The use of polygenic risk scores in pre-implantation genetic testing: an unproven, unethical practice

Screening embryos for polygenic disease risk: a review of epidemiological, clinical, and ethical considerations

BACKGROUND

The genetic composition of embryos generated by in vitro fertilization (IVF) can be examined with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). Until recently, PGT was limited to detecting single-gene, high-risk pathogenic variants, large structural variants, and aneuploidy. Recent advances have made genome-wide genotyping of IVF embryos feasible and affordable, raising the possibility of screening embryos for their risk of polygenic diseases such as breast cancer, hypertension, diabetes, or schizophrenia. Despite a heated debate around this new technology, called polygenic embryo screening (PES; also PGT-P), it is already available to IVF patients in some countries. Several articles have studied epidemiological, clinical, and ethical perspectives on PES; however, a comprehensive, principled review of this emerging field is missing.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This review has four main goals. First, given the interdisciplinary nature of PES studies, we aim to provide a self-contained educational background about PES to reproductive specialists interested in the subject. Second, we provide a comprehensive and critical review of arguments for and against the introduction of PES, crystallizing and prioritizing the key issues. We also cover the attitudes of IVF patients, clinicians, and the public towards PES. Third, we distinguish between possible future groups of PES patients, highlighting the benefits and harms pertaining to each group. Finally, our review, which is supported by ESHRE, is intended to aid healthcare professionals and policymakers in decision-making regarding whether to introduce PES in the clinic, and if so, how, and to whom.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for PubMed-indexed articles published between 1/1/2003 and 1/3/2024 using the terms 'polygenic embryo screening', 'polygenic preimplantation', and 'PGT-P'. We limited the review to primary research papers in English whose main focus was PES for medical conditions. We also included papers that did not appear in the search but were deemed relevant.

OUTCOMES

The main theoretical benefit of PES is a reduction in lifetime polygenic disease risk for children born after screening. The magnitude of the risk reduction has been predicted based on statistical modelling, simulations, and sibling pair analyses. Results based on all methods suggest that under the best-case scenario, large relative risk reductions are possible for one or more diseases. However, as these models abstract several practical limitations, the realized benefits may be smaller, particularly due to a limited number of embryos and unclear future accuracy of the risk estimates. PES may negatively impact patients and their future children, as well as society. The main personal harms are an unindicated IVF treatment, a possible reduction in IVF success rates, and patient confusion, incomplete counselling, and choice overload. The main possible societal harms include discarded embryos, an increasing demand for 'designer babies', overemphasis of the genetic determinants of disease, unequal access, and lower utility in people of non-European ancestries. Benefits and harms will vary across the main potential patient groups, comprising patients already requiring IVF, fertile people with a history of a severe polygenic disease, and fertile healthy people. In the United States, the attitudes of IVF patients and the public towards PES seem positive, while healthcare professionals are cautious, sceptical about clinical utility, and concerned about patient counselling.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

The theoretical potential of PES to reduce risk across multiple polygenic diseases requires further research into its benefits and harms. Given the large number of practical limitations and possible harms, particularly unnecessary IVF treatments and discarded viable embryos, PES should be offered only within a research context before further clarity is achieved regarding its balance of benefits and harms. The gap in attitudes between healthcare professionals and the public needs to be narrowed by expanding public and patient education and providing resources for informative and unbiased genetic counselling.

Reproductive decision-making in cancer susceptibility syndromes

Cancer susceptibility syndromes confer an increased lifetime risk of cancer and occur due to germline likely-pathogenic or pathogenic variants in a cancer susceptibility gene. Clinical Genetics services advise patients of ways to manage their future cancer risks, often prefaced with uncertainties due to poor understandings of individualised risk. For individuals/couples whose future offspring are at risk of a cancer susceptibility syndrome, different options are available depending on their preferences and circumstances, including prenatal diagnosis and preimplantation genetic testing. This review provides an overview of the most common cancer susceptibility syndromes, available reproductive options and a genetic counselling framework recommended to support individuals/couples in their decision-making. We describe complexities of decision-making involving moderate penetrance and sex-specific variable penetrance genes and explore associated ethical issues arising in this complex area of medicine.

The current clinical applications of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT): acknowledging the limitations of biology and technology

INTRODUCTION

Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) is a cutting-edge test used to detect genetic abnormalities in embryos fertilized through Medically Assisted Reproduction (MAR). PGT aims to ensure that embryos selected for transfer are free of specific genetic conditions or chromosome abnormalities, thereby reducing chances for unsuccessful MAR cycles, complicated pregnancies, and genetic diseases in future children.

