Prenatal chromosome microarray: 'The UK experience'. A survey of reporting practices in UK genetic services (2012-2019)

Exploring prenatal testing preferences among US pregnant individuals: A discrete choice experiment

Although there are numerous benefits to diagnostic prenatal testing, such as fetal exome sequencing, there are also consequences, including the possibility of receiving variants of uncertain significance or identifying secondary findings. In this study, we utilized a survey-based discrete choice experiment to elicit the preferences of pregnant people in Northern California for hypothetical prenatal genomic tests. Pregnant individuals were invited to complete the survey through advertisements on social media. Five test attributes were studied: likelihood of getting a result, time taken to receive results, who explains results, reporting of uncertain results, and reporting of secondary findings. The survey also gathered information about the participants' demographics, current and past pregnancies, and tolerance of uncertainty using the IUS-12 scale. Participants were eligible if they were female, currently 24 or more weeks pregnant, and able to read/write enough English or Spanish to complete an online survey. Overall, participants (n = 56) preferred the option of having a prenatal test over not having a prenatal test (p < 0.01) and had substantially higher preferences for tests with the highest likelihood of getting a result (p < 0.01). There were also positive preferences for tests that reported secondary findings (p = 0.01) and those where results were returned by a genetic specialist (vs. their prenatal provider) (p = 0.04). These findings can be used to guide conversations between pregnant individuals and genetics specialists, such as genetic counselors, as they weigh the pros and cons of diagnostic prenatal testing options.

Clinically significant findings in a decade-long retrospective study of prenatal chromosomal microarray testing

BACKGROUND

Chromosomal microarray (CMA) is commonly utilized in the obstetrics setting. CMA is recommended when one or more fetal structural abnormalities is identified. CMA is also commonly used to determine genetic etiologies for miscarriages, fetal demise, and confirming positive prenatal cell-free DNA screening results.

METHODS

In this study, we retrospectively examined 523 prenatal and 319 products-of-conception (POC) CMA cases tested at Nationwide Children's Hospital from 2011 to 2020. We reviewed the referral indications, the diagnostic yield, and the reported copy number variants (CNV) findings.

RESULTS

In our cohort, the diagnostic yield of clinically significant CNV findings for prenatal testing was 7.8% (n = 41/523) compared to POC testing (16.3%, n = 52/319). Abnormal ultrasound findings were the most common indication present in 81% of prenatal samples. Intrauterine fetal demise was the common indication identified in POC samples. The most common pathogenic finding observed in all samples was isolated trisomy 21, detected in seven samples.

CONCLUSION

Our CMA study supports the clinical utility of prenatal CMA for clinical management and identifying genetic etiology in POC arrays. In addition, it provides insight to the spectrum of prenatal and POC CMA results as detected in an academic hospital clinical laboratory setting that serves as a reference laboratory.

Receiving uncertain results from prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis: Women's decisions on continuation or termination of pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) may detect variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS) and susceptibility loci (SL) with incomplete penetrance for neurodevelopmental disorders. This qualitative study provides empirical data on women's experiences with receiving such findings in pregnancy and their decisions regarding continuation or termination of the pregnancy.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women who received a VUS and/or SL from prenatal CMA in the last 2-4 years and were analyzed using Grounded Theory.

RESULTS

The vast majority of women recalled being stressed by the findings. All women sought further advice and information to be able to decide whether to continue or terminate their pregnancy. The three pregnancies that were terminated have in common a de novo SL with a 10%-20% penetrance. Similar reasoning (coping with uncertainty, the quest for a perfect child, and a chance for recurrence in future pregnancies) led different women to contradicting conclusions regarding their pregnancies. All women felt satisfied with their decisions.

CONCLUSION

Although uncertain/probabilistic information commonly involves a psychological burden, it may also be perceived as valuable and actionable. Pre-test parental choice regarding the disclosure of such information could allow personalized utilization of advanced genomic tests in pregnancy.

Every Mother and Every Fetus Matters: A Positive Pregnant Test = Multiple Offerings of Reproductive Risk Screening for personal, family, and specific obstetrical-fetal conditions

Structured OBJECTIVE: The requirement and need for a focused 'pregnant person -centered' antenatal care process with time for informed consent and shared decision making are important for optimal antenatal care. This commentary focuses on the evidenced -based screening test options and timing as part of the overall 'pregnant person-centered' preconception and antenatal care journey.

METHODS

A structured quality improvement (QI) review (Squire 2.0) was undertaken to examine the appropriate reproductive screening process in the periods of preconception and during pregnancy.

RESULTS

First, evaluated the broader antenatal care structure which, second, enabled the directed reproductive risk screening processes to be offered within an informed consent process. Four international pre-conception and antenatal evidenced-based consensus would routinely offer specific gestational age reproductive risk screening elements: totaling 21 screening elements (preconception 3; 1st trimester 9; 2nd trimester 3; 3rd trimester 4; intrapartum 1; postpartum 1).

CONCLUSION

The best evidenced-based opportunity for comprehensive and collaborative antenatal care with appropriate screening elements requires: single national access healthcare system; expert evidenced-based guideline creation; collaborative maternity care providers based for risk assessment, triage, and management; pregnant person (women) centered care model of maternity care; clearly identified evidenced-based gestational age directed screening elements; international pre-conception and antenatal guideline consensus.