Polygenic embryo testing: understated ethics, unclear utility

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.

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.

A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Idealisations and the aims of polygenic scores

Research in pharmacogenomics and precision medicine has recently introduced the concept of Polygenic Scores (PGSs), namely, indexes that aggregate the effects that many genetic variants are predicted to have on individual disease risk. The popularity of PGSs is increasing rapidly, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to the idealisations they make about phenotypic development. Indeed, PGSs rely on quantitative genetics models and methods, which involve considerable theoretical assumptions that have been questioned on various grounds. This comes with epistemological and ethical concerns about the use of PGSs in clinical decision-making. In this paper, I investigate to what extent idealisations in genetics models can impact the data gathering and clinical interpretation of genomics findings, particularly the calculation and predictive accuracy of PGSs. Although idealisations are considered ineliminable components of scientific models, they may be legitimate or not depending on the epistemic aims of a model. I thus analyse how various idealisations have been introduced in classical models and progressively readapted throughout the history of genetic theorising. Notably, this process involved important changes in the epistemic purpose of such idealisations, which raises the question of whether they are legitimate in the context of contemporary genomics.

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.

Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived In Vitro Gametogenesis and Synthetic Embryos-It Is Never Too Early for an Ethical Debate

Recently, 2 branches of the wide area of synthetic biology-in vitro gametogenesis and synthetic embryo development-have gained considerable attention. Rodent induced pluripotent stem cells derived via reprogramming of somatic cells can in vitro be differentiated into gametes to produce fertile offspring. And even synthetic embryos with organ progenitors were generated ex utero entirely from murine pluripotent stem cells. The use of these approaches in basic research, which is rightfully accompanied by an ethical discussion, will allow hitherto unattainable insights into the processes of the beginning of life. There is a broad international consensus that currently the application of these technologies in human-assisted reproduction must be considered to be unsafe and unethical. However, newspaper headlines also addressed the putatively resulting paradigm shift in human reproduction and thereby raised expectations in patients. Due to unsolved biological and technological obstacles, most scientists do not anticipate translation of any of these approaches into human reproductive medicine, if ever, for the next 10 years. Still, whereas the usage of synthetic embryos for reproductive purposes should be banned, in the context of in vitro-derived human gametes it is not too early to initiate the evaluation of the ethical implications, which could still remain assuming all technological hurdles can ever be cleared.

Rank concordance of polygenic indices

Polygenic indices (PGIs) are increasingly used to identify individuals at risk of developing disease and are advocated as screening tools for personalized medicine and education. Here we empirically assess rank concordance between PGIs created with different construction methods and discovery samples, focusing on cardiovascular disease and educational attainment. We find Spearman rank correlations between 0.17 and 0.93 for cardiovascular disease, and 0.40 and 0.83 for educational attainment, indicating highly unstable rankings across different PGIs for the same trait. Potential consequences for personalized medicine and gene-environment (G × E) interplay are illustrated using data from the UK Biobank. Simulations show how rank discordance mainly derives from a limited discovery sample size and reveal a tight link between the explained variance of a PGI and its ranking precision. We conclude that PGI-based ranking is highly dependent on PGI choice, such that current PGIs do not have the desired precision to be used routinely for personalized intervention.

Genetic risk factors have a substantial impact on healthy life years

The impact of genetic variation on overall disease burden has not been comprehensively evaluated. We introduce an approach to estimate the effect of genetic risk factors on disability-adjusted life years (DALYs; 'lost healthy life years'). We use genetic information from 735,748 individuals and consider 80 diseases. Rare variants had the highest effect on DALYs at the individual level. Among common variants, rs3798220 (LPA) had the strongest individual-level effect, with 1.18 DALYs from carrying 1 versus 0 copies. Being in the top 10% versus the bottom 90% of a polygenic score for multisite chronic pain had an effect of 3.63 DALYs. Some common variants had a population-level effect comparable to modifiable risk factors such as high sodium intake and low physical activity. Attributable DALYs vary between males and females for some genetic exposures. Genetic risk factors can explain a sizable number of healthy life years lost both at the individual and population level.

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.