An easy test but a hard decision: ethical issues concerning non-invasive prenatal testing for autosomal recessive disorders

First and Second Level Haemoglobinopathies Diagnosis: Best Practices of the Italian Society of Thalassemia and Haemoglobinopathies (SITE)

The purpose of this best practice paper is to review the current recommendations for the identification and prenatal diagnosis of hemoglobinopathies. Methods: The management committee of SITE selected and gathered a multidisciplinary team in order to formulate recommendations based on the available scientific evidence integrated with the opinions of experts, with the purpose of supporting clinicians. Results: We provide recommendations for first level tests (complete blood count, hemoglobin separation and iron balance), second level tests (molecular diagnosis) and prenatal diagnosis. Five Italian experts in hemoglobinopathies were consulted regarding the orientation of prenatal diagnosis, and for each indication, the degree of agreement among the experts has been specified. Conclusions: Best practice recommendations are the final outcome of this translational research and allow transfer to daily clinical practice.

From late fatherhood to prenatal screening of monogenic disorders: evidence and ethical concerns

BACKGROUND

With the help of ART, an advanced parental age is not considered to be a serious obstacle for reproduction anymore. However, significant health risks for future offspring hide behind the success of reproductive medicine for the treatment of reduced fertility associated with late parenthood. Although an advanced maternal age is a well-known risk factor for poor reproductive outcomes, understanding the impact of an advanced paternal age on offspring is yet to be elucidated. De novo monogenic disorders (MDs) are highly associated with late fatherhood. MDs are one of the major sources of paediatric morbidity and mortality, causing significant socioeconomic and psychological burdens to society. Although individually rare, the combined prevalence of these disorders is as high as that of chromosomal aneuploidies, indicating the increasing need for prenatal screening. With the help of advanced reproductive technologies, families with late paternity have the option of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for multiple MDs (MD-NIPT), which has a sensitivity and specificity of almost 100%.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The main aims of the current review were to examine the effect of late paternity on the origin and nature of MDs, to highlight the role of NIPT for the detection of a variety of paternal age-associated MDs, to describe clinical experiences and to reflect on the ethical concerns surrounding the topic of late paternity and MD-NIPT.

SEARCH METHODS

An extensive search of peer-reviewed publications (1980-2021) in English from the PubMed and Google Scholar databases was based on key words in different combinations: late paternity, paternal age, spermatogenesis, selfish spermatogonial selection, paternal age effect, de novo mutations (DNMs), MDs, NIPT, ethics of late fatherhood, prenatal testing and paternal rights.

OUTCOMES

An advanced paternal age provokes the accumulation of DNMs, which arise in continuously dividing germline cells. A subset of DNMs, owing to their effect on the rat sarcoma virus protein-mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathway, becomes beneficial for spermatogonia, causing selfish spermatogonial selection and outgrowth, and in some rare cases may lead to spermatocytic seminoma later in life. In the offspring, these selfish DNMs cause paternal age effect (PAE) disorders with a severe and even life-threatening phenotype. The increasing tendency for late paternity and the subsequent high risk of PAE disorders indicate an increased need for a safe and reliable detection procedure, such as MD-NIPT. The MD-NIPT approach has the capacity to provide safe screening for pregnancies at risk of PAE disorders and MDs, which constitute up to 20% of all pregnancies. The primary risks include pregnancies with a paternal age over 40 years, a previous history of an affected pregnancy/child, and/or congenital anomalies detected by routine ultrasonography. The implementation of NIPT-based screening would support the early diagnosis and management needed in cases of affected pregnancy. However, the benefits of MD-NIPT need to be balanced with the ethical challenges associated with the introduction of such an approach into routine clinical practice, namely concerns regarding reproductive autonomy, informed consent, potential disability discrimination, paternal rights and PAE-associated issues, equity and justice in accessing services, and counselling.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Considering the increasing parental age and risks of MDs, combined NIPT for chromosomal aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes as well as tests for MDs might become a part of routine pregnancy management in the near future. Moreover, the ethical challenges associated with the introduction of MD-NIPT into routine clinical practice need to be carefully evaluated. Furthermore, more focus and attention should be directed towards the ethics of late paternity, paternal rights and paternal genetic guilt associated with pregnancies affected with PAE MDs.