AREAS COVERED

In PGT, genetics, embryology, and technology progress and evolve together. Biological and technological limitations are described and addressed to highlight complexity and knowledge constraints and draw attention to concerns regarding safety of procedures, clinical validity, and utility, extent of applications and overall ethical implications for future families and society.

EXPERT OPINION

Understanding the genetic basis of diseases along with advanced technologies applied in embryology and genetics contribute to faster, cost-effective, and more efficient PGT. Next Generation Sequencing-based techniques, enhanced by improved bioinformatics, are expected to upgrade diagnostic accuracy. Complicating findings such as mosaicism, mt-DNA variants, variants of unknown significance, or variants related to late-onset or polygenic diseases will however need further appraisal. Emphasis on monitoring such emerging data is crucial for evidence-based counseling while standardized protocols and guidelines are essential to ensure clinical value and respect of Ethical, Legal and Societal Issues.

Perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing patients in Belgium on the ethics of polygenic embryo screening

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) patients in Belgium on the ethics of PGT for polygenic risk scoring (PGT-P)?

DESIGN

In-depth interviews (18 in total, 10 couples, 8 women, n = 28) were performed with patients who had undergone treatment with PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) or chromosomal structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) between 2017 and 2019 in Belgium. Participants were asked about their own experiences with PGT-M/SR and about their viewpoints on PGT-P, including their own interest and their ideas on its desirability, scope and consequences. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the interviews.

RESULTS

Participants stated that their experiences with PGT-M/SR had been physically, psychologically and practically difficult. Most participants stated that, partly because of these difficulties, they did not see the added value of knowing the risk scores of embryos via PGT-P. Many participants worried that PGT-P could lead to additional anxieties, responsibilities and complex choices in reproduction and parenthood. They argued that not everything should be controlled and felt that PGT-P, especially non-medical and broad screening, was going too far. With regards to the clinical implementation of PGT-P, participants in general preferred PGT-P to be limited to people with a serious polygenic family history and wanted embryo selection decisions to be made by healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that individuals with experience of PGT-M/SR saw PGT-P as different from PGT-M/SR. They had various ethical concerns with regards to PGT-P, especially regarding broadly offering PGT-P. These stakeholder viewpoints need to be considered regarding potential PGT-P implementation and guidelines.

Polygenic embryo screening: quo vadis?

Recently, the use of polygenic risk scores in embryo screening (PGT-P) has been introduced on the premise of reducing polygenic disease risk through embryo selection. However, it has been met with extensive critique: considered "technology-driven" rather than "evidence-based", concerns exist about its validity, utility, ethics, and societal effects. Its scientific foundations and criticisms thus need to be carefully considered. However, seeing as PGT-P is already offered in some settings, further questions need to be addressed, in order to give due diligence to various aspects of PGT-P. By examining the complexities of clinical introduction of PGT-P, we discuss whether PGT-P could be responsibly implemented in the first place, what elements need to be addressed if PGT-P is clinically implemented, and subsequently how counselling and decision-making of its users could be envisaged. By dissecting these elements, we provide an overview of important practical questions of PGT-P and emphasize elements of PGT-P that we think have yet to be given sufficient attention. These questions and elements are for example related to the potential target group, scope, and decision-making possibilities of PGT-P. The aspects we raise are crucial to consider by the scientific community and policy makers for the development of guidelines and/or an ethical framework for PGT-P.

Predicting the direction of phenotypic difference

Predicting phenotypes from genomic data is a key goal in genetics, but for most complex phenotypes, predictions are hampered by incomplete genotype-to-phenotype mapping. Here, we describe a more attainable approach than quantitative predictions, which is aimed at qualitatively predicting phenotypic differences. Despite incomplete genotype-to-phenotype mapping, we show that it is relatively easy to determine which of two individuals has a greater phenotypic value. This question is central in many scenarios, e.g., comparing disease risk between individuals, the yield of crop strains, or the anatomy of extinct vs extant species. To evaluate prediction accuracy, i.e., the probability that the individual with the greater predicted phenotype indeed has a greater phenotypic value, we developed an estimator of the ratio between known and unknown effects on the phenotype. We evaluated prediction accuracy using human data from tens of thousands of individuals from either the same family or the same population, as well as data from different species. We found that, in many cases, even when only a small fraction of the loci affecting a phenotype is known, the individual with the greater phenotypic value can be identified with over 90% accuracy. Our approach also circumvents some of the limitations in transferring genetic association results across populations. Overall, we introduce an approach that enables accurate predictions of key information on phenotypes - the direction of phenotypic difference - and suggest that more phenotypic information can be extracted from genomic data than previously appreciated.

