Conflict between values and technology: perceptions of preimplantation genetic diagnosis among women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Fam Cancer. 2009;8:441-449. [PMID: 19554475 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-009-9263-7]

Walking the tightrope: Fertility preservation among hereditary breast and ovarian Cancer syndrome Previvors

INTRODUCTION

Fertility-related concerns cause significant anxiety among patients with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (HBOC). The Society of Gynecologic Oncology and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommend patients diagnosed with HBOC receive early referral to a reproductive endocrinologist. However, evidence about fertility trends in this patient population are limited and guidelines are scarce. The aim of this study is to compare fertility preservation among patients with HBOC to control patients undergoing fertility treatment without a diagnosis of infertility.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who presented to a single academic institution for fertility preservation in the setting of diagnosis of HBOC. In this study, HBOC patients are referred to as those who had tested positive for pathogenic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 or were at high-risk for HBOC based on a strong family history (defined as >3 family members diagnosed with HBOC) without a genetic mutation. HBOC patients were matched in a 1:1 fashion to a control group undergoing fertility preservation without a diagnosis of infertility or HBOC. All analysis was done using SPSS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

RESULTS

Between August 1st, 2016 and August 1st, 2022, 81 patients presented to the study center for consultation in the setting of HBOC. Of those who presented, 48 (59.2%) ultimately underwent oocyte cryopreservation and 33 (40.7%) underwent embryo cryopreservation. Patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation due to BRCA1 status were more likely to present for fertility consultation at a younger age compared to control patients (32.6 vs. 34.7 years, p = 0.03) and were more likely to undergo oocyte cryopreservation at a younger age (32.1 vs. 34.6 years, p = 0.007). There was no difference in age at initial consultation or age at procedure for patients with BRCA2 or patients with a strong family history compared to control patients (p > 0.05). There was no difference in the mean age of patients with HBOC at presentation for consultation for embryo cryopreservation or the mean age the patient with HBOC underwent embryo cryopreservation compared to control patients (p > 0.05). Patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 did not have expedited time from consultation to first cycle start (p > 0.05). After adjusting for factors including anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level and age, patients considered in the HBOC group due to family history had less time between consultation and oocyte cryopreservation cycle compared to control patients. (179 vs. 317 days, p = 0.045). There was no difference in time from consultation to starting cycle for embryo cryopreservation for patients with HBOC compared to controls (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with HBOC did not undergo expedited fertility treatment compared to control patients undergoing oocyte and embryo cryopreservation for non-infertility reasons. Patients diagnosed with BRCA1 had more oocytes retrieved compared to the control population which is possibly due to earlier age of presentation in the setting of recommended age of risk reducing surgery being age 35-40. When age matched, cycle outcomes did not differ between HBOC and control patients. Given the known cancer prevention benefit and recommendations for risk-reducing surgery, future studies should focus on guidelines for fertility preservation for patients with HBOC.

Reproductive decision-making and the utilization of preimplantation genetic testing among individuals with inherited aortic or vascular disease

Preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M) is a reproductive technology used in conjunction with in-vitro fertilization (IVF) to reduce the risk of passing on a known genetic condition from parent to child. There is limited research describing the experience and emotional impact of PGT-M among individuals with inherited aortic or vascular disease (IAVD). Our qualitative study aims to explore the factors that influence reproductive decision-making and the uptake of PGT-M within this population. Individuals diagnosed with IAVD who have considered PGT-M, and/or their reproductive partner, were recruited using internal clinical databases and advocacy organizations. Virtual semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide that included questions related to participants' lived experience of their condition, risk perception, reproductive history, familiarity with PGT-M/IVF, and financial/psychosocial considerations. A total of 17 interviews were completed (13 affected individuals, 4 unaffected partners) and analyzed using thematic analysis. Emergent themes included: (1) the lived experience and perceived severity of disease; (2) need for comprehensive, balanced, and timely information; (3) and impact of personal values and circumstances. When discussing the impact of lived experience on reproductive decision-making, participants identified the physical and emotional impact of disease and variability of disease as factors influencing the uptake of PGT-M. Many described PGT-M as the only reproductive option presented to them by providers. Even so, participants expressed gaps in their understanding of PGT-M, particularly regarding cost/insurance coverage and the experience of IVF. Finally, participants recognized that the decision to pursue PGT-M primarily requires introspection and evaluation of one's values, but that cost remains a significant consideration. The findings from our study highlight the complexity of reproductive decision-making for individuals with IAVD and provide insight into their psychological and informational needs when engaging in this process. Providers can use these findings to tailor their discussions about reproductive decision-making with this patient cohort.

