rights, and the rights and interests of the fetus as a potential future child. We conclude that parents should be able to access information that could be useful during pregnancy, but that testing for non-medical information should be limited. Next, we argue that the government lacks a compelling state interest in regulating prenatal genetic testing and propose that regulation should occur through medical professional organizations. Finally, we present a framework for determining what testing physicians should recommend, offer neutrally, or not offer at all.

A framework for reporting secondary and incidental findings in prenatal sequencing: When and for whom?

As the use of genomic sequencing (GS) in the prenatal setting becomes more widespread, laboratories and clinicians will be tasked with making decisions about whether to offer incidental and secondary findings to expectant parents and, if so, which ones. Unfortunately, few guidelines or position statements issued by professional bodies address the return of secondary findings specifically in the context of prenatal GS, nor do they offer clear guidance on whether, and which types of incidental findings should be reported. Laboratories and clinicians will also need to navigate other challenges, such as how to obtain sufficiently informed consent, workload burdens for both laboratories and clinicians, and funding. Here we discuss these, and other challenges associated with offering incidental and secondary findings in the context of prenatal GS. We outline existing guidelines for return of these findings, prenatally and in children. We review the existing literature on stakeholder perspectives on return of incidental and secondary findings and discuss the main practical and ethical challenges that require consideration. We then propose a framework to help guide decision-making, suggesting a baseline routine analysis, with additional layers of analysis that could be offered, according to local laboratory policy, with additional opt-in consent from the parents.

Parental expectations of raising a child with disability in decision-making for prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

To examine attitudes toward prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy (TOP) among parents and obstetric providers in relation to their views on raising a child with disability.

METHODS

An explanatory sequential mixed methods study. A survey among 274 parents and 141 providers was followed by interviews with 26 parents and 10 providers. Using multivariate analysis, the relationships between attitudes were examined. Thematic analysis was used to identify the reasons behind the attitudes.

RESULTS

In comparison with providers, parents reported more positive attitudes toward raising a child with disability and more moral views about TOP. Providers reported more variations in attitudes toward offering prenatal testing and TOP. Significant associations were found between attitudes toward prenatal testing, raising a child with disability, reproductive autonomy, and TOP. Three major themes were identified: (1) meanings of parenthood from genetic tests; (2) views toward TOP and parental responsibility; and (3) implications of advanced extended prenatal genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceived social-cultural norms of disabilities and parental expectations of raising a child with disability influence decision-making regarding TOP.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

As more conditions of the fetus are able to be detected, the social-cultural implications of the technology and disabilities need to be addressed in antenatal care.

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.

Noninvasive Prenatal Whole Genome Sequencing: Pregnant Women's Views and Preferences

OBJECTIVE

To assess pregnant women's views and preferences on noninvasive prenatal whole genome sequencing.

METHODS

A survey was offered to 805 pregnant women receiving prenatal care in practices affiliated with a large, tertiary care maternity hospital. Respondents were asked to envision undergoing prenatal whole genome sequencing and discuss their preferences and reasons for receiving different categories of genomic results, organized by actionability, severity, prevalence, and age of onset. The survey also queried respondents on their preferred role for clinicians in prenatal whole genome sequencing decision-making, and on their demographics and genetic literacy.

RESULTS

From June to August 2017, a total of 553 respondents returned the survey (response rate=68.7%). Respondents were most likely to want information regarding serious treatable childhood-onset conditions (89.7%) and least likely to want to receive information about nonmedical traits from prenatal whole genome sequencing (40%). The most frequently cited reason for wanting medical prenatal whole genome sequencing results was "to prepare financially, medically, or psychologically for a child with special needs." In total, 10.5% of respondents wanted clear recommendations from clinicians about the categories of information that are most appropriate to test for, 44.7% wanted clear recommendations plus all options presented, 26.2% wanted all options presented and joint decision-making, and 13.2% wanted all options presented and independent decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Respondents generally preferred to receive all categories of genetic results pertaining to medical conditions and wanted the information to prepare. More than half of respondents wanted (at minimum) clear recommendations from clinicians when deciding which prenatal whole genome sequencing results to receive.

Alternative option labeling impacts decision-making in noninvasive prenatal screening

Prenatal genetic screening should be an informed, autonomous patient choice. Extrinsic factors which influence patient decision-making threaten the ethical basis of prenatal genetic screening. Prior research in the area of medical decision-making has identified that labeling may have unanticipated effects on patient perceptions and decision-making processes. This Internet-administered study explored the impact of option labeling on the noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) selections of US adults. A total of 1,062 participants were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and randomly assigned to one of three possible label sets reflecting provider-derived and industry-derived option labels used in prenatal screening. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed option labeling had a statistically significant impact on the NIPS selections of study participants (p = .0288). Outcomes of the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SWD) indicated option labels did not play a role in participant satisfaction with screening selection. The results of this study indicate a need for further evaluation of the impact NIPS option labeling has on patient screening decisions in real-world clinical interactions. Clinical providers and testing laboratories offering NIPS should give careful consideration to the option labels used with prenatal screening so as to minimize influence on patient screening selection and decision-making processes.