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.

Women's perspectives on the ethical implications of non-invasive prenatal testing: a qualitative analysis to inform health policy decisions

Background

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) is a technology which provides information about fetal genetic characteristics (including sex) very early in pregnancy by examining fetal DNA obtained from a sample of maternal blood. NIPT is a morally complex technology that has advanced quickly to market with a strong push from industry developers, leaving many areas of uncertainty still to be resolved, and creating a strong need for health policy that reflects women’s social and ethical values. We approach the need for ethical policy-making by studying the use of NIPT and emerging policy in the province of Ontario, Canada.

Methods

Using an adapted version of constructivist grounded theory, we conducted interviews with 38 women who have had personal experiences with NIPT. We used an iterative process of data collection and analysis and a staged coding strategy to conduct a descriptive analysis of ethics issues identified implicitly and explicitly by women who have been affected by this technology.

Results

The findings of this paper focus on current ethical issues for women seeking NIPT, including place in the prenatal pathway, health care provider counselling about the test, industry influence on the diffusion of NIPT, consequences of availability of test results. Other issues gain relevance in the context of future policy decisions regarding NIPT, including funding of NIPT and principles that may govern the expansion of the scope of NIPT. These findings are not an exhaustive list of all the potential ethical issues related to NIPT, but rather a representation of the issues which concern women who have personal experience with this test.

Conclusions

Women who have had personal experience with NIPT have concerns and priorities which sometimes contrast dramatically with the theoretical ethics literature. These findings suggest the importance of engaging patients in ethical deliberation about morally complex technologies, and point to the need for more deliberative patient engagement work in this area.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0267-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Joint SOGC-CCMG Opinion for Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: An Update for All Canadian Providers of Maternity and Reproductive Healthcare in the Era of Direct-to-Consumer Testing

OBJECTIVE

This guideline was written to update Canadian maternity care and reproductive healthcare providers on pre- and postconceptional reproductive carrier screening for women or couples who may be at risk of being carriers for autosomal recessive (AR), autosomal dominant (AD), or X-linked (XL) conditions, with risk of transmission to the fetus. Four previous SOGC- Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) guidelines are updated and merged into the current document.

INTENDED USERS

All maternity care (most responsible health provider [MRHP]) and paediatric providers; maternity nursing; nurse practitioner; provincial maternity care administrator; medical student; and postgraduate resident year 1-7.

TARGET POPULATION

Fertile, sexually active females and their fertile, sexually active male partners who are either planning a pregnancy or are pregnant (preferably in the first trimester of pregnancy, but any gestational age is acceptable).

OPTIONS

Women and their partners will be able to obtain appropriate genetic carrier screening information and possible diagnosis of AR, AD, or XL disorders (preferably pre-conception), thereby allowing an informed choice regarding genetic carrier screening and reproductive options (e.g., prenatal diagnosis, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, egg or sperm donation, or adoption).

OUTCOMES

Informed reproductive decisions related to genetic carrier screening and reproductive outcomes based on family history, ethnic background, past obstetrical history, known carrier status, or genetic diagnosis. SOGC REPRODUCTIVE CARRIER SCREENING SUMMARY STATEMENT (2016): Pre-conception or prenatal education and counselling for reproductive carrier screening requires a discussion about testing within the three perinatal genetic carrier screening/diagnosis time periods, which include pre-conception, prenatal, and neonatal for conditions currently being screened for and diagnosed. This new information should be added to the standard reproductive carrier screening protocols that are already being utilized by the most responsible maternity provider through the informed consent process with the patient. (III-A; GRADE low/moderate) SOGC OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS QUALITY AND GRADE: There was a strong observational/expert opinion (quality and grade) for the genetic carrier literature with randomized controlled trial evidence being available only for the invasive testing. Both the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care quality and classification and the GRADE evidence quality and grade are provided.