Potential corporate uses of polygenic indexes: Starting a conversation about the associated ethics and policy issues

Some commercial firms currently sell polygenic indexes (PGIs) to individual consumers, despite their relatively low predictive power. It might be tempting to assume that because the predictive power of many PGIs is so modest, other sorts of firms-such as those selling insurance and financial services-will not be interested in using PGIs for their own purposes. We argue to the contrary. We build this argument in two ways. First, we offer a very simple model, rooted in economic theory, of a profit-maximizing firm that can gain information about a single consumer's genome. We use the model to show that, depending on the specific economic environment, a firm would be willing to pay for statistically noisy PGIs, even if they allow for only a small reduction in uncertainty. Second, we describe two plausible scenarios in which these different kinds of firms could conceivably use PGIs to maximize profits. Finally, we briefly discuss some of the associated ethics and policy issues. They deserve more attention, which is unlikely to be given until it is first recognized that firms whose services affect a large swath of the public will indeed have incentives to use PGIs.

Ready for polygenic risk scores? An analysis of regulation of preimplantation genetic testing in European countries

STUDY QUESTION

Would the different regulatory approaches for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in Europe permit the implementation of preimplantation genetic testing using polygenic risk scores (PGT-P)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

While the regulatory approaches for PGT differ between countries, the space provided for potential implementation of PGT-P seems limited in all three regulatory models.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

PGT is a reproductive genetic technology that allows the testing for hereditary genetic disorders and chromosome abnormalities in embryos before implantation. Throughout its history, PGT has largely been regarded as an ethically sensitive technology. For example, ethical questions have been raised regarding the use of PGT for adult-onset conditions, non-medical sex selection, and human leukocyte antigen typing for the benefit of existing siblings. Countries in which PGT is offered each have their own approach of regulating the clinical application of PGT, and a clear overview of legal and practical regulation of PGT in Europe is lacking. An emerging development within the field of PGT, namely PGT-P, is currently bringing new ethical tensions to the forefront. It is unclear whether PGT-P may be applied within the current regulatory frameworks in Europe. Therefore, it is important to investigate current regulatory frameworks in Europe and determine whether PGT-P fits within these frameworks.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the legal and practical regulation of the use of PGT in seven selected European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK) and critically analyse the different approaches with regards to regulatory possibilities for PGT-P. Between July and September 2023, we performed a thorough and extensive search of websites of governments and governmental agencies, websites of scientific and professional organizations, and academic articles in which laws and regulations are described.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

We investigated the legal and regulatory aspects of PGT by analysing legal documents, regulatory frameworks, scientific articles, and guidelines from scientific organizations and regulatory bodies to gather relevant information about each included country. The main sources of information were national laws relating to PGT.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

We divided the PGT regulation approaches into three models. The regulation of PGT differs per country, with some countries requiring central approval of PGT for each new indication (the medical indication model: the UK, the Netherlands), other countries evaluating each individual PGT request at the local level (the individual requests model: France, Germany), and countries largely leaving decision-making about clinical application of PGT to healthcare professionals (the clinical assessment model: Belgium, Italy, Spain). In the countries surveyed that use the medical indication model and the individual requests model, current legal frameworks and PGT criteria seem to exclude PGT-P. In countries using the clinical assessment model, the fact that healthcare professionals and scientific organizations in Europe are generally negative about implementation of PGT-P due to scientific and socio-ethical concerns, implies that, even if it were legally possible, the chance that PGT-P would be offered in the near future might be low.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The results are based on our interpretation of publicly available written information and documents, therefore not all potential discrepancies between law and practice might have been identified. In addition, our analysis focuses on seven-and not all-European countries. However, since these countries are relevant players within PGT in Europe and since they have distinct PGT regulations, the insights gathered give relevant insights into diverse ways of PGT regulation.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that provides a thorough overview of the legal and practical regulation of PGT in Europe. Our analysis of how PGT-P fits within current regulation models provides guidance for healthcare professionals and policymakers in navigating the possible future implementation of PGT-P within Europe.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 813707. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Patient interest in and clinician reservations on polygenic embryo screening: a qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives

PURPOSE

We explored and compared perspectives of reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists (REIs) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients regarding polygenic embryo screening (PES), a new type of preimplantation screening that estimates the genetic chances of developing polygenic conditions and traits in the future.