The personal utility of cfDNA screening: Pregnant patients' experiences with cfDNA screening and views on expanded cfDNA panels

Prenatal cell-free DNA screening (cfDNA) provides more genetic risk information about the fetus than has ever been possible. At the same time, the rapid expansion of new cfDNA panels raises important questions about how to structure patient-centered discussions that best support patients' decision-making about its use. To address this question, we conducted interviews with pregnant patients to identify decision-making needs and preferences with respect to cfDNA in patient-centered healthcare discussions, given its evolving capability to identify a range of fetal variants. Personal utility was a core concept guiding decision-making. Participants spoke of how their deeply personal values and beliefs about maternal responsibility, actionability, and tolerance of uncertainty framed their view of the personal utility of cfDNA screening. While discussing their notions of personal utility with their healthcare provider, participants also had concerns about potential ramifications for the provider-patient relationship and shared decision-making when disclosing values and preferences regarding disability, quality of life, and termination-particularly as it becomes possible to identify variants with different disease-associated severity and outcomes. The complexities associated with the introduction of genomics in prenatal care present unique challenges to structuring effective shared decision-making discussions between patients and their healthcare providers. While efforts are underway to determine how to best educate patients about the medical aspects of cfDNA, it is equally important to develop approaches in healthcare communication that enable patients to make informed, values-based decisions about the use of cfDNA and its impact on their pregnancy.

Attitudes of Australian health professionals towards rapid genomic testing in neonatal and paediatric intensive care

We investigated the attitudes of intensive care physicians and genetics professionals towards rapid genomic testing in neonatal and paediatric intensive care units (NICU/PICU). A mixed-methods study (surveys and interviews) was conducted at 13 Australian hospitals and three laboratories involved in multi-center implementation of rapid genomic testing. We investigated experience and confidence with genomic tests among intensivists; perceived usefulness of genomic diagnostic results; preferences for service delivery models; and implementation readiness among genetic services. The overall survey response rate was 59%, 47% for intensivists (80/170), and 75% (91/121) for genetics professionals. Intensivists reported moderate confidence with microarray tests and lower confidence with genomic tests. The majority of intensivists (77%), clinical geneticists (87%) and genetic counsellors (82%) favoured a clinical genetics-led service delivery model of genomic testing. Perceived clinical utility of genomic results was lower in the intensivist group compared to the genetics professionals group (20 v 50%, p < 0.001). Interviews (n = 6 intensivists; n = 11 genetic counselors) demonstrated support for implementation, with concerns relating to implementation environment and organizational readiness. Overall, our findings support initial implementation of genomic testing in NICU/PICU as part of an interdisciplinary service delivery model that promotes gradual adoption of genomics by the intensive care workforce while ensuring safety, sustainability, and efficiency.

Introduction of cell-free DNA screening is associated with changes in prenatal genetic counseling indications

The introduction of cell-free DNA screening, or non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), for chromosome abnormalities has greatly impacted prenatal care since its introduction in late 2011. We aimed to evaluate the association between the introduction of cell-free DNA screening and indication and referral patterns for genetic counseling at a large US academic medical center by comparing the percentage of each counseling indication between the time period prior to the introduction of cell-free DNA screening (2006-2011) and following its introduction (2012-2016) using multivariable Poisson regression models. Genetic counseling indications for positive carrier screens, average risk patients, abnormal ultrasound findings, and family history indications were significantly higher following the introduction of NIPT while advanced maternal age and abnormal maternal serum screening indications dropped significantly. We also showed that the uptake of amniocentesis dropped significantly after the introduction of cell-free DNA screening, while chorionic villus sampling uptake increased. These results provide evidence that the introduction of new genetic screening technologies is associated with a shift in genetic counseling referral indications and an increased uptake in genetic screening. Additional research is needed to explore the impact of expanded testing options on the need for genetic counseling services.

Toward greater understanding of patient decision-making around genome sequencing

In the era of next-generation sequencing, it is essential to collect and understand the patient outcomes that result from this new technology. One critical determinant of these is the process by which individuals first decide whether and how to pursue genome sequencing. In this perspective article, we examine the literature on adult patient decision-making in genome sequencing and identify current research gaps to address. Several studies have explored the motivations and concerns of patients undergoing sequencing; less attention has been paid to those who decline sequencing or to individuals from lower socioeconomic groups. Many factors that might play a role in the decision to pursue or decline sequencing, including trust, family dynamics and barriers to access, have yet to be explored fully. Future research that captures the experience of the wider population will produce a more generalizable understanding of the clinical, psychosocial, and economic outcomes of pursuing or declining sequencing.

