Prenatal genetic testing for cystic fibrosis: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and an ethics review

Cystic fibrosis management in pediatric population-from clinical features to personalized therapy

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is an autosomal recessive disease caused by mutations of the gene encoding the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR). In 1949, it's been identified as a monogenic disease and was thought to primarily affect individuals of Northern European descent. It was the most prevalent autosomal recessive disease that shortens life. With the availability of multiple testing methodologies nowadays, there is a chance to create novel and enhanced treatment options. Even in the absence of a high sweat chloride test (SCT) result, the discovery of two causal mutations is diagnostic for cystic fibrosis (CF). For a CF diagnosis, however, at least two positive E sweat chloride tests are still required. In order to achieve early and active intervention to manage cystic fibrosis (CF) and its comorbidities, treatment regimens for pediatric patients should be evaluated, improved, and closely monitored. New developments in the treatment of cystic fibrosis (CF) have led to the development of medications derived from molecules that target the pathogenetic pathway of the illness. These options are very efficient and allow pediatric patients to receive individualized care. However, in order to better direct patient care and enhance patient outcomes, it is crucial to research uncommon CF mutations, which can provide crucial information about the prognosis of the disease and the relationships between genotype and phenotype. To ensure the success of creating novel, safer, and more efficient treatment approaches, a deeper understanding of the pathogeny of the illness is required. In the age of customized medicine, genetic research will be essential to improving patient care and quality of life for those with uncommon mutations.

The European Register of Specialists in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine: code of conduct, version 3 - 2023

Whilst version 2 focussed on the professional conduct expected of a Specialist in Laboratory Medicine, version 3 builds on the responsibilities for ethical conduct from point of planning to point of care. Particular responsibilities that are outlined include: - The need for evidence when planning a new service, providing assurance that a new test does not do harm - Maintaining respect for patient confidentiality, their religious/ethnic beliefs, the need for informed consent to test, agreement on retrospective use of samples as part of governance envelopes in the pre-analytical phase - Ensuring respect for patient autonomy in the response to untoward results generated in the analytical phase - Supporting the safety of patients in the post-analytical phase through knowledge-based interpretation and presentation of results - The duty of candour to disclose and respond to error across the total testing process - Leading initiatives to harmonise and standardise pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical phases to ensure more consistent clinical decision making with utilisation of demand management to ensure more equitable access to scarce resources - Working with emerging healthcare providers beyond the laboratory to ensure consistent application of high standards of clinical care In identifying opportunities for wider contributions to resolving ethical challenges across healthcare the need is also highlighted for more external quality assurance schemes and ethics-based quality indicators that span the total testing process.

An Ethical Argument for Health Insurance Coverage of Paternal Prenatal Genetic Testing

Despite evidence-based recommendations from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Medical Genetics to offer prenatal genetic carrier screening for reproductive partners, partner carrier screening or genetic testing is inconsistently covered by pregnant patients' health insurance plans. Health policies that exclude reproductive partners from insurance coverage for prenatal carrier screening or genetic testing contradict multiple ethical principles and can even contribute to adverse maternal-child health outcomes. Incomplete or missing information regarding partner carrier status can lead to costly, invasive, and potentially risky interventions for the pregnant patient that can be avoided by a simple and less expensive blood test in the reproductive partner. Lack of information regarding carrier status also harms the neonate by obviating an opportunity for early detection and treatment of potential medical complications. Insurance policies that exclude coverage for paternal genetic testing perpetuate the disproportionate burdens of pregnancy care and risk shouldered by pregnant people. To rectify these ethical dilemmas, partner carrier screening and genetic testing should be considered and covered as routine components of obstetric health care that are covered by health insurance.

A Cross-Sectional Study of the Marital Attitudes of Pregnant Women at Risk for Cystic Fibrosis and Psychological Impact of Prenatal Screening

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is one of the most frequent genetic disorders in those with Northern European ancestry. Prenatal testing for cystic fibrosis may be used to plan and prepare for the birth of a child with the disease or to determine whether to terminate the pregnancy. The accessibility of prenatal detection for women with a high genetic risk of delivering a child with cystic fibrosis is determined by CF carriers and those affected by the disease. Moreover, prenatal testing for CF is mainly dependent on invasive diagnostic tests that can influence the mental health of the pregnant woman, and it is assumed that the birth of a CF child will have a serious influence on the couple's subsequent family planning and marital behavior. The purpose of this research was to examine the marital attitudes of women at risk for cystic fibrosis and the psychological effect of screening for CF among pregnant women. The study followed a cross-sectional design with five questionnaires comprising Prenatal Attachment Interview (PAI), Maternal Antenatal Attachment Scale (MAAS), Pregnancy-Related Anxiety Questionnaire (PRAQ-R2), the Prenatal Psychosocial Profile (PPP), and the Marital Intimacy Questionnaire (MIQ). A total of 84 pregnant women were included in the "carriers" group for CFTR and 91 in the "non-carrier" group. CFTR-carrier mothers were likely to be more affectionate to the fetus, with better maternal-fetal quality and intensity of attachment. The same group of pregnant women was less scared of giving birth or worried about bearing a physically or mentally handicapped child compared to women who were expecting the prenatal diagnosis test for being at risk of delivering a newborn with malformations. CFTR-carrier pregnant women did not score significantly different results in the Prenatal Psychosocial Profile regarding stress levels, social support, and self-esteem. It was also found that intimacy and consensus problems inside the marriage were significantly more often experienced by CFTR carriers. Based on the current findings, it is likely that CFTR-carrier mothers have a better perception of the possible pregnancy outcomes by knowing their abnormal gene carrier status. Therefore, the psychological impact of invasive diagnostic tests is lower in this category compared with those who are unaware of the possible pregnancy outcomes. However, we promote a future analysis for pregnant women with moderate risk of giving birth to a child with single-gene mutations such as cystic fibrosis or other congenital malformations that undergo noninvasive prenatal diagnosis tests, as they become more accurate and might cause lower pre-diagnosis stress levels.

Fifty years of Shannon information theory in assessing the accuracy and agreement of diagnostic tests

Since 1948, Shannon theoretic methods for modeling information have found a wide range of applications in several areas where information plays a key role, which goes well beyond the original scopes for which they have been conceived, namely data compression and error correction over a noisy channel. Among other uses, these methods have been applied in the broad field of medical diagnostics since the 1970s, to quantify diagnostic information, to evaluate diagnostic test performance, but also to be used as technical tools in image processing and registration. This review illustrates the main contributions in assessing the accuracy of diagnostic tests and the agreement between raters, focusing on diagnostic test performance measurements and paired agreement evaluation. This work also presents a recent unified, coherent, and hopefully, final information-theoretical approach to deal with the flows of information involved among the patient, the diagnostic test performed to appraise the state of disease, and the raters who are checking the test results. The approach is assessed by considering two case studies: the first one is related to evaluating extra-prostatic cancers; the second concerns the quality of rapid tests for COVID-19 detection.

COVID-19 in a pregnant cystic fibrosis carrier with myasthenia gravis: A case report

A 16-year-old primigravida was diagnosed with COVID-19 in her second trimester. She decompensated quickly and had to be admitted to hospital and intubated. She was diagnosed with a fetal demise after being intubated and neurology suspected myasthenia gravis due to neurologic symptoms. Due to pan-sinusitis and increased mucus secretion, cystic fibrosis screening was ordered. After she was extubated, cervical ripening and induction was performed with eventual vaginal delivery without maternal complications. Myasthenia gravis and cystic fibrosis carrier status were confirmed after the patient was discharged.

•

Cystic fibrosis carrier status may increase the risk for severe COVID-19.

•

COVID-19 and myasthenia gravis in pregnancy may change treatment options.

•

Cystic fibrosis screening may be recommended to improve maternal outcomes.

The Core Outcome DEvelopment for Carrier Screening (CODECS) study: protocol for development of a core outcome set

Background

Reproductive genetic carrier screening is a type of genetic testing available to those planning a pregnancy, or during their first trimester, to understand their risk of having a child with a severe genetic condition. There is a lack of consensus for ‘what to measure’ in studies on this intervention, leading to heterogeneity in choice of outcomes and methods of measurement. Such outcome heterogeneity has implications for the quality and comparability of these studies and has led to a lack of robust research evidence in the literature to inform policy and decision-making around the offer of this screening. As reproductive genetic carrier screening becomes increasingly accessible within the general population, it is timely to investigate the outcomes of this intervention.