Preimplantation genetic testing for embryos predisposed to hereditary cancer: Possibilities and challenges

Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), which was developed as an alternative to prenatal genetic testing, allows couples to avoid pregnancies with abnormal chromosomes and the subsequent termination of the affected fetus. Originally used for early onset monogenic conditions, PGT is now used to prevent various types of inherited cancer conditions based on the development of PGT technology, assisted reproductive techniques (ARTs), and in vitro fertilization (IVF). This review provides insights into the potential benefits and challenges associated with the application of PGT for hereditary cancer and provides an overview of the existing literature on this test, with a particular focus on the current challenges related to laws, ethics, counseling, and technology. Additionally, this review predicts the future potential applications of this method. Although PGT may be utilized to predict and prevent hereditary cancer, each case should be comprehensively evaluated. The motives of couples must be assessed to prevent the misuse of this technique for eugenic purposes, and non-pathogenic phenotypes must be carefully evaluated. Pathological cases that require this technology should also be carefully considered based on legal and ethical reasoning. PGT may be the preferred treatment for hereditary cancer cases; however, such cases require careful case-by-case evaluations. Therefore, this study concludes that multidisciplinary counseling and support for patients and their families are essential to ensure that PGT is a viable option that meets all legal and ethical concerns.

Attitudes toward preimplantation genetic testing and quality of life among individuals with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome

BACKGROUND

Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC) syndrome is an autosomal dominant hereditary cancer predisposition associated with germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in the CDH1 gene. Identifying early stage HDGC is difficult, and prophylactic measures can be effective in preventing incidence. Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) can provide information about CDH1 variant status, HDGC risk, and limit familial transmission of CDH1 variants. To date, however, little is known about the attitudes of individuals with CDH1 variants towards PGT.

METHODS

Given that little is known about the reproductive attitudes of individuals with HDGC, we recruited participants with CDH1 variants from a familial gastric cancer registry and administered a cross-sectional survey with open- and closed-ended response items. We assessed attitudes regarding PGT and the effect of HDGC on quality of life.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 21) were predominantly partnered (61.9%), had a personal cancer history (71.4%), and had biological children (71.4%). Interest in learning about PGT was high; 66.7% of participants were interested in PGT and 90.5% approved of healthcare providers discussing PGT with individuals with CDH1 variants. Attitudes regarding personal use were varied. Among all participants, 35% would not, 25% were uncertain, and 40% would use PGT. Personal philosophy and preferences for family and reproduction were key factors related to PGT attitudes. HDGC had moderate effects on participants' quality of life, including social relationships, health behaviors, and emotional experiences including worry about cancer risk and guilt regarding familial implications.

CONCLUSION

PGT was identified by participants as acceptable for use in a variety of contexts and benefits of reproductive counseling involving PGT may extend beyond CDH1 carriers to family members' reproductive behaviors. Dispositions towards PGT are governed by personal philosophy or belief systems. These findings can help guide providers counseling individuals with CDH1 variants.

Becoming and being a parent with an inherited predisposition to diffuse gastric cancer: A qualitative study of young adults with a CDH1 pathogenic variant

PURPOSE

This study explored the experiences of young people with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC), an inherited cancer predisposition syndrome, as they navigate becoming and being a parent.

