Offering pregnant women different levels of genetic information from prenatal chromosome microarray: a prospective study

Attitudes toward uncertain results from prenatal exome sequencing: a national survey among healthcare professionals working in the prenatal setting

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate the attitudes of healthcare professionals (HPs) working in the prenatal setting toward uncertain results (UR) from prenatal exome sequencing (pES) in China.

Methods

We conducted a national survey among HPs working in the prenatal setting. UR in our study include variants of uncertain significance (VUS), variants with variable penetrance/expressivity (VVPE), and secondary findings unrelated to the indication for testing (SFs). A total of 285 questionnaires that met the inclusion criteria were collected. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26.

Results

When performing the pre-test counseling, only 7.4% of HPs mentioned the possibility of VUS, 6.3% discussed the possibility of VVPE, and 7.4% introduced the SFs with parents with the option to not report these variants. In post-test counseling, 73.0-82.8% HPs discussed with the parents but did not make any recommendations for managing the pregnancy after reporting UR (73.0% for VUS, 82.8% for VVPE, 74.7% for SFs, respectively).

Conclusion

Most parents did not have the option of opting out of reporting UR from pES in pre-test counseling. UR did not influence the pregnancy recommendation made by most HPs. Establishing national guidelines for reporting UR from pES and developing strategies to improve counseling skills may help HPs manage UR.

Exploring attitudes and experiences with reproductive genetic carrier screening among couples seeking medically assisted reproduction: a longitudinal survey study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the attitudes and experiences of subfertile couples applying for medically assisted reproduction (MAR) using their own gametes towards reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) for monogenic conditions.

METHODS

A prospective survey study was conducted where subfertile couples were recruited from the fertility centre of a university hospital in Flanders, Belgium. Participants were offered RGCS free of charge and completed self-administered questionnaires at three different time points.

RESULTS

The study sample consisted of 26 couples. Most participants had no children, did not consider themselves as religious, and had some form of higher education. Overall, attitudes towards RGCS were mostly positive and the intention to participate in RGCS was high. Anxiety scores were only elevated and clinically relevant for a limited number of participants. A large proportion of participants would consider preventive reproductive options like prenatal diagnosis or in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) combined with pre-implantation genetic testing for monogenic conditions (PGT-M) in the event of an increased likelihood of conceiving a child with a hereditary condition. Participants were satisfied with their decision to undergo RGCS, and the majority would recommend RGCS to other couples.

CONCLUSION

Our study findings suggest that subfertile couples applying for MAR using their own gametes find RGCS acceptable and have a positive attitude towards it. This study provides valuable insights into the perspectives of these couples, highlighting the need for appropriate counseling and timely information provision.

An incidental finding in prenatal exome sequencing-A case study and review of the clinical and ethical considerations

The introduction of genomic testing into prenatal care has come at a rapid pace and has been met with significant clinical and ethical challenges, specifically when dealing with incidental findings. We present the case of a couple in their first pregnancy who were referred to our institution with isolated fetal cataracts on morphology scan. After an unremarkable infectious disease workup and microarray on an amniocentesis sample, the couple opted for fetal whole-exome sequencing to investigate the cataracts further. This investigation did not find any cause for the cataracts but yielded an incidental finding of a de novo pathogenic variant in the SCN1A gene unrelated to the cataracts. Pathogenic variants in the SCN1A gene are strongly associated with severe myoclonic epilepsy of infancy, or Dravet syndrome. After extensive genetic counseling, the couple decided to terminate the pregnancy at 28 weeks' gestation based on this finding. This case highlights some of the important clinical and ethical considerations in prenatal genetic diagnosis, particularly in the group of patients in which there is no phenotypic evidence in-utero of the incidental finding. The case demonstrates the value of frameworks and guidelines to guide management decisions for both clinicians and patients.

Development and use of the Australian reproductive genetic carrier screening decision aid

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) may be offered to all individuals and couples, regardless of family history or ethnicity. "Mackenzie's Mission" (MM) is an Australian RGCS pilot study, evaluating the offer of couple-based screening for ~1300 genes associated with around 750 autosomal and X-linked recessive childhood-onset conditions. Each member of the couple makes an individual decision about RGCS and provides consent. We developed a decision aid (RGCS-DA) to support informed decision-making in MM, suitable for couples who were either non-pregnant or in early pregnancy. A Delphi approach invited experts to review values statements related to various concepts of RGCS. Three review rounds were completed, seeking consensus for relevance and clarity of statements, incorporating recommended modifications in subsequent iterations. The final RGCS-DA contains 14 statements that achieved Delphi consensus plus the attitude scale of the measure of informed choice. This was then evaluated in cognitive talk aloud interviews with potential users to assess face and content validity. Minimal wording changes were required at this stage. After this process, the RGCS-DA was piloted with 15 couples participating in MM who were then interviewed about their decision-making. The RGCS-DA prompted discussion within couples and facilitated in depth consideration of screening. There was reassurance when values aligned and a sense of shared decision-making within the couple. This RGCS-DA may become a very useful tool in supporting couples' decision making and contribute to RGCS being feasible for scaled-up implementation.

A framework for reporting secondary and incidental findings in prenatal sequencing: When and for whom?

As the use of genomic sequencing (GS) in the prenatal setting becomes more widespread, laboratories and clinicians will be tasked with making decisions about whether to offer incidental and secondary findings to expectant parents and, if so, which ones. Unfortunately, few guidelines or position statements issued by professional bodies address the return of secondary findings specifically in the context of prenatal GS, nor do they offer clear guidance on whether, and which types of incidental findings should be reported. Laboratories and clinicians will also need to navigate other challenges, such as how to obtain sufficiently informed consent, workload burdens for both laboratories and clinicians, and funding. Here we discuss these, and other challenges associated with offering incidental and secondary findings in the context of prenatal GS. We outline existing guidelines for return of these findings, prenatally and in children. We review the existing literature on stakeholder perspectives on return of incidental and secondary findings and discuss the main practical and ethical challenges that require consideration. We then propose a framework to help guide decision-making, suggesting a baseline routine analysis, with additional layers of analysis that could be offered, according to local laboratory policy, with additional opt-in consent from the parents.

Study protocol: childhood outcomes of fetal genomic variants: the PrenatAL Microarray (PALM) cohort study

BACKGROUND

The implementation of genomic testing in pregnancy means that couples have access to more information about their child's genetic make-up before birth than ever before. One of the resulting challenges is the management of genetic variations with unclear clinical significance. This population-based study will help to close this critical knowledge gap through a multidisciplinary cohort study of children with and without genomic copy number variants (CNVs) diagnosed before birth. By comparing children with prenatally-ascertained CNVs to children without a CNV, we aim to (1) examine their developmental, social-emotional and health status; (2) measure the impact of prenatal diagnosis of a CNV on maternal perceptions of child health, behavior and development; and (3) determine the proportion of prenatally-ascertained CNVs of unknown or uncertain significance that are reclassified as benign or pathogenic after 2 or more years.

METHODS

This study will establish and follow up a cohort of mother-child pairs who have had a prenatal diagnosis with a chromosomal microarray from 2013-2019 in the Australian state of Victoria. Children aged 12 months to 7 years will be assessed using validated, age-appropriate measures. The primary outcome measures will be the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence IV (WPSSI-IV) IQ score (2.5 to 7 year old's), the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (12-30 months old), and the Brief Infant- Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) score. Clinical assessment by a pediatrician will also be performed. Secondary outcomes will be scores obtained from the: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale, Maternal Postnatal Attachment Questionnaire, the Vulnerable Child Scale, Profile of Mood States, Parent Sense of Competence Scale. A descriptive analysis of the reclassification rates of CNVs after ≥2 years will be performed.

DISCUSSION

This study protocol describes the first Australian cohort study following children after prenatal diagnostic testing with chromosomal microarray. It will provide long-term outcomes of fetal genomic variants to guide evidence-based pre-and postnatal care. This, in turn, will inform future efforts to mitigate the negative consequences of conveying genomic uncertainty during pregnancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12620000446965p ; Registered on April 6, 2020.

Clinicians' attitudes towards parental choice in the era of advanced genomic tests in pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

Israel is one of the first countries to incorporate chromosomal microarray analysis into routine prenatal care. We explored attitudes of Israeli healthcare professionals (HCPs) towards the disclosure of challenging findings: variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS), susceptibility loci (SL) for neurodevelopmental disorders and variants associated with adult-onset (AO) conditions. Particularly, we sought their views on providing parental choice regarding the disclosure of these findings.

METHODS

Twenty-nine in-depth interviews were conducted with genetic counselors (n = 19), medical geneticists (n = 4), medical geneticists that are trained in and practice fetal medicine (n = 3), and fetal medicine experts (n = 3).