METHODS

Qualitative thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with US-based REIs and IVF patients.

RESULTS

Clinicians and patients often held favorable views of screening embryos for physical or psychiatric conditions, though clinicians tended to temper their positive attitudes with specific caveats. Clinicians also expressed negative views about screening embryos for traits more frequently than patients, who generally held more positive views. Most clinicians were either unwilling to discuss or offer PES to patients or were willing to do so only under certain circumstances, while many patients expressed interest in PES. Both stakeholder groups envisioned multiple potential benefits or uses of PES and raised multiple potential, interrelated concerns about PES.

CONCLUSION

A gap exists between clinician and patient attitudes toward PES; clinicians generally maintained reservations about such screening and patients indicated interest in it. Clinicians and patients sometimes imagined using PES to prepare for the birth of a predisposed or "affected" individual-a rationale that is often associated with prenatal testing. Many clinicians and patients held different attitudes depending on what is specifically screened, despite the sometimes blurry distinction between conditions and traits. Considerations raised by clinicians and patients may help guide professional societies in developing guidelines to navigate the uncertain terrain of PES.

Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Polygenetic Conditions: A Legal, Ethical, and Scientific Challenge

The recent commercialization of the Embryo Health Score (EHS), determined through preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic conditions, offers the potential to select embryos with lower disease risk, thus potentially enhancing offspring longevity and health. Lately, Orchid Health company increased testing from less than 20 diseases to more than 900+ conditions for birth defects. However, the "geneticization" of phenotype estimates to a health state erases the environmental part, including the in vitro fertilization potential risks, questioning its scientific usefulness. EHS is utilized in countries with minimal regulatory oversight and will likely expand, while it remains illegal in other countries due to ethical and legal dilemmas it raises about reproductive autonomy, discrimination, impacts on family dynamics, and genetic diversity. The shift toward commercialized polygenic embryo screening (PES) redefines healthcare relationships, turning prospective parents into consumers and altering the physician's role. Moreover, PES could increase social inequalities, stigmatize those not born following PES, and encourage "desirable" phenotypic or behavioral traits selection, leading to ethical drift. Addressing these issues is essential before further implementation and requires a collaborative approach involving political, governmental, and public health, alongside geneticists, ethicists, and fertility specialists, focusing on the societal implications and acceptability of testing for polygenic traits for embryo selection.

Recent advances in polygenic scores: translation, equitability, methods and FAIR tools

Polygenic scores (PGS) can be used for risk stratification by quantifying individuals' genetic predisposition to disease, and many potentially clinically useful applications have been proposed. Here, we review the latest potential benefits of PGS in the clinic and challenges to implementation. PGS could augment risk stratification through combined use with traditional risk factors (demographics, disease-specific risk factors, family history, etc.), to support diagnostic pathways, to predict groups with therapeutic benefits, and to increase the efficiency of clinical trials. However, there exist challenges to maximizing the clinical utility of PGS, including FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) use and standardized sharing of the genomic data needed to develop and recalculate PGS, the equitable performance of PGS across populations and ancestries, the generation of robust and reproducible PGS calculations, and the responsible communication and interpretation of results. We outline how these challenges may be overcome analytically and with more diverse data as well as highlight sustained community efforts to achieve equitable, impactful, and responsible use of PGS in healthcare.

Genetics of infertility: a paradigm shift for medically assisted reproduction

The field of reproductive genetics has undergone significant advancements with the completion of the Human Genome Project and the development of high-throughput sequencing techniques. This has led to the identification of numerous genes involved in both male and female infertility, revolutionizing the diagnosis and management of infertility patients. Genetic investigations, including karyotyping, specific genetic tests, and high-throughput sequencing, have become essential in determining the genetic causes of infertility. Moreover, the integration of genetics into reproductive medicine has expanded the scope of care to include not only affected individuals or couples but also their family members. Genetic consultations and counselling play a crucial role in identifying potentially affected relatives and offering tailored therapy and the possibility of fertility preservation. Despite the current limited therapeutic options, an increasing understanding of genotype-phenotype correlations in infertility genes holds promise for improved treatment outcomes. The availability of genetic diagnostic tools has reduced the number of idiopathic infertility cases by providing accurate aetiological diagnoses. The transition from research to clinical practice in reproductive genetics requires the establishment of genetic consultations and data warehousing systems to provide up-to-date information on gene-disease relationships. Overall, the integration of genetics into reproductive medicine has brought about a paradigm shift, emphasizing the familial dimension of infertility and offering new possibilities for personalized care and family planning.

Islamic Perspectives on Polygenic Testing and Selection of IVF Embryos (PGT-P) for Optimal Intelligence and Other Non-Disease-Related Socially Desirable Traits

In recent years, the genetic testing and selection of IVF embryos, known as preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), has gained much traction in clinical assisted reproduction for preventing transmission of genetic defects. However, a more recent ethically and morally controversial development in PGT is its possible use in selecting IVF embryos for optimal intelligence quotient (IQ) and other non-disease-related socially desirable traits, such as tallness, fair complexion, athletic ability, and eye and hair colour, based on polygenic risk scores (PRS), in what is referred to as PGT-P. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning-based analysis of big data sets collated from genome sequencing of specific human ethnic populations can be used to estimate an individual embryo's likelihood of developing such multifactorial traits by analysing the combination of specific genetic variants within its genome. Superficially, this technique appears compliant with Islamic principles and ethics. Because there is no modification of the human genome, there is no tampering with Allah's creation (taghyīr khalq Allah). Nevertheless, a more critical analysis based on the five maxims of Islamic jurisprudence (qawa'id fiqhiyyah) that are often utilized in discourses on Islamic bioethics, namely qaṣd (intention), yaqın̄ (certainty), ḍarar (injury), ḍarūra (necessity), and `urf (custom), would instead reveal some major ethical and moral flaws of this new medical technology in the selection of non-disease-related socially desirable traits, and its non-compliance with the spirit and essence of Islamic law (shariah). Muslim scholars, jurists, doctors, and biomedical scientists should debate this further and issue a fatwa on this new medical technology platform.

Divergence Between Clinician and Patient Perspectives on Polygenic Embryo Screening: A Qualitative Study

Objective

To explore and compare the perspectives of clinicians and patients on polygenic embryo screening.

Design

Qualitative.

Subjects

Fifty-three participants: 27 reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists and 26 patients currently undergoing in vitro fertilization or had done so within the last five years.

Main Outcome Measures

Qualitative thematic analysis of interview transcripts.

Results

Both clinicians and patients often held favorable views of screening embryos for physical or psychiatric conditions, though clinicians tended to temper their positive attitudes with specific caveats. Clinicians also expressed negative views about screening embryos for traits more often than patients, who generally held more positive views. Most clinicians were either unwilling to discuss or offer polygenic embryo screening to patients or were willing to do so only under certain circumstances, while many patients expressed interest in polygenic embryo screening. Both sets of stakeholders envisioned multiple potential benefits or uses of polygenic embryo screening; the most common included selection and/or prioritization of embryos, receipt of more information about embryos, and preparation for the birth of a predisposed or "affected" child. Both sets of stakeholders also raised multiple potential, interrelated concerns about polygenic embryo screening. The most common concerns among both sets of stakeholders included the potential for different types of "biases" - most often in relation to selection of embryos with preferred genetic chances of traits -, the probabilistic nature of polygenic embryo screening that can complicate patient counseling and/or lead to excessive cycles of in vitro fertilization, and a lack of data from long-term prospective studies supporting the clinical use of polygenic embryo screening.

Conclusion

Despite patients' interest in polygenic embryo screening, clinicians feel such screening is premature for clinical application. Though now embryos can be screened for their genetic chances of developing polygenic conditions and traits, many clinicians and patients maintain different attitudes depending on what is specifically screened, despite the blurry distinction between conditions and traits. Considerations raised by these stakeholders may help guide professional societies as they consider developing guidelines to navigate the uncertain terrain of polygenic embryo screening, which is already commercially available.

Limitations, concerns and potential: attitudes of healthcare professionals toward preimplantation genetic testing using polygenic risk scores

Preimplantation genetic testing using polygenic risk scores (PGT-P) has recently been introduced. However, PGT-P has been met with many ethical concerns. It is therefore important to get insights into the perspectives of stakeholders regarding PGT-P. We performed a qualitative interview study on the views of healthcare professionals toward PGT-P. We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 31 healthcare professionals working in the field of preimplantation genetic testing. The interviews explored the attitudes of healthcare professionals toward the technology of PGT-P, e.g., the validity, utility, limitations and potential benefits of PGT-P. We found that most healthcare professionals were concerned about the prematurity of introducing PGT-P into clinical practice. They had various ethical considerations, such as concerns related to validity and utility of PGT-P, limited embryos and options, and difficulties for prospective parents regarding comprehension and informed decision-making. Positive aspects were also identified, e.g., regarding reproductive autonomy and potential health benefits. Overall, most healthcare professionals considered that clinical implementation of PGT-P is premature. More comprehensive, longitudinal and inclusive studies are needed first, though these might not improve PGT-P enough to responsibly implement it. Healthcare professionals were also concerned that PGT-P could cause anxiety and create difficult choices for prospective parents. These perspectives and ethical considerations are crucial to consider for future guidelines and recommendations regarding PGT-P.