DESIGN

We used interpretive description and conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 young Australians (18-39 years) with a CDH1 pathogenic variant (PV). Data were analyzed using team-based, reflexive thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Participants' reproductive decisions centered on the perceived manageability of HDGC, namely via gastrectomy, and timing of their genetic testing. Participants yet to have children and those with challenging gastrectomy experiences favored using reproductive technologies to prevent passing on their PV. Parents who had children before genetic testing described complicated decisions about having more children. Gastrectomy was considered a parental responsibility but recovery diminished parenting abilities.

CONCLUSION

Young people with HDGC face unique challenges navigating reproductive decision-making and parenting with gastrectomy. Findings lend credence to calls for longitudinal, developmentally sensitive genetic counseling services.

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.

Literacy assessment of preimplantation genetic patient education materials exceed national reading levels

PURPOSE

In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing (IVF+PGT-M) reduces the risk of having a child affected by a heritable condition, yet only one-third of eligible patients are aware of this reproductive option. Access to education materials written at appropriate literacy levels could raise patients' awareness, but there is a mismatch between patient reading ability and the literacy demand of most materials. This study aimed to systematically identify written education materials on IVF+PGT-M and evaluate their literacy levels. We hypothesized that materials would fail to meet standards set by the Joint Commission and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

METHODS

To identify patient education materials about IVF+PGT-M from academic databases and public-facing sources, an environmental scan was performed. Materials were analyzed using three validated scales: Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, and Clear Communication Index.

RESULTS

Seventeen patient education materials about IVF+PGT-M were identified from patient education databases, a consumer search engine, and professional organizations. The median reading level was 14.5 grade, median understandability was 74.2%, and median comprehensibility was 73.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

For most American adults, materials about IVF+PGT-M are not readable, understandable, or clear. The Joint Commission requires patient education materials be written at or below 5th grade reading level and the CDC recommends a 90% minimum score for comprehensibility. No evaluated material met these guidelines. Patient education materials that exceed average American literacy skills may perpetuate disparities in the utilization of IVF+PGT-M. Materials that communicate this complicated subject at an understandable level are needed.

Patients' preimplantation genetic testing decision-making experience: an opinion on related psychological frameworks

The process of deciding whether to pursue preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) of an embryo is highly stressful for individuals and couples and has adverse emotional consequences (e.g. distress and uncertainty). PGT influences patients’ lives in both positive and negative ways and is experienced at an individual level, as a dyadic unit, as a family member and as part of the society. Here, we argue that providing a conceptual framework with which to understand the `experience of decision making’ about PGT for monogenic disease (PGT-M) testing specifically, as well as the factors contributing to `decisional distress’ and `uncertainty’ that patients endure as a result—apart from what decision they make—is crucial to optimizing patient counseling, satisfaction and outcomes in the field of ART. Derived from psychological theory, the framework proposed here identifies three categories of contributing factors to decisional distress and uncertainty in considering PGT-M; namely, ‘intraindividual’, ‘interpersonal’ and ‘situational’ factors. We reviewed evidence from the PGT literature to inform our framework. Well-accepted theories of stress and health decision making were also reviewed for their relevance to PGT-M decision making, focusing on potential distress and uncertainty. Our novel conceptual framework can be used to inform clinical practice, to advance research and to aid the development of interventions for individuals and couples who are deciding whether or not to use PGT-M. Alleviating emotional distress and uncertainty can improve patients’ well-being during their reproductive journey.

Review of patient decision-making factors and attitudes regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis

The increasing technical complexity and evolving options for repro-genetic testing have direct implications for information processing and decision making, yet the research among patients considering preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is narrowly focused. This review synthesizes the literature regarding patient PGD decision-making factors, and illuminates gaps for future research and clinical translation. Twenty-five articles met the inclusion criteria for evaluating experiences and attitudes of patients directly involved in PGD as an intervention or considering using PGD. Thirteen reports were focused exclusively on a specific disease or condition. Five themes emerged: (1) patients motivated by prospects of a healthy, genetic-variant-free child, (2) PGD requires a commitment of time, money, energy and emotions, (3) patients concerned about logistics and ethics of discarding embryos, (4) some patients feel sense of responsibility to use available technologies, and (5) PGD decisions are complex for individuals and couples. Patient research on PGD decision-making processes has very infrequently used validated instruments, and the data collected through both quantitative and qualitative designs have been inconsistent. Future research for improving clinical counseling is needed to fill many gaps remaining in the literature regarding this decision-making process, and suggestions are offered.