RESULTS

Most participants (n = 24) supported parental choice regarding uncertain genetic information. Engaging parents in disclosure decisions allows avoidance from potentially anxiety-provoking information, practicing parental autonomy, and better preparation in cases where uncertain findings are identified. HCPs believed that given appropriate preparation, parents can make informed decisions. Four participants believed that disclosure should be based on professional judgment and one supported full-disclosure. Unlike VUS or SL, all interviewees agreed that in cases of medically actionable AO conditions, the benefit of disclosure outweighs the damage.

CONCLUSION

HCPs attitudes are largely in-line with the Israeli practice of involving parents in disclosure decisions regarding uncertain information. This may mitigate disclosure dilemmas and allow personalized disclosure based on parents' views.

Chromosomal microarray analysis for pregnancies with abnormal maternal serum screening who undergo invasive prenatal testing

Recently, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) has been implemented as a first-tier test in pregnancies with ultrasound anomalies. However, its application for pregnancies with abnormal maternal serum screening (AMSS) only is not widespread. This study evaluated the value of CMA compared to traditional karyotyping in pregnancies with increased risk following first- or second-trimester maternal serum screening. Data from 3973 pregnancies with referral for invasive prenatal testing following AMSS were obtained from April 2016 to May 2020. Routine karyotyping was performed and single nucleotide polymorphism array was recommended. The foetuses were categorized according to the indications as AMSS only (group A) and AMSS with ultrasound anomalies (group B). CMA was performed on 713 prenatal samples. The proportion of women opting for CMA testing in both groups increased over the years. The incremental yield of clinically significant findings for pregnancies with high risk of screening results was similar to that for the foetuses with ultrasound soft markers (P > 0.05), but significantly lower than that for the foetuses with structural anomalies (P < 0.05). The total frequencies of variants of unknown significance in groups A and B showed no significant difference (P > 0.05). CMA should be performed for pregnant women undergoing prenatal invasive testing due to AMSS, especially with high-risk results, regardless of ultrasound findings.

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

BACKGROUND

The value of chromosome microarray (CMA) in the prenatal detection of significant chromosome anomalies is well-established. To guide the introduction of this technique in routine clinical practice, the Joint Committee on Genomics in Medicine developed national UK guidelines for reporting prenatal CMA in 2015.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the UK experience of utilising prenatal CMA.

METHOD

A 36-item survey was distributed to all UK clinical genetics services (n = 23) in March 2019 requesting information pertaining to experience since diagnostic testing commenced and current practice (March 2018 to March 2019).

RESULTS

Eighteen UK genetics services currently offer prenatal CMA. A total of 14,554 tests had been performed. A pathogenic copy number variant was identified in 7.8% of tests overall, though the diagnostic rate increased to 8.4% in the final year of the survey. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were reported in 0.7% of tests, and 'actionable' incidental findings in 0.12%.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic rate has improved over time, while reporting of VUS has decreased. Reviewing survey responses at a national level highlights variation in testing experience and practice, raising considerations both for future guideline development and implementation of other novel techniques including prenatal whole exome sequencing.

Personalized prenatal genomic testing: Couples' experience with choice regarding uncertain and adult-onset findings from chromosomal-microarray-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chromosomal-microarray-analysis (CMA) can identify variants of uncertain clinical significance, susceptibility-loci for neurodevelopmental conditions, and risk for adult-onset conditions. We explored choices made by couples undergoing prenatal CMA, their understanding of these findings, reasons for and against receiving them, and whether they believe parents or professionals should decide which are disclosed.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women (n = 27) or their partners (n = 15) during the week following prenatal CMA testing and analyzed using grounded theory.

RESULTS

Over half the interviewees (55%) recalled at least two of the three types of CMA results they chose whether to receive. Sixty-four percent found the choice simple, whereas 36% found it difficult. All participants could clearly explain their choices, which were based on the perceived actionability and psychological impact of the information. Sixty percent viewed their choice favorably, whereas ~21% would have preferred clinicians to decide for them. More women than men, and more decisive than indecisive participants supported parental choice.

CONCLUSION

Overall, expectant parents can make informed choices about which uncertain findings about their fetuses they wish to receive, and value the opportunity to tailor results to their values and wishes. Arguments presented provide the basis for a decision-aid tool for expecting parents.

Couples experiences of receiving uncertain results following prenatal microarray or exome sequencing: A mixed-methods systematic review

Background

Tests in pregnancy such as chromosomal microarray analysis and exome sequencing are increasing diagnostic yield for fetal structural anomalies, but have greater potential to result in uncertain findings. This systematic review investigated the experiences of prospective parents about receiving uncertain results from these tests.