Objectives

The development of a core outcome set is an established methodology to address issues with outcome heterogeneity in research. We aim to develop a core outcome set for reproductive genetic carrier screening to clarify and standardise outcomes for research and practice.

Methods

In accordance with guidance from the COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative, this study will consist of five steps: (i) a systematic review of quantitative studies, using narrative synthesis to identify previously reported outcomes, their definitions, and methods of measurement; (ii) a systematic review of qualitative studies using content analysis to identify excerpts related to patient experience and perspectives that can be interpreted as outcomes; (iii) semi-structured focus groups and interviews with patients who have undertaken reproductive genetic carrier screening to identify outcomes of importance to them; (iv) Delphi survey of key stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, and researchers, to refine and prioritise the list of outcomes generated from the previous steps; and (v) a virtual consensus meeting with a purposive sample of key stakeholders to finalise the core outcome set for reporting.

Discussion

This protocol outlines the core outcome set development process and its novel application in the setting of genetic testing. This core outcome set will support the standardisation of outcome reporting in reproductive carrier screening research and contribute to an evolving literature on outcomes to evaluate genetic testing and genetic counselling as health interventions.

COMET core outcome set registration

http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1381.

Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice, May 2021

An extensive review of new resources to support the provision of evidence-based care for women and infants. The current column includes a discussion of the prenatal prediction of fetal macrosomia and commentaries on reviews focused on the effects of date palm and dill seed on labor outcomes and the current research available on SARS-CoV-2 and pregnancy outcomes.

Addressing the dark matter of gene therapy: technical and ethical barriers to clinical application

Gene therapies for genetic diseases have been sought for decades, and the relatively recent development of the CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing system has encouraged a new wave of interest in the field. There have nonetheless been significant setbacks to gene therapy, including unintended biological consequences, ethical scandals, and death. The major focus of research has been on technological problems such as delivery, potential immune responses, and both on and off-target effects in an effort to avoid negative clinical outcomes. While the field has concentrated on how we can better achieve gene therapies and gene editing techniques, there has been less focus on when and why we should use such technology. Here we combine discussion of both the technical and ethical barriers to the widespread clinical application of gene therapy and gene editing, providing a resource for gene therapy experts and novices alike. We discuss ethical problems and solutions, using cystic fibrosis and beta-thalassemia as case studies where gene therapy might be suitable, and provide examples of situations where human germline gene editing may be ethically permissible. Using such examples, we propose criteria to guide researchers and clinicians in deciding whether or not to pursue gene therapy as a treatment. Finally, we summarize how current progress in the field adheres to principles of biomedical ethics and highlight how this approach might fall short of ethical rigour using examples in the bioethics literature. Ultimately by addressing both the technical and ethical aspects of gene therapy and editing, new frameworks can be developed for the fair application of these potentially life-saving treatments.

Mixed claims in Health Technology Assessment: The case of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing

Health Technology Assessment (HTA) uses explicit methods to determine the value of a health technology. This typically results in several claims regarding the effects that are expected to follow from the use of a health technology in a particular context. These claims seem to capture conclusions based solely on facts, but they often combine empirical information with normative presuppositions. Claims that have this character reflect (implicit) value judgments and have been labelled mixed claims. Not recognizing these normative components of such claims risks value inattention and value imposition, presenting results as self-evident and not in need of any moral justification. As proposed by Anna Alexandrova, to avoid these risks of value inattention and imposition we need rules to deal with mixed claims. According to her, when producing and evaluating mixed claims we need to unearth the invoked value presuppositions and check whether these presuppositions are invariant to disagreements. By applying these rules, the robustness of mixed claims can be checked: it can be evaluated whether their truth value is independent from the way in which their components, involving normative presuppositions, are conceptualized. This paper aims to illustrate the role of mixed claims in HTA, and expand upon the work by Alexandrova, by analyzing claims and recommendations presented in an HTA report on the introduction of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) in The Netherlands. Our results show that the report contains mixed claims, and that a normative analysis of these claims can help to clarify the normativity of HTA and evaluate the robustness of claims on alleged effects of a health technology.