High-risk individuals' perceptions of reproductive genetic testing for CDH1 mutations

Reproductive genetic testing- PreNatal Diagnosis (PND) and Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD)-for CDH1 mutations associated with Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC)is available in the UK. This qualitative interview study examined high-risk individuals' (n = 35) views of CDH1 reproductive genetic testing. Interviewees generally regarded reproductive genetic testing as an acceptable form of HDGC risk management. However, some were concerned that their genetic risks required them to plan reproduction and anticipated difficulties communicating this to reproductive partners. Individuals had a preference for PGD over PND because it avoided the need for a termination of pregnancy. However, those who had not yet had children expressed concerns about having to undergo IVF procedures and worries about their effectiveness and the need for embryo selection in PGD. It is suggested that high-risk individuals are provided with access to reproductive genetic counselling.

Awareness and attitude regarding reproductive options of persons carrying a BRCA mutation and their partners

STUDY QUESTION

To what extent are BRCA mutation carriers and their partners in the Netherlands aware about preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND) as reproductive options and what is their attitude towards these options?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Awareness of PGD (66%) and PND (61%) among BRCA mutation carriers and their partners is relatively high and 80% and 26%, respectively, of BRCA carriers and their partners find offering PGD and PND for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) acceptable.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Internationally, awareness of PGD among persons with a genetic cancer predisposition appears to be relatively low (35%) and although acceptability is generally high (71%), only a small proportion of mutation carriers would consider using PGD (36%). However, for HBOC, there are no studies available that investigated the perspective of individuals with a confirmed BRCA1/2 mutation and their partners about PGD and PND including demographic and medical correlates of awareness and acceptability.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A cross-sectional survey was completed by 191 participants between July 2012 and June 2013. Participants were recruited through patient organizations (88%) and the databases of two Clinical Genetics departments in the Netherlands (12%).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Male and female BRCA carriers and their partners completed an online survey, which assessed demographic and medical characteristics, and awareness, knowledge, acceptability and consideration of PGD and PND as main outcomes. Correlations between demographic and medical characteristics and the main outcomes were investigated.

MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE

The majority of respondents were female (87%), of reproductive age (86%) and about half reported a desire for a child in the future. About two-thirds (66%) were aware of PGD and 61% of PND for HBOC. PGD knowledge was moderate (5.5 on a 9-point scale) and acceptability of PGD and PND for HBOC was 80% and 26%, respectively. A minority would personally consider using PGD (39%) or PND (20%). Individuals with a higher educational level were more likely to be aware of PGD (P < 0.001) and PND (P < 0.001) and persons with a more immediate child wish were more often aware of PGD (P = 0.044) and had more knowledge about PGD (P = 0.001). PGD acceptability was positively associated with knowledge about PGD (P = 0.047), and PND acceptability was higher among partners in comparison to carriers (P = 0.001). Participants with a history of cancer and with a higher perceived seriousness of breast and ovarian cancer were more likely to consider using PGD (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001 respectively) or PND (P = 0.021 and P = 0.017 respectively).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The response rate (23%) of participants invited by the clinical genetics departments was low, probably related to a simultaneous study that used a similar recruitment strategy within the same target group, which may have resulted in selection bias. Moreover, PGD knowledge was measured with an instrument that is not yet validated since to date such an instrument is not available in the literature. Finally, the cross-sectional design of this study limits us from drawing any causal conclusions.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Improvement of information provision remains needed, in order to timely inform all couples with HBOC about the available reproductive options and enable them to make a balanced reproductive decision. This may limit the risk of negative psychological impact due to decisional conflict and possible regret.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The Dutch breast cancer foundation Stichting Pink Ribbon (grant number 2010.PS11.C74). None of the authors have competing interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