From collective health to "personalized" medicine: bioethical challenges in preimplantation genetic testing from a North-South perspective

This article examines the scope and limitations of the precision medicine paradigm and its relationship with the collective health approach. To that end, it takes preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) as a paradigmatic example of technologies aimed at the "individualization" of health processes. In this regard, we review the characteristics and scientific and regulatory foundations of PGT technologies in Argentina, and discuss the next steps for their bioethical analysis. More specifically, we shed light on some of the conditions for their implementation from a north-south perspective. We propose three themes or problematic aspects as a synthesis of our analysis, related to biases in the production of knowledge, the values and interests underlying its uses, and the underlying epistemological assumptions of these technologies. Throughout the article, we review these dilemmas and suggest some issues that should be taken into account in future research.

Genetics in reproductive endocrinology and infertility

Tremendous advances in genetics have transformed the field of reproductive endocrinology and infertility over the last few decades. One of the most prominent advances is preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), which allows for the screening of embryos obtained during in vitro fertilization before transfer. Moreover, PGT can be performed for aneuploidy screening, detection of monogenic disorders, or exclusion of structural rearrangements. Refinement of biopsy techniques, such as obtaining samples at the blastocyst rather than the cleavage stage, has helped optimize results from PGT, and technological advances, including next-generation sequencing, have made PGT more efficient and accurate. The continued evolution of the approach to PGT has the potential to further enhance the accuracy of results, expand the application to other conditions, and increase access by reducing cost and improving efficiency.

A review of the 2021/2022 PGDIS Position Statement on the transfer of mosaic embryos

The practice of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) in association with in vitro fertilization (IVF) since 2016 has been mostly directed by three highly controversial guidance documents issued by the Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS). Because these documents are so influential on worldwide IVF practice, the most recent one is here the subject of a detailed review, again revealing important misrepresentations and internal contradictions. Most importantly, however, this most recent guidance document still does not prevent the non-use and/or disposal of large numbers of embryos with substantial pregnancy and live-birth potential and, therefore, continues to propagate an IVF practice harmful to many infertile women.

Ultra-low-coverage genome-wide association study-insights into gestational age using 17,844 embryo samples with preimplantation genetic testing

BACKGROUND

Very low-coverage (0.1 to 1×) whole genome sequencing (WGS) has become a promising and affordable approach to discover genomic variants of human populations for genome-wide association study (GWAS). To support genetic screening using preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in a large population, the sequencing coverage goes below 0.1× to an ultra-low level. However, the feasibility and effectiveness of ultra-low-coverage WGS (ulcWGS) for GWAS remains undetermined.

METHODS

We built a pipeline to carry out analysis of ulcWGS data for GWAS. To examine its effectiveness, we benchmarked the accuracy of genotype imputation at the combination of different coverages below 0.1× and sample sizes from 2000 to 16,000, using 17,844 embryo PGT samples with approximately 0.04× average coverage and the standard Chinese sample HG005 with known genotypes. We then applied the imputed genotypes of 1744 transferred embryos who have gestational ages and complete follow-up records to GWAS.

RESULTS

The accuracy of genotype imputation under ultra-low coverage can be improved by increasing the sample size and applying a set of filters. From 1744 born embryos, we identified 11 genomic risk loci associated with gestational ages and 166 genes mapped to these loci according to positional, expression quantitative trait locus, and chromatin interaction strategies. Among these mapped genes, CRHBP, ICAM1, and OXTR were more frequently reported as preterm birth related. By joint analysis of gene expression data from previous studies, we constructed interrelationships of mainly CRHBP, ICAM1, PLAGL1, DNMT1, CNTLN, DKK1, and EGR2 with preterm birth, infant disease, and breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This study not only demonstrates that ulcWGS could achieve relatively high accuracy of adequate genotype imputation and is capable of GWAS, but also provides insights into the associations between gestational age and genetic variations of the fetal embryos from Chinese population.

Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Use of Polygenic Scores in Clinical Practice and Population Health

Considerable progress continues to be made with regards to the value and use of disease associated polygenic scores (PGS). PGS aim to capture a person's genetic liability to a condition, disease, or a trait, combining information across many risk variants and incorporating their effect sizes. They are already available for clinicians and consumers to order in Australasia. However, debate is ongoing over the readiness of this information for integration into clinical practice and population health. This position statement provides the viewpoint of the Human Genetics Society of Australasia (HGSA) regarding the clinical application of disease-associated PGS in both individual patients and population health. The statement details how PGS are calculated, highlights their breadth of possible application, and examines their current challenges and limitations. We consider fundamental lessons from Mendelian genetics and their continuing relevance to PGS, while also acknowledging the distinct elements of PGS. Use of PGS in practice should be evidence based, and the evidence for the associated benefit, while rapidly emerging, remains limited. Given that clinicians and consumers can already order PGS, their current limitations and key issues warrant consideration. PGS can be developed for most complex conditions and traits and can be used across multiple clinical settings and for population health. The HGSA's view is that further evaluation, including regulatory, implementation and health system evaluation are required before PGS can be routinely implemented in the Australasian healthcare system.

Addressing the challenges of polygenic scores in human genetic research

The genotyping of millions of human samples has made it possible to evaluate variants across the human genome for their possible association with risks for numerous diseases and other traits by using genome-wide association studies (GWASs). The associations between phenotype and genotype found in GWASs make possible the construction of polygenic scores (PGSs), which aim to predict a trait or disease outcome in an individual on the basis of their genotype (in the disease case, the term polygenic risk score [PRS] is often used). PGSs have shown promise for studying the biology of complex traits and as a tool for evaluating individual disease risks in clinical settings. Although the quantity and quality of data to compute PGSs are increasing, challenges remain in the technical aspects of developing PGSs and in the ethical and social issues that might arise from their use. This ASHG Guidance emphasizes three major themes for researchers working with or interested in the application of PGSs in their own research: (1) developing diverse research cohorts; (2) fostering robustness in the development, application, and interpretation of PGSs; and (3) improving the communication of PGS results and their implications to broad audiences.

An Update on Non-invasive Approaches for Genetic Testing of the Preimplantation Embryo

Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) aims to reduce the chance of an affected pregnancy or improve success in an assisted reproduction cycle. Since the first established pregnancies in 1990, methodological approaches have greatly evolved, combined with significant advances in the embryological laboratory. The application of preimplantation testing has expanded, while the accuracy and reliability of monogenic and chromosomal analysis have improved. The procedure traditionally employs an invasive approach to assess the nucleic acid content of embryos. All biopsy procedures require high technical skill, and costly equipment, and may impact both the accuracy of genetic testing and embryo viability. To overcome these limitations, many researchers have focused on the analysis of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) at the preimplantation stage, sampled either from the blastocoel or embryo culture media, to determine the genetic status of the embryo non-invasively. Studies have assessed the origin of cfDNA and its application in non-invasive testing for monogenic disease and chromosomal aneuploidies. Herein, we discuss the state-of-the-art for modern non-invasive embryonic genetic material assessment in the context of PGT. The results are difficult to integrate due to numerous methodological differences between the studies, while further work is required to assess the suitability of cfDNA analysis for clinical application.

Polygenic Health Index, General Health, and Pleiotropy: Sibling Analysis and Disease Risk Reduction

We construct a polygenic health index as a weighted sum of polygenic risk scores for 20 major disease conditions, including, e.g., coronary artery disease, type 1 and 2 diabetes, schizophrenia, etc. Individual weights are determined by population-level estimates of impact on life expectancy. We validate this index in odds ratios and selection experiments using unrelated individuals and siblings (pairs and trios) from the UK Biobank. Individuals with higher index scores have decreased disease risk across almost all 20 diseases (no significant risk increases), and longer calculated life expectancy. When estimated Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) are used as the performance metric, the gain from selection among ten individuals (highest index score vs average) is found to be roughly 4 DALYs. We find no statistical evidence for antagonistic trade-offs in risk reduction across these diseases. Correlations between genetic disease risks are found to be mostly positive and generally mild. These results have important implications for public health and also for fundamental issues such as pleiotropy and genetic architecture of human disease conditions.

Concerns about the use of polygenic embryo screening for psychiatric and cognitive traits

Private companies have begun offering services to allow parents undergoing in-vitro fertilisation to screen embryos for genetic risk of complex diseases, including psychiatric disorders. This procedure, called polygenic embryo screening, raises several difficult scientific and ethical issues, as discussed in this Personal View. Polygenic embryo screening depends on the statistical properties of polygenic risk scores, which are complex and not well studied in the context of this proposed clinical application. The clinical, social, and ethical implications of polygenic embryo screening have barely been discussed among relevant stakeholders. To our knowledge, the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics is the first professional biomedical organisation to issue a statement regarding polygenic embryo screening. For the reasons discussed in this Personal View, the Society urges caution and calls for additional research and oversight on the use of polygenic embryo screening.

Polygenic scores in biomedical research

Public health strategies aimed at disease prevention or early detection and intervention have the potential to advance human health worldwide. However, their success depends on the identification of risk factors that underlie disease burden in the general population. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have implicated thousands of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in common complex diseases or traits. By calculating a weighted sum of the number of trait-associated alleles harboured by an individual, a polygenic score (PGS), also called a polygenic risk score (PRS), can be constructed that reflects an individual’s estimated genetic predisposition for a given phenotype. Here, we ask six experts to give their opinions on the utility of these probabilistic tools, their strengths and limitations, and the remaining barriers that need to be overcome for their equitable use.

A review of normative documents on preimplantation genetic testing: Recommendations for PGT-P

PURPOSE

Recently, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for polygenic conditions (PGT-P) has been introduced commercially. In view of the lack of specific guidance on this development, we analyzed normative documents on PGT for monogenic conditions (PGT-M) to understand what we can learn from these documents for recommendations for PGT-P.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of normative guidelines and recommendations on PGT-M. The aim was to understand what the current consensus and disagreements are on ethical acceptability of PGT-M and how this compares with PGT-P.

RESULTS

We analyzed 38 documents by advisory committees at the national, European, and global level. In total, 2 themes were identified, which included the following: (1) what PGT is considered appropriate for and (2) who can make decisions regarding the use of PGT. Many aspects of PGT-M documents apply to PGT-P as well. Additional factors such as the fact that PGT-P screens for risk indications of multiple polygenic conditions increase ethical difficulties regarding severity, risk, autonomy, and informed decision-making.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of PGT-M normative documents, we conclude that ethical acceptability for PGT-P is limited. Our findings present various factors that have to be considered for the development of guidelines and the appropriateness of PGT.

Genomics and justice: mitigating the potential harms and inequities that arise from the implementation of genomics in medicine

Advances in human genetics raise many social and ethical issues. The application of genomic technologies to healthcare has raised many questions at the level of the individual and the family, about conflicts of interest among professionals, and about the limitations of genomic testing. In this paper, we attend to broader questions of social justice, such as how the implementation of genomics within healthcare could exacerbate pre-existing inequities or the discrimination against social groups. By anticipating these potential problems, we hope to minimise their impact. We group the issues to address into six categories: (i) access to healthcare in general, not specific to genetics. This ranges from healthcare insurance to personal behaviours. (ii) data management and societal discrimination against groups on the basis of genetics. (iii) epigenetics research recognises how early life exposure to stress, including malnutrition and social deprivation, can lead to ill health in adult life and further social disadvantage. (iv) psychiatric genomics and the genetics of IQ may address important questions of therapeutics but could also be used to disadvantage specific social or ethnic groups. (v) complex diseases are influenced by many factors, including genetic polymorphisms of individually small effect. A focus on these polygenic influences distracts from environmental factors that are more open to effective interventions. (vi) population genomic screening aims to support couples making decisions about reproduction. However, this remains a highly contentious area. We need to maintain a careful balance of the competing social and ethical tensions as the technology continues to develop.

Racial and Ethnic Variation in Genetic Susceptibility: Are Disparities in Infertility Prevalence and Outcomes more than Black and White?

Race, as a social construct without a clear genetic underpinning, is frequently referenced in medicine as predictor of multiple diseases including that of infertility. The authors will discuss how systematic racism can have downstream consequences ranging from overt physician bias to use of medical algorithms that may potentiate the same disparities they attempt to narrow. Then, the authors explore the utility and pragmatic use of genetic ancestry to estimate disease prevalence, instead of racial categories. Finally, the authors explore how health inequities, rooted in systematic racism, can influence disease heritability effectively advocating for research to disentangle the contributions of racism to genetic susceptibility in infertility.