Prenatal diagnosis by chromosomal microarray analysis

Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is performed either by array comparative genomic hybridization or by using a single nucleotide polymorphism array. In the prenatal setting, CMA is on par with traditional karyotyping for detection of major chromosomal imbalances such as aneuploidy and unbalanced rearrangements. CMA offers additional diagnostic benefits by revealing sub-microscopic imbalances or copy number variations that are too small to be seen on a standard G-banded chromosome preparation. These submicroscopic imbalances are also referred to as microdeletions and microduplications, particularly when they include specific genomic regions that are associated with clinical sequelae. Not all microdeletions/duplications are associated with adverse clinical phenotypes and in many cases, their presence is benign. In other cases, they are associated with a spectrum of clinical phenotypes that may range from benign to severe, while in some situations, the clinical significance may simply be unknown. These scenarios present a challenge for prenatal diagnosis, and genetic counseling prior to prenatal CMA greatly facilitates delivery of complex results. In prenatal diagnostic samples with a normal karyotype, chromosomal microarray will diagnose a clinically significant subchromosomal deletion or duplication in approximately 1% of structurally normal pregnancies and 6% with a structural anomaly. Pre-test counseling is also necessary to distinguish the primary differences between the benefits, limitations and diagnostic scope of CMA versus the powerful but limited screening nature of non-invasive prenatal diagnosis using cell-free fetal DNA.

Next-generation sequencing and the impact on prenatal diagnosis

INTRODUCTION

The advent of affordable and rapid next-generation sequencing has been transformative for prenatal diagnosis. Sequencing of cell-free DNA in maternal plasma has enabled the development of not only a highly sensitive screening test for fetal aneuploidies, but now definitive noninvasive prenatal diagnosis for monogenic disorders at an early gestation. Sequencing of fetal exomes offers broad diagnostic capability for pregnancies with unexpected fetal anomalies, improving the yield and accuracy of diagnoses and allowing better counseling for parents. The challenge now is to translate these approaches into mainstream use in the clinic. Areas covered: Here, the authors review the current literature to describe the technologies available and how these have evolved. The opportunities and challenges at hand, including considerations for service delivery, counseling, and development of ethical guidelines, are discussed. Expert commentary: As technology continues to advance, future developments may be toward noninvasive fetal whole exome or whole genome sequencing and a universal method for noninvasive prenatal diagnosis without the need to sequence both parents or an affected proband. Expansion of cell-free fetal DNA analysis to include the transcriptome and the methylome is likely to yield clinical benefits for monitoring other pregnancy-related pathologies such as preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction.

Time Costs for Genetic Counseling in Preconception Carrier Screening with Genome Sequencing

Advances in technology and the promise of personalized health care are driving greater use of genome sequencing (GS) for a variety of clinical scenarios. As health systems consider adopting GS, they need to understand the impact of GS on the organization and cost of care. While research has documented a dramatic decrease in the cost of sequencing and interpreting GS, few studies have examined how GS impacts genetic counseling workloads. This study examined the time needed to provide genetic counseling for GS in the context of preconception carrier screening. Genetic counselors prospectively reported on the time spent in the results disclosure process with 107 study participants who were part of the NextGen study. We found that the median time for results disclosure was 64 min (ranged from 5 to 229 min). Preparation work was the most time-consuming activity. Qualitative data from journal entries, debrief interviews with genetic counselors, and detailed case conference notes provided information on factors influencing time for results disclosure and implications for practice. Results suggest that expanded carrier screening could require significant increases in genetic counseling time, unless we are able to generate new resources to reduce preparation work or develop other strategies such as the creation of new models to deliver this type of service.

Promises, pitfalls and practicalities of prenatal whole exome sequencing

Prenatal genetic diagnosis provides information for pregnancy and perinatal decision-making and management. In several small series, prenatal whole exome sequencing (WES) approaches have identified genetic diagnoses when conventional tests (karyotype and microarray) were not diagnostic. Here, we review published prenatal WES studies and recent conference abstracts. Thirty-one studies were identified, with diagnostic rates in series of five or more fetuses varying between 6.2% and 80%. Differences in inclusion criteria and trio versus singleton approaches to sequencing largely account for the wide range of diagnostic rates. The data suggest that diagnostic yields will be greater in fetuses with multiple anomalies or in cases preselected following genetic review. Beyond its ability to improve diagnostic rates, we explore the potential of WES to improve understanding of prenatal presentations of genetic disorders and lethal fetal syndromes. We discuss prenatal phenotyping limitations, counselling challenges regarding variants of uncertain significance, incidental and secondary findings, and technical problems in WES. We review the practical, ethical, social and economic issues that must be considered before prenatal WES could become part of routine testing. Finally, we reflect upon the potential future of prenatal genetic diagnosis, including a move towards whole genome sequencing and non-invasive whole exome and whole genome testing. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.