Oncofertility in adolescent and young adult hereditary cancer: Considerations for genetics professionals

Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with a cancer diagnosis or those at risk for cancer due to hereditary cancer syndromes may benefit from genetic counseling and testing not only to manage personal risk but also to address reproductive concerns, especially fertility. The opportunity for genetic counselors to provide important risk information is relevant to both the newly diagnosed as well as to unaffected carriers and survivors. However, genetic counselors may need additional training in reproductive options related to AYA cancer to provide this valuable counsel. This commentary uses hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome as a model to highlight important considerations when discussing preimplanatation genetic diagnosis and prenatal diagnosis, particularly in the context of expanded testing for hereditary cancer risk including multigene panels or whole exome or whole genome sequencing. Other hereditary cancers are also addressed; however, less is known about the psychosocial and fertility concerns in these AYA populations. Additionally, we provide an overview of the concept of “oncofertility” - the linkage between cancer care and reproductive medicine that aims to expand the reproductive opportunities of cancer patients - and offer support for the expansion of guidelines to include genetic counselors in AYA cancer patients’ treatment planning related to reproductive health and fertility.

Comparison of attitudes regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis among patients with hereditary cancer syndromes

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) allows couples to avoid having a child with an inherited condition, potentially reducing cancer burden in families with a hereditary cancer predisposition. This study investigated and compared awareness and acceptance of PGD among patients with different hereditary cancer syndromes. Questionnaires were mailed to 984 adults with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis, or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or 2. Associations between clinical, demographic, and psychosocial factors and awareness and acceptance of PGD were examined. Of 370 respondents (38 % return rate), 28 % felt their syndrome impacted family planning, 24 % were aware of PGD, 72 % felt that PGD should be offered, 43 % would consider using PGD, and 29 % were uncertain. Family experience and syndrome-specific characteristics, such as disease severity, quality of life and availability of medical interventions as well as gender, family planning stage, and religiosity impact perceptions of the acceptability of PGD, though a high level of uncertainty exists. Hereditary cancer patients lack awareness of PGD despite feeling that PGD should be offered, highlighting the need for education on this topic. While we found attitudes about the acceptability of PGD to be generally similar to those reported in the literature and of genetics and ethics experts, we observed similarities and differences between syndromes that provide insight into why some hereditary cancer patients may find PGD more acceptable than others.

Comparison of whole genome amplification and nested-PCR methods for preimplantation genetic diagnosis for BRCA1 gene mutation on unfertilized oocytes-a pilot study

Background

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) remains nowadays a valid alternative for couples at high-risk of having a child with a genetic disease and for women older than 37–40 years with the high risk of chromosomal aneuploidies in the embryos. However the use of PGD for high penetrance recessive, dominant and X-liked disorders occurring in early life is documented, debate exists regarding its appropriateness in lower penetrance and late-onset cancer susceptibility syndromes. The data regarding the efficacy of different molecular techniques used in PGD are still lacking. We therefore sought to assess the different molecular techniques used in PGD for detecting three most frequent BRCA1 gene mutations: 5382insC, 185delAG and C61G.

Methods

Anonymous donors of the oocytes and control healthy blood samples were extracted and analyzed in the Fertility and Reproductive Center Invicta in Gdansk. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for the most frequent mutations: 185delAG, 5382insC, C61G in BRCA 1 gene was carried out on single, unfertilized oocytes, in metaphase of second meiotic division, not qualified to IVF. Positive mutation controls were represented by cell lines from the Coriell Institute for Medical Research: GM14090 (185delAG), GM14097 (C61G), GM13715 (5382insC).

Results

Repeatability of the results acquired from the WGA analysis for the mutation 5382insC was 38%. The repeatability of the nested-PCR analysis in the second round of the amplification was labile for the mutation 5382insC and 185delAG and was ranged from 47% to 57%. However, the repeatability for the mutation C61G was 100%.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the nested-PCR technique remains more sensitive and specific method as compared to WGA. WGA performed on the single cells did not reflect expected results. The repeatability of the WGA methodology remains questionable, and any analysis attempt does not guarantee reliable results.

Further evaluation is strongly needed to propose the most accurate molecular technique used in PGD for detecting three most frequent BRCA1 gene mutations: 5382insC, 185delAG and C61G.

Much more than a gene: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, reproductive choices and family life

This article presents the results of a study that investigates the way in which carriers of a mutation on the BRCA1 or the BRCA2 gene, associated with a high risk of breast and ovarian cancer, make their reproductive decisions. Using semi-structured interviews, the study explored the way in which these persons reflected on the acceptability of taking the risk of transmitting this mutation to the next generation, the arguments they used in favor or against taking that risk, and in the light of these arguments, their opinion on the acceptability of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) as a reproductive option. The findings suggest that when carriers are planning to have a(nother) child, they are mainly concerned by the risk of transmitting 'much more than a gene': essentially painful experiences not only with respect to health, such as undergoing cancer surveillance or combatting one's own illness, but also with regards to family life, such as witnessing the illness and death of a close relative, encountering difficulties in finding a partner or reconsidering one's plans to have a family. As for opinions concerning the acceptability of PGD as a reproductive option, opinions about personal recourse were varied but all expressed the understanding that PGD should be made available to those persons who consider it their best option.

High-risk consumers' perceptions of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Individuals carrying deleterious germline mutations placing them at increased risk for hereditary cancer syndromes (high-risk consumers) often have a great deal of fear and concern over transmitting mutations to their offspring, particularly conditions which are autosomal dominant. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a procedure that can detect certain germline cancer predisposing mutations present in embryos. The objective of this review was to assess high-risk consumers' knowledge and perceptions of PGD for hereditary cancers. A systematic literature review was conducted through PubMed, Wiley Interscience, PsychInfo, and Cochrane Library databases to identify all articles assessing consumer knowledge and attitudes of PGD for hereditary cancer syndromes. We assessed heterogeneity and the robustness of findings through additional analyses according to study location, hereditary cancer type, and sample size. Thirteen articles remained eligible after the application of specific criteria. Results show a general low level of knowledge about PGD for hereditary cancers, moderate rates of acceptability among high-risk groups, and high levels of need for information about PGD. Individuals in specific risk groups such as those with a personal or family history of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) may benefit from educational information from healthcare professionals about the use of PGD.

Knowledge, attitudes, and clinical experience of physicians regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes

Approximately 5-10% of cancers are caused by an inherited predisposition. Individuals affected by hereditary cancer are often concerned about transmitting a predisposition to cancer to their children. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a technology that allows embryos without a deleterious mutation associated with a hereditary cancer syndrome to be identified and implanted. The aim of this study is to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and clinical experience of physicians regarding PGD for hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes. Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) are two hereditary cancer syndromes highlighted in this present study. A survey assessing physicians' attitudes, knowledge, and clinical practice was completed by a total of 373 gynecologic oncologists (GYN ONCs) and obstetrics and gynecologists (OB/GYNs). Physicians had a limited knowledge of PGD for hereditary cancer; however, physicians reported PGD was an appropriate option for patients with either HBOC or FAP. Although GYN ONCs were more likely to care for patients with hereditary cancer (P < 0.001), they were less likely than OB/GYNs to refer their patients to a PGD specialist (P = 0.004). While 80% of GYN ONCs and 91% of OB/GYNs would refer patients to a PGD specialist, clinical experience indicates that only 29% actually referred their patients. Since 68% of physicians had incorrect or limited knowledge of PGD for hereditary cancer, there is a need for additional education.

BRCA carriers' thoughts on risk management in relation to preimplantation genetic diagnosis and childbearing: when too many choices are just as difficult as none

Women with a BRCA mutation have unique concerns about childbearing and future fertility. In a focus group conducted among unaffected carriers, the majority of women held positive attitudes toward preimplantation genetic diagnosis to reduce transmission to future offspring and further identified unmet needs for education and support for decision making.