EVIDENCE

MEDLINE; PubMed; government neonatal screening websites; key words/common reproductive genetic carrier screened diseases/previous SOGC Guidelines/medical academic societies (Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine [SMFM]; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics; American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG]; CCMG; Royal College Obstetrics and Gynaecology [RCOG] [UK]; American Society of Human Genetics [ASHG]; International Society of Prenatal Diagnosis [ISPD])/provincial neonatal screening policies and programs; search terms (carrier screening, prenatal screening, neonatal genetic/metabolic screening, cystic fibrosis (CF), thalassemia, hemoglobinopathy, hemophilia, Fragile X syndrome (FXS), spinal muscular atrophy, Ashkenazi Jewish carrier screening, genetic carrier screening protocols, AR, AD, XL).

SEARCH PERIOD

10 years (June 2005-September 2015); initial search dates June 30, 2015 and September 15, 2015; completed final search January 4, 2016. Validation of articles was completed by primary authors RD Wilson and I De Bie.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COST

Benefits are to provide an evidenced based reproductive genetic carrier screening update consensus based on international opinions and publications for the use of Canadian women, who are planning a pregnancy or who are pregnant and have been identified to be at risk (personal or male partner family or reproductive history) for the transmission of a clinically significant genetic condition to their offspring with associated morbidity and/or mortality. Harm may arise from having counselling and informed testing of the carrier status of the mother, their partner, or their fetus, as well as from declining to have this counselling and informed testing or from not having the opportunity for counselling and informed testing. Costs will ensue both from the provision of opportunities for counselling and testing, as well as when no such opportunities are offered or are declined and the birth of a child with a significant inherited condition and resulting morbidity/mortality occurs; these comprise not only the health care costs to the system but also the social/financial/psychological/emotional costs to the family. These recommendations are based on expert opinion and have not been subjected to a health economics assessment and local or provincial implementation will be required.

GUIDELINE UPDATE

This guideline is an update of four previous joint SOGC-CCMG Genetic Screening Guidelines dated 2002, 2006, 2008, and 2008 developed by the SOGC Genetic Committee in collaboration with the CCMG Prenatal Diagnosis Committee (now Clinical Practice Committee). 2016 CARRIER SCREENING RECOMMENDATIONS.

Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis for single gene disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis for single gene disorders is coming to fruition in its clinical utility. The presence of cell-free DNA in maternal plasma has been recognized for many years, and a number of applications have developed from this. Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis for single gene disorders has lagged behind due to complexities of technology development, lack of investment and the need for validation samples for rare disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Publications are emerging demonstrating a variety of technical approaches and feasibility of clinical application. Techniques for analysis of cell-free DNA including digital PCR, next-generation sequencing and relative haplotype dosage have been used most often for assay development. Analysis of circulating fetal cells in the maternal blood is still being investigated as a viable alternative and more recently transcervical trophoblast cells. Studies exploring ethical and social issues are generally positive but raise concerns around the routinization of prenatal testing.

SUMMARY

Further work is necessary to make testing available to all patients with a pregnancy at risk of a single gene disorder, and it remains to be seen if the development of more powerful technologies such as isolation and analysis of single cells will shift the emphasis of noninvasive prenatal diagnosis. As testing becomes possible for a wider range of conditions, more ethical questions will become relevant.

Preferences for prenatal diagnosis of sickle-cell disorder: A discrete choice experiment comparing potential service users and health-care providers

Background

Non‐invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) for sickle‐cell disorder (SCD) is moving closer to implementation and studies considering stakeholder preferences are required to underpin strategies for offering NIPD in clinical practice.

Objective

Determine service user and provider preferences for key attributes of prenatal diagnostic tests for SCD and examine views on NIPD.

Method

A questionnaire that includes a discrete choice experiment was used to determine the preferences of service users and providers for prenatal tests that varied across three attributes: accuracy, time of test and risk of miscarriage.

