The ethics of preconception expanded carrier screening in patients seeking assisted reproduction

The Use of Expanded Carrier Screening in Reproductive Medicine: Scientific Impact Paper No. 74

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) is a genetic screening test carried out by analysing a blood sample. This screen can be used to detect whether the individual unknowingly carries gene variants associated with common genetic conditions, such as cystic fibrosis, that may be passed on to their children. It is typically performed in reproductive medicine for those who are considering having a family either naturally or via fertility treatment. Many donor sperm and egg banks, particularly in the USA and Europe, also perform blanket ECS testing on all their prospective sperm and egg donors. ECS is not currently routine practice in the UK, but a growing number of patients are requesting it before treatment. All of us carry gene variants of some sort that may cause autosomal recessive disease in their children if their partner or donor also carry a variant in the same gene. An autosomal recessive disease means two copies of an abnormal gene must be present in order for the disease or trait (such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease) to develop. One copy of the variant means the person is a carrier but does not have the condition. Two copies, i.e. from the mother and father, means the child has a 25% chance of having the genetic disease. Carrying a gene variant does not mean that the individual would necessarily have any symptoms of the disease or any features of the condition. Genetic tests for specific conditions are currently available either before or during pregnancy for prospective parents who have a family or personal history of a genetic condition, or for those from ethnic backgrounds where certain conditions - such as haemoglobinopathies (blood disorders) - are common, prompting referral to a clinical genetics department. Expanded carrier screens may test for more than 100 genetic conditions. The list of conditions screened for is called a panel. Common panels are 250 or 600 genes. Not all expanded carrier screens that are available analyse the same genes. Some may test for genes that do not cause serious disease, or cause diseases that occur in later life; others test for genes that cause severe conditions in childhood. There is no agreement as to which panel of genes should be tested for in an ECS. Understanding the screening that is being offered, and the meaning of any results, is complicated and requires support from appropriately trained professionals to best inform the prospective parent or parents.

Preconception carrier screening and preimplantation genetic testing in the infertility management

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing serves as a valuable element of reproductive care, applicable at various stages of the reproductive journey: (i) before pregnancy, when a couple's genetic reproductive risk can be evaluated; (ii) before embryo implantation, as part of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment, to ascertain several inherited or de novo genetic/chromosomal diseases of the embryo before transfer; (iii) during the prenatal period, to assess the genetic costitution of the fetus. Preconception carrier screening (CS) is a genetic test typically performed on couples planning a pregnancy. The primary purpose of CS is to identify couples at-risk of conceiving a child affected by a severe genetic disorder with autosomal recessive or X-linked inheritance. Detection of high reproductive risk through CS allows prospective parents to be informed of their predisposition and improve reproductive decision-making. These include undergoing IVF with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) or donor gametes, prenatal diagnosis, adoption, remaining childless, taking no actions. Both the presence of the affected gene (PGT-M) and chromosomal status (PGT-A) of the embryo can be comprehensively assessed through modern approaches.

OBJECTIVES

We provide a review of CS and PGT applications to equip healthcare providers with up-to-date information regarding their opportunities and complexities.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The use of CS and PGT is currently considered the most effective intervention for avoiding both an affected pregnancy whilst using autologous gametes in couples with known increased risk, and chromosomal abnormalities. As our understanding in the genetic component in pathological conditions increases, the number of tested disorders will expand, offering a more thorough assessment of one's genetic inheritance. Nevertheless, implementation and development in this field must be accompanied by scientific and ethical considerations to ensure this approach serves the best long-term interests of individuals and society, promoting justice and autonomy and preserving parenthood and the healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

The combination of CS and PGT aligns with principles of personalized medicine by offering reproductive care tailored to the individual's genetic makeup.

Perceptions of reproductive healthcare providers regarding their involvement in offering expanded carrier screening in fertility clinics: a qualitative study

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the main arguments of reproductive healthcare providers in favour or against their involvement in offering expanded carrier screening (ECS) for recessive disorders at fertility clinics in the Netherlands?

DESIGN

Semi-structured interview study with 20 reproductive healthcare providers between May 2020 and January 2021. Participants included 11 gynaecologists, seven fertility doctors, one nurse practitioner and one clinical embryologist, recruited from academic medical centres (n = 13), peripheral facilities associated with academic centres (n = 4), and independent fertility treatment centres (n = 3) in the Netherlands. An interview guide was developed, and thematic content analysis was performed using ATLAS.ti software.

RESULTS

Arguments of reproductive healthcare providers in favour of their potential involvement in offering ECS included: (i) opportunities offered by the setting; (ii) motivation to assist in reproduction and prevent suffering; and (iii) to counter unwanted commercialization offers. Arguments against involvement included: (i) lack of knowledge and familiarity with offering ECS; (ii) insufficient staff and resources, and potential high costs for clinics and/or couples; (iii) the emotional impact it may have on couples; (iv) perceived complexity of counselling and expected elongation of waiting lists; and (v) expected low impact on reducing the burden of diseases. Participants felt that more evidence and research on the costs-benefits, implications and demand are needed prior to their involvement.

CONCLUSION

While agreeing that the field of medically assisted reproduction provides a unique opportunity to offer ECS, reproductive healthcare workers feel a lack of capability and limited motivation to offer ECS to all or a selection of couples at their fertility clinics.

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.

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.

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.

Implementing preconception expanded carrier screening in a universal health care system: A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis

PURPOSE

The limited evidence available on the cost-effectiveness (CE) of expanded carrier screening (ECS) prevents its widespread use in most countries, including Italy. Herein, we aimed to estimate the CE of 3 ECS panels (ie, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics [ACMG] Tier 1 screening, "Focused Screening," testing 15 severe, highly penetrant conditions, and ACMG Tier 3 screening) compared with no screening, the health care model currently adopted in Italy.

METHODS

The reference population consisted of Italian couples seeking pregnancy with no increased personal/familial genetic risk. The CE model was developed from the perspective of the Italian universal health care system and was based on the following assumptions: 100% sensitivity of investigated screening strategies, 77% intervention rate of at-risk couples (ARCs), and no risk to conceive an affected child by risk-averse couples opting for medical interventions.

RESULTS

The incremental CE ratios generated by comparing each genetic screening panel with no screening were: -14,875 ± 1,208 €/life years gained (LYG) for ACMG1S, -106,863 ± 2,379 €/LYG for Focused Screening, and -47,277 ± 1,430 €/LYG for ACMG3S. ACMG1S and Focused Screening were dominated by ACMG3S. The parameter uncertainty did not significantly affect the outcome of the analyses.

CONCLUSION

From a universal health care system perspective, all the 3 ECS panels considered in the study would be more cost-effective than no screening.

Expanded carrier screening for reproductive risk assessment: An evidence-based practice guideline from the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) intends to broadly screen healthy individuals to determine their reproductive chance for autosomal recessive (AR) and X-linked (XL) conditions with infantile or early-childhood onset, which may impact reproductive management (Committee Opinion 690, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2017, 129, e35). Compared to ethnicity-based screening, which requires accurate knowledge of ancestry for optimal test selection and appropriate risk assessment, ECS panels consist of tens to hundreds of AR and XL conditions that may be individually rare in various ancestries but offer a comprehensive approach to inherited disease screening. As such, the term "equitable carrier screening" may be preferable. This practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for ECS using the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework (Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 995; Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 924). We used evidence from a recent systematic evidence review (Ramdaney et al., Genetics in Medicine, 2022, 20, 374) and compiled data from peer-reviewed literature, scientific meetings, and clinical experience. We defined and prioritized the outcomes of informed consent, change in reproductive plans, yield in identification of at-risk carrier pairs/pregnancies, perceived barriers to ECS, amount of provider time spent, healthcare costs, frequency of severely/profoundly affected offspring, incidental findings, uncertain findings, patient satisfaction, and provider attitudes. Despite the recognized barriers to implementation and change in management strategies, this analysis supported implementation of ECS for these outcomes. Based upon the current level of evidence, we recommend ECS be made available for all individuals considering reproduction and all pregnant reproductive pairs, as ECS presents an ethnicity-based carrier screening alternative which does not rely on race-based medicine. The final decision to pursue carrier screening should be directed by shared decision-making, which takes into account specific features of patients as well as their preferences and values. As a periconceptional reproductive risk assessment tool, ECS is superior compared to ethnicity-based carrier screening in that it both identifies more carriers of AR and XL conditions as well as eliminates a single race-based medical practice. ECS should be offered to all who are currently pregnant, considering pregnancy, or might otherwise biologically contribute to pregnancy. Barriers to the broad implementation of and access to ECS should be identified and addressed so that test performance for carrier screening will not depend on social constructs such as race.

Diagnostic accuracy of hysterosalpingo-lidocