Challenges, Dilemmas and Factors Involved in PGD Decision-Making: Providers’ and Patients’ Views, Experiences and Decisions

Bearing Witness to Joy and Sorrow: Narrative Medicine and Reproductive Endocrinologist and Infertility (REI) Providers' Journeys in Infertility Treatment

This study examines providers' perceptions of provider-patient communication in reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) practices. Grounded in narrative medicine, we interviewed six REI providers about their experiences providing fertility care. REI providers crafted a narrative of bearing witness by (1) situating personal and professional self in REI narratives, (2) sharing news as important medical moments, and (3) cultivating affiliation between provider and patient. These findings offer insight into the power of narrative medicine in fertility care, the role of emplotment in narrative sense-making, and the emotional labor associated with information delivery in REI treatments. We offer several recommendations for how patients and providers can improve communication experiences in REI.

Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Adult-Onset Neurodegenerative Disease: Considerations for Access, Utilization, and Counseling

Preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic conditions (PGT-M), formerly called preimplantation genetic diagnosis, is a specialized assisted reproduction technique that aims to reduce the risk of a pregnancy inheriting a monogenic condition. Despite calls to increase awareness and prepare neurologists for discussing PGT-M with patients and their families, no guidelines currently exist. When introducing PGT-M to those who may be interested in using it, there are major factors for discussion, including (1) genetic considerations (e.g., requirement for a confirmed genetic diagnosis; timing of genetic test results); (2) practical considerations (e.g., access to PGT-M and genetic services); (3) technical considerations (e.g., factors that can affect the success rate of PGT-M); and (4) psychosocial and ethical considerations (e.g., predictive testing for asymptomatic family members; family dynamics and values). Here, our team of neurologists and specialized genetic counselors discusses the current state of genetic characterization in adult-onset neurodegenerative conditions and highlights the major factors that should be considered when discussing PGT-M with families.

Parental mosaicism detection and preimplantation genetic testing in families with multiple transmissions of de novo mutations

BACKGROUND

De novo mutations (DNMs) are linked with many severe early-onset disorders ranging from rare congenital malformation to intellectual disability. Conventionally, DNMs are considered to have an estimated recurrence rate of 1%. Recently, studies have revealed a higher prevalence of parental mosaicism, leading to a greater recurrence risk, resulting in a second child harbouring the same DNM as a previous child.

METHODS

In this study, we included 10 families with DNMs leading to adverse pregnancy outcomes. DNA was extracted from tissue samples, including parental peripheral blood, parental saliva and paternal sperm. High-throughput sequencing was used to screen for parental mosaicism with a depth of more than 5000× on average and a variant allele fraction (VAF) detection limit of 0.5%.

RESULTS

The presence of mosaicism was detected in sperms in two families, with VAFs of 2.8% and 2.5%, respectively. Both families have a history of multiple adverse pregnancies and DNMs shared by siblings. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) and prenatal diagnosis were performed in one family, thereby preventing the reoccurrence of DNMs.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to report the successful implementation of PGT for monogenic/single gene defects in the parental mosaicism family. Our study suggests that mosaic detection of paternal sperm is warranted in families with recurrent DNMs leading to adverse pregnancy outcomes, and PGT can effectively block the transmission of the pathogenic mutation.

Day 5 versus day 3 embryo biopsy for preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic/single gene defects