Results

Adults who were carriers of SCD or affected with the condition (N=67) were recruited from haemoglobinopathy clinics at two maternity units. Health professionals, predominately midwives, who offer antenatal care (N=62) were recruited from one maternity unit. No miscarriage risk was a key driver of decision making for both service users and providers. Service providers placed greater emphasis on accuracy than service users. Current uptake of invasive tests was 63%, whilst predicted uptake of NIPD was 93.8%. Many service users (55.4%) and providers (52.5%) think pressure to have prenatal testing will increase when NIPD for SCD becomes available.

Conclusions

There are clear differences between service users and health professionals’ preferences for prenatal tests for sickle‐cell disorder. The safety of NIPD is welcomed by parents and uptake is likely to be high. To promote informed choice, pretest counselling should be balanced and not exclusively focused on test safety. Counselling strategies that are sensitive to feelings of pressure to test will be essential.

A Qualitative Study to Explore the Views and Attitudes towards Prenatal Testing in Adults Who Have Muenke Syndrome and their Partners

Muenke syndrome constitutes the most common syndromic form of craniosynostosis, occurring in 1 in 30,000 live births. The phenotype is variable, ranging from no clinical findings to complex presentation. Facilitating reproductive decision making for couples at genetic risk of having a child with Muenke syndrome is an important aspect of genetic counselling. Prenatal genetic testing for Muenke syndrome is accurate; however the value of testing is uncertain with a variable phenotype. The purpose of this study was to explore attitudes towards prenatal testing in couples where one partner had tested positive for the Muenke mutation. We used a qualitative approach based on thematic analysis and collected data using individual semi-structured interviews with eight parents. Five key themes were: The Muenke journey; Impact and knowledge of diagnosis; Knowledge and attitude to prenatal testing; Stigma and sharing of information; and Information retention. Knowledge of Muenke syndrome and prenatal testing was poor. Genetic information was provided when treatment of their affected child was their paramount concern. Couples reported not sharing genetic information with family due to fear of stigmatisation. Couples cannot make reproductive decisions if lacking appropriate understanding of the choices: timely genetic counselling regarding prenatal testing is needed when relevant to them.

Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) for single gene disorders: cost analysis of NIPD and invasive testing pathways

Objective

Evaluate the costs of offering non‐invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) for single gene disorders compared to traditional invasive testing to inform NIPD implementation into clinical practice.

Method

Total costs of diagnosis using NIPD or invasive testing pathways were compared for a representative set of single gene disorders.

Results

For autosomal dominant conditions, where NIPD molecular techniques are straightforward, NIPD cost £314 less than invasive testing. NIPD for autosomal recessive and X‐linked conditions requires more complicated technical approaches and total costs were more than invasive testing, e.g. NIPD for spinal muscular atrophy was £1090 more than invasive testing. Impact of test uptake on costs was assessed using sickle cell disorder as an example. Anticipated high uptake of NIPD resulted in an incremental cost of NIPD over invasive testing of £48 635 per 100 pregnancies at risk of sickle cell disorder.

Conclusion

Total costs of NIPD are dependent upon the complexity of the testing technique required. Anticipated increased demand for testing may have economic implications for prenatal diagnostic services. Ethical issues requiring further consideration are highlighted including directing resources to NIPD when used for information only and restricting access to safe tests if it is not cost‐effective to develop NIPD for rare conditions. © 2016 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

What's Already Known About This Topic?

Non‐invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) for some single gene disorders has entered clinical practice and NIPD for other conditions is in development.

Studies exploring the costs and benefits of implementing NIPD for a range of single gene disorders have not been undertaken.

What Does This Study Add?

For single gene disorders where technical approaches are straightforward, NIPD was considerably cheaper than invasive testing, but for conditions that need more technically challenging approaches NIPD was more expensive.

The anticipated increase in test uptake following the introduction of NIPD will be a major contributing factor to the cost of a genetic service offering prenatal diagnosis for single gene disorders in clinical practice.

Prospective monitoring and audit of uptake following clinical implementation is required to allow full consideration of the economic, social and ethical issues that will arise.