Initial psychometric analysis of novel instruments to assess decisional distress and decisional uncertainty in women who have considered using preimplantation genetic testing

Ethical and moral perspectives of individuals who considered/used preimplantation (embryo) genetic testing

This study examined perspectives on the ethical implications of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) among individuals who actually (not hypothetically) used or considered using PGT. Most of the prior patient-centered research on PGT ethics used qualitative designs (9 out of the 11 articles) and focused only on single gene testing. This cross-sectional study used an anonymous online questionnaire; 15 items assessed potential ethical concerns involved in PGT decision-making, including clinical indications for PGT, the greater implications of PGT for society, and unused embryo disposition. N = 207 individuals (mean female/male age 35.7/38.9 years, 21% Hispanic or non-White) who had recently used or considered using PGT for single gene (60%) or for chromosomal testing (40%) completed the questionnaire. Most respondents supported PGT screening for disease conditions with childhood or adult onset that are untreatable (64%-85% across items); most opposed PGT for trait selection (76%-81%). Most respondents agreed that PGT aids in parental decision-making (66%-67%), although some expressed concern over potential unforeseen consequences (25%-30%). Regarding disposition of embryos without known genetic abnormalities, most respondents favored freezing indefinitely (86%) or donating to another family (69%), while for embryos with genetic abnormalities, most respondents favored donating to research (78%) or destroying them (62%). Stratification by religious affiliation revealed several differences, such as less acceptance of PGT for diseases that occur in adulthood and have no treatment options among Protestants (p = .015) and greater willingness to donate surplus embryos to research among participants without a religious affiliation (p < .001). These results are limited by the relatively homogeneous sample of participants (mostly White, married, and predominantly college-educated). In summary, participants who considered/used PGT found PGT acceptable overall for screening for disease conditions; most opposed using PGT for trait selection. Our novel questionnaire provides a structured tool for assessing the ethical perspectives surrounding the use of PGT.

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

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

Psychological measures of patient's decision-making for prenatal genetic testing

OBJECTIVE

To use a questionnaire to determine the levels of maternal decision-related distress, clarity of the pros and cons, and certainty when considering prenatal genetic diagnostic testing; and to assess the relationship between these constructs and patient characteristics.

METHOD

Cross-sectional study. Voluntary, anonymous questionnaires distributed 2017-2019 to women referred for invasive prenatal genetic testing. Excluded: English or Spanish illiterate. Maternal characteristics were collected. Questions evaluated distress, decisional certainty, and decisional clarity on a 5-point Likert scale (range: 0 = low/uncertain/unclear to 4 = high/certain/clear). Analysis: non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis, correlation statistics, and ANOVA.

RESULTS

Forty-four female patients completed it. Most were married, white, Catholic, and multiparous. 58% had already made a testing decision. Patients expressed low distress levels (mean 1.18 ± 0.80) and expressed high decisional certainty (mean 3.28 ± 0.76) and clarity (mean 3.30 ± 0.99). Decisional certainty and clarity were positively correlated (r = 0.47, p < .01), whereas distress was negatively correlated with decisional certainty (r = -0.8136, p < .0005) and decisional clarity (r = -0.49, p = .007). No significant differences by religion or parity. Greater distress (p < .05) and less decisional clarity (p = .07) occurred between those still debating testing vs those who had decided.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher maternal distress scores were associated with lower decisional certainty and decisional clarity in women considering prenatal genetic testing.