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has allowed couples with a family history of a monogenic genetic disease, or a disease-carrying gene, to reduce the chance of them having a child with the genetic disorder. This is achieved by genetically testing the embryos using an advanced process called preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic or single gene disorders (PGT-M), such as Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis. This current terminology (PGT-M) has replaced the formerly-known preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). During PGT-M, one or more embryo cells are biopsied and analysed for genetic or chromosomal anomalies before transferring the embryos to the endometrial cavity. Biopsy for PGT-M can be performed at day 3 of cleavage-stage embryo development when the embryo is at the six- to the eight-cell stage, with either one or two blastomeres being removed for analysis. Biopsy for PGT-M can also be performed on day 5 of the blastocyst stage of embryo development when the embryo has 80 to 100 cells, with five to six cells being removed for analysis. Day 5 biopsy has taken over from day 3 biopsy as the most widely-used biopsy technique; however, there is a lack of summarised evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assesses the effectiveness and safety of day 5 biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy. Since biopsy is an invasive process, whether it is carried out at day 3 or day 5 of embryo development may have different impacts on further development, implantation, pregnancy, live birth and perinatal outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of day 5 embryo biopsy, in comparison to day 3 biopsy, in PGT-M in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases in December 2021 to identify relevant RCTs: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) Specialised Trials Register; CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. We also handsearched grey literature, such as trial registers, relevant journals, reference lists, Google Scholar, and published conference abstracts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible RCTs compared day 5 versus day 3 embryo biopsy for PGT-M.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were live births and miscarriages. We calculated outcomes per woman/couple randomised and reported odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included one RCT involving 20 women. The evidence was of very low certainty; the main limitations of the study were serious risk of bias due to lack of blinding of study personnel, and imprecision. We are uncertain whether day 5 embryo biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy has an effect on live births (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.26 to 8.82; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that if the chance of live birth following day 3 biopsy was assumed to be 40%, then the chance with day 5 biopsy is between 15% and 85%. It is also uncertain whether day 5 embryo biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy has an effect on miscarriages (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.05 to 18.57; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence).  We are uncertain whether day 5 embryo biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy has an effect on other secondary outcome measures, including viable intrauterine pregnancies (OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.38 to 13.47; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence), ectopic pregnancies (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.85; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence), stillbirths (OR not estimable as no events in either group; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence) or termination of pregnancies (OR 3.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 91.60; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported on gestational age at birth, birthweight, neonatal mortality and major congenital anomaly.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain if there is a difference in live births and miscarriages, viable intrauterine pregnancies, ectopic pregnancies, stillbirths or termination of pregnancies between day 5 and day 3 embryo biopsy for PGT-M. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions regarding other adverse outcomes. The results should be interpreted with caution, as the evidence was of very low certainty due to limited studies, high risk of bias in the included study, and an overall low level of precision.

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.

A systematic review of the views of healthcare professionals on the scope of preimplantation genetic testing

Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) involves testing embryos created through in vitro fertilization for the presence of hereditary genetic disorders and chromosome abnormalities. PGT for monogenic conditions (PGT-M) is generally performed for childhood-onset, lethal disorders, but is increasingly accepted for certain adult-onset conditions, conditions with available treatment options or conditions with lower penetrance. Furthermore, the development of PGT for polygenic conditions (PGT-P) makes ethical questions regarding PGT indications imperative. A systematic review was therefore performed to gather and analyse studies on the perspectives of healthcare professionals on the appropriate scope of PGT, with the aim of getting insights into the concerns about the scope of PGT now and in the near future. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Twelve qualitative articles were included. The main themes extracted were the scope of PGT and decision-making about PGT. Defining 'a serious genetic condition' was seen as complex, but severity, high penetrance and absence of treatability and patients' experience were seen as relevant indications to determine the appropriateness of PGT. In navigating the decision-making processes with patients, professionals experienced friction between setting limits and respecting patients' autonomy. Such friction and ethical dilemmas around seriousness, informed decision-making and preventative medicine show that while expanding the list of possible PGT indications and the development of PGT-P could augment patients' reproductive autonomy, it could also lead to an increased reproductive 'burden' for patients. These insights are crucial for establishing guidelines that help healthcare professionals navigate ethical tensions associated with PGT.

Offering preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M) for conditions with reduced penetrance or variants of uncertain significance: Ethical insight from U.S. laboratory genetic counselors

Preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M) was originally developed to identify embryos affected with serious childhood-onset disorders, but its use has recently broadened. Guidance on the use of PGT-M in the United States (U.S.) is currently limited, with no formal laws or guidelines established on its use. The goals of this study were to determine for which types of conditions U.S. laboratories currently do not offer PGT-M, to explore ethical considerations U.S. laboratory genetic counselors (GCs) take into consideration when deciding to accept or reject a PGT-M request, and to explore whether U.S. laboratory GCs believe PGT-M should be offered for conditions with reduced penetrance or for variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with nine genetic counselors, from five different PGT-M laboratories, was conducted. Participants were required to be GCs working at a PGT-M laboratory in the U.S. and either actively counsel patients on PGT-M or determine a patient's eligibility for PGT-M. Two participants reported their separate laboratories have no limitations for allowable PGT-M testing, while the other seven participants representing three other laboratories reported having limitations. The main ethical consideration GCs reported considering when deciding to accept or reject a PGT-M request was patient autonomy, with a focus on the patient understanding risks of the testing. All participants reported believing PGT-M should be allowable for conditions with reduced penetrance and VUS, with all participants stating their respective laboratories allow for this currently. However, all participants reported a lack of sufficient guidelines and that having guidelines from a professional organization would be beneficial to their practice. In conclusion, lack of current guidelines in the United States has created discrepancies between PGT-M laboratories. PGT-M laboratory GCs support the use of PGT-M for conditions with reduced penetrance and VUS with informed consent. The need for guidelines is supported.

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.

A review on the motivations, decision-making factors, attitudes and experiences of couples using pre-implantation genetic testing for inherited conditions

BACKGROUND

In pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT), fertile couples undergo IVF with genetic testing of embryos to avoid conceptions with a genetic condition. There is an exponentially increasing uptake with over 600 applications listed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in the UK. The psychological aspects of the decision-making process and the experience of PGT, however, are relatively underevaluated, with the potential to leave patients unsupported in their journeys.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

In this review, we aim to comprehensively report on every aspect of couples' experiences of PGT. We consider what motivates users, the practical and ethical decisions involved and how couples navigate the decision-making process. Additionally, we report on the social and psychological impact on couples who are actively undergoing or have completed the PGT process.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic search of English peer-reviewed journals of three computerized databases was undertaken following PRISMA guidelines. Studies that examined the motivations, attitudes, decision-making factors and experiences of patients who have been actively engaged in the PGT process were included. No restrictions were placed on study design or date of publication. Studies examining patients using PGT in a hypothetical context or solely using PGT for aneuploidy were excluded. Qualitative data were extracted using thematic analysis.

OUTCOMES

The main outcomes were patient motivations, deciding factors and attitudes, as well as the patient experience of coming to a decision and going through PGT.Patients were primarily motivated by the desire to have a healthy child and to avoid termination of pregnancy. Those with a sick child or previous experience of termination were more likely to use PGT. Patients also felt compelled to make use of the technology available, either from a moral responsibility to do so or to avoid feelings of guilt if not. The main factors considered when deciding to use PGT were the need for IVF and the acceptability of the technology, the financial cost of the procedure and one's ethical standpoint on the creation and manipulation of embryos. There was a general consensus that PGT should be applied to lethal or severe childhood disease but less agreement on use for adult onset or variable expression conditions. There was an agreement that it should not be used to select for aesthetic traits and a frustration with the views of PGT in society. We report that couples find it difficult to consider all of the benefits and costs of PGT, resulting in ambivalence and prolonged indecision. After deciding on PGT use, we found that patients find the process extremely impractical and psychologically demanding.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This review aimed to summarize the current knowledge on how patients decide to use and experience PGT and to make suggestions to incorporate the findings into clinical practice. We cannot stress enough the importance of holistic evaluation of patients and thorough counselling prior to and during PGT use from a multidisciplinary team that includes geneticists, IVF clinicians, psychologists and also patient support groups. Large prospective studies using a validated psychological tool at various stages of the PGT process would provide an invaluable database for professionals to better aid patients in their decision-making and to improve the patient experience.

Predictive Prenatal Diagnosis for Infantile-onset Inflammatory Bowel Disease Because of Interleukin-10 Signalling Defects

OBJECTIVES

Advances in genetic technologies provide opportunities for patient care and ethical challenges. Clinical care of patients with rare Mendelian disorders is often at the forefront of those developments. Whereas in classical polygenic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), the predictive value of genetic variants is very low, predictive prenatal genetic diagnosis can inform families at high risk of severe genetic disorders. Patients with IL-10 signalling defects because of pathogenic variants in IL10RA, Il10RB, and IL10 develop severe infantile onset inflammatory bowel disease that is completely penetrant and has a high morbidity and substantial mortality despite treatment.

METHODS

We performed a survey among tertiary specialist paediatric centers of 10 countries on the utilization of predictive prenatal genetic diagnosis in IL-10 signalling defects. We retrospectively report prenatal genetics in a series of 8 families.

RESULTS

International variation in legislation, guidelines, expert opinion, as well as cultural and religious background of families and clinicians results in variable utilization of preimplantation and prenatal genetic testing for IL-10 signalling defects. Eleven referrals for prenatal diagnosis for IL-10 signalling defects were identified across 4 countries. We report on 8 families who underwent prenatal preimplantation monogenic testing after in vitro fertilization (n = 2) and/or by amniocentesis/chorion villus sampling (n = 6). A genetic diagnosis was established in 1 foetus and excluded in 7 foetuses (all IL10RA variants).

CONCLUSIONS

Prenatal genetic testing for IL10R-defects is feasible, yet the legal and ethical considerations are complex and controversial. In some countries, predictive genetics for IL-10-related signalling defects is entering clinical practice.

How will new genetic technologies, such as gene editing, change reproductive decision-making? Views of high-risk couples

Couples at increased risk of having offspring with a specific genetic disorder who want to avoid having an affected child have several reproductive options including prenatal diagnosis (PND) and preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). In the future, non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD), germline gene editing (GGE) and somatic gene editing (SGE) might become available. This study explores if, and how, availability of new genetic technologies, including NIPD, GGE, SGE, would change reproductive decision-making of high-risk couples. In 2018, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 genetically at-risk couples. Couples previously had received genetic counselling for PND and PGT, and in most cases opted for (one of) these techniques, at one Dutch Clinical Genetics Center between 2013 and 2017. Considerations participants mentioned regarding the hypothetical use of NIPD, GGE and SGE, seem similar to considerations regarding PND and PGT and are reflected in underlying concepts. These include safety and burden for mother and child, and moral considerations. Couples generally favoured NIPD over PND as this would be safe and enables earlier diagnosis. Increased opportunities of having a 'healthy' embryo and less embryo disposal were considerations in favour of GGE. Some regarded GGE as unsafe and feared slippery slope scenarios. Couples were least favourable towards SGE compared to choosing for a genetic reproductive technology, because of the perceived burden for the affected offspring. With the possibly growing number of technological options, understanding high risk couples' perspectives can assist in navigating the reproductive decision-making process. Counsellors should be prepared to counsel on more and complex reproductive options.

The decision-making process, experience, and perceptions of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) users

PURPOSE

The decision to undergo preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) entails a variety of personal and societal variables. Although PGT technology is widely accepted and used, few studies have queried the motives and concerns of PGT users; moreover, in-depth qualitative data regarding the PGT experience is scant.

METHODS

In order to explore and analyze the experience, concerns, expectations, and attitudes toward the PGT technique and its implications, semi-structured interviews were conducted in a single tertiary medical center with 43 Israeli PGT users for HLA matching and autosomal dominant, autosomal recessive, and X-linked genetic disorders.

RESULTS

The primary considerations in choosing PGT were prevention of birth of a child who would suffer a terminal or chronic disease as well as abrogation of a familial genetic condition. Religion played a decisive role in accepting PGT as an antenatal option. Regarding satisfaction with the PGT experience, many interviewees highlighted the need for greater attention to be given to potential stages of failure throughout the procedure and the need for emotional support. Our clinical results regarding implantation rate and cumulative live birth rate are 38-40% and 27-30%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This survey broadens understanding of the specialized needs of women, couples, and minority groups undergoing PGT and underscores the relevance of counseling services for PGT users.

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.

Impediments to communication and relationships between infertility care providers and patients

BACKGROUND

Infertility patients generally see provider-patient communication and relationships as important, but as often insufficient, raising critical questions regarding why these gaps persist, and how they might best be addressed.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews of approximately one hour each were conducted with 37 ART providers and patients (17 physicians, 10 other health providers, and 10 patients) and were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Patients see clinicians' interactions as ranging widely from good to bad, related to several specific barriers and factors. Patients and providers may differ in their physical and emotional experiences, expectations concerning treatment outcomes and uncertainties, and time frames and finances, generating dynamic processes and tensions. Characteristics of particular providers, clinics and patients can also vary. Infertility patients tend to find only one outcome acceptable - a "take home baby" - rather than partial success, as is the case with many other diseases. Yet most IVF cycles fail. Many patients must pay considerable out-of-pocket expenses for infertility treatment, exacerbating disappointments and frustrations. Providers often work in competitive, entrepreneurial markets, and "hype" their potential success. After treatment failures, providers may feel guilty and withdraw from patients. Yet these behaviors can antagonize patients more than physicians realize, aggravating patient stresses. Several providers described how they understood patients' needs and perceptions more fully only after becoming infertility patients themselves. Interactions with not only physicians, but other providers (e.g., nurses and staff) can play key roles. Patients may be willing to understand these impediments, but providers often communicate these obstacles and reasons poorly or not at all, furthering tensions.

CONCLUSIONS

These data, the first to examine several critical aspects of challenges that infertility providers and patients face in communication and relationships, suggest that several key dynamic processes and factors may be involved, and need to be addressed. While prior research has shown that infertility patients value, but often feel disappointed in relationships with clinicians, the present data highlight several specific impediments, and thus have critical implications for future practice, research, guidelines and education.