Methods

A systematic search of three electronic databases was conducted. Data extraction was performed for studies that met the eligibility and quality criteria. Results were synthesised following the principles of thematic analysis.

Results

Fourteen studies (10 qualitative, 4 quantitative) were included. Findings were grouped into three overarching themes. Sources of uncertainty included the testing procedure, the diagnosis and prognosis, and health professionals' own uncertainty. The clinical impact of the uncertainty included parents struggling to make clinical decisions with the information available, the emotional impact included decisional‐regret, shock, worry and feeling overwhelmed. To manage the uncertainty, parents sought support from healthcare professionals, friends, family, the internet and other parents as well as remaining hopeful.

Conclusions

Prospective parents experience a myriad of uncertainties in the prenatal setting, which must be handled sensitively. Future research should explore optimal ways of managing uncertainty to minimise harm. Recommendations are made for discussing uncertainty during pre‐ and post‐test counseling.

Detection of copy number variants with chromosomal microarray in 10 377 pregnancies at a single laboratory

Introduction

Invasive prenatal testing with chromosomal microarray analysis may be a relevant option for all pregnant women, but there is only moderate‐quality evidence for such an offer. We intended to study the prevalence of copy number variants (CNVs) in prenatal samples using a single SNP‐array platform stratified by indication.

Material and methods

A cross‐sectional study was performed based on a cohort. From January 2015 to December 2017, a total of 10 377 prenatal samples were received for prenatal single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)‐array in the laboratory of the Genetics Generation Advancement Corporation. Indications for chromosomal microarray analysis studies included the confirmation of an abnormal karyotype, ultrasound abnormalities, advanced maternal age and parental anxiety. CNVs and region of homozygosity identified by the SNP‐array were analyzed.

Results

Of 10 377 cases, 689 had ultrasound abnormalities and 9688 were ascertained to have other indications. The overall prevalence of CNVs was 2.1% (n = 223/10 377, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9‐2.4), but the prevalence was 4.4% (95% CI 3.0‐6.1) for cases referred with abnormal ultrasound findings and 2.0% (95% CI 1.7‐2.3) for other indications. Of the 223 CNVs detected, 42/10 377 were pathogenic (0.4%, 95% CI 0.3‐0.6), 84 were susceptibility CNV (0.8%, 95% CI 0.6‐1.0) and 97 were variants of uncertain significance (0.9%, 95% CI 0.8‐1.1). Using an SNP‐based platform allowed for the detection of paternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 14 in a fetus with ultrasound abnormality.

Conclusions

With an indication of advanced maternal age but normal ultrasound scans, the prevalence of pathogenic CNVs was 0.4% and that of susceptibility CNV 0.7%. As CNVs are independent of maternal age, the prevalence is likely the same for younger women. Thus, this study provides further evidence that chromosomal microarray analysis should be available for all women who wish to receive diagnostic testing, as this risk is above the cut‐off of 1:300 for Down syndrome, leading to the suggestion of invasive testing. A chromosomal microarray analysis based on SNP‐array platform is preferable, as it can also detect uniparental disomy in addition to copy number variants.

Maternity health care professionals' views and experiences of fetal genomic uncertainty: A review

The field of prenatal screening and diagnosis for fetal anomalies has been marked by a rapid succession of technological advances, including most notably, chromosomal microarray analysis, and next generation sequencing. Despite the diagnostic advantages of these technologies, their incorporation into prenatal testing has created additional challenges of revealing genomic variants of unknown or uncertain significance, and secondary findings. While detailed posttest counseling about uncertain variants is best performed by medical geneticists, many of the screening and diagnostic tests that lead to this information are actually ordered by general maternity health care professionals (HCPs), such as obstetricians, midwives, and family physicians. Maternity HCPs support pregnant women through to the conclusion of their pregnancy and the postpartum period, and thus are close observers of the psychosocial impart of fetal genomic uncertainty on women and their families. While there have been many studies exploring the handling of genomic uncertainty by genetics HCPs, there has been relatively less attention paid to maternity HCPs without speciality training in genetics. This review explores the current literature surrounding nongenetic maternity HCPs' views and experiences of genomic uncertainty and returning uncertain results in the prenatal setting.

Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 2: The 59 genes ACMG recommends reporting as secondary findings when sequencing postnatally should be reported when detected on fetal (and parental) sequencing

Genome sequencing is increasingly being used to aid genetic diagnosis in fetuses with structural abnormalities detected on ultrasound examination. However, with clinical exome and genome sequencing, there is potential for the recognition and reporting of incidental or secondary findings unrelated to the indication for ordering the sequencing, but of potential medical value for patient care. In the postnatal setting, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) has clear guidelines that state that when offering sequencing, secondary findings should be reported in 59 genes for which ACMG consider there is a clinical evidence that pathogenic variants may result in disease that might be prevented or treated, with the option to opt out of receiving this information. However, these guidelines specifically exclude prenatal sequencing. Here, we report the debate on whether or not pathogenic findings in these 59 genes should or should not be reported in the prenatal setting. Although more were in favour of reporting before the debate, there was no significant consensus from the audience. After the debate there was a swing toward not reporting, but a slim majority (55%) remained in favour, indicating that this is an area requiring further research and the development of evidence-based guidelines applicable to prenatal proband and trio sequencing.

Information Women Choose to Receive About Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the choices of women with both high-risk and low-risk pregnancies who are undergoing prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in a clinical setting regarding three challenging types of findings: variants of uncertain clinical significance, susceptibility loci for neurodevelopmental disorders, and copy number variants associated with risks for adult-onset conditions. We assessed whether women's choices were associated with indications for testing or with one-on-one pretest genetic counseling.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, medical records of women who underwent invasive prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis testing (N=1,070) at Hadassah Medical Center between June 2017 and February 2018 were examined for testing indications, choices regarding chromosomal microarray analysis findings, and type of pretest genetic counseling. Multivariable analyses to assess associations with testing indication and prior genetic counseling were carried out using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 56% of women (n=593) chose to be informed of all three types of findings and 20% (n=218) chose not to be informed of any of the findings beyond high-penetrance childhood-onset pathogenic findings. Variants of uncertain clinical significance as a single choice was the least-selected finding (2.5%, n=27). Low-risk pregnancies (ie, those with normal biochemical screening and fetal ultrasound examinations) were associated with increased interest in receiving genetic information about adult-onset conditions (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.7; 95% CI 1.18-2.33) and susceptibility loci (aOR 1.5; 95% CI 1.08-2.10).

CONCLUSION

Women with both high-risk and low-risk pregnancies were generally more likely to choose to receive additional genetic information, albeit differences in preferences depend on testing indication and type of pretest counseling.

Exome sequencing in newborns with congenital deafness as a model for genomic newborn screening: the Baby Beyond Hearing project

PURPOSE

Genomic newborn screening raises practical and ethical issues. Evidence is required to build a framework to introduce this technology safely and effectively. We investigated the choices made by a diverse group of parents with newborns when offered tiered genomic information from exome sequencing.

METHODS

This population-derived cohort comprised infants with congenital deafness. Parents were offered exome sequencing and choice regarding the scope of analysis. Options were choice A, diagnostic analysis only; choice B, diagnostic analysis plus childhood-onset diseases with medical actionability; or choice C, diagnostic analysis plus childhood-onset diseases with or without medical actionability.

RESULTS

Of the 106 participants, 72 (68%) consented to receive additional findings with 29 (27.4%) selecting choice B and 43 (40.6%) opting for choice C. Family size, ethnicity, and age of infant at time of recruitment were the significant predictors of choice. Parents who opted to have additional findings analysis demonstrated less anxiety and decisional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide evidence from a culturally diverse population that choice around additional findings is important and the age of the infant when this choice is offered impacts on their decision. We found no evidence that offering different levels of genomic information to parents of newborns has a negative psychological impact.

What is the real "price" of more prenatal screening and fewer diagnostic procedures? Costs and trade-offs in the genomic era

Any screening approach, including with cell-free DNA, will have an inferior detection rate compared with 100% diagnostic testing with chromosomal microarrays. Cell-free DNA-based screening, however, should not be seen as a threat to informed choice or maximising the benefits of diagnostic testing. Screening methods have become so much better that more women are now comfortable relying on such screening and do not need the certainty of a diagnostic test. This has not lead to a decline in detection of fetal chromosome abnormalities-in fact, we are now seeing historically high yields from prenatal screening. There are both economic and ethical consequences of offering universal diagnostic testing and abandoning the presumption of a normal infant in otherwise uncomplicated pregnancies. However, for some women, comprehensive information and diagnostic accuracy are important. Offering these women all options, with a careful and comprehensive explanation of the risks and benefits of each, results in outcomes that are best aligned with woman's preferences while at the same time requiring fewer diagnostic tests and lowering costs. It is one of the primary challenges of the modern era of prenatal testing to ensure that women receive sufficient information on which to make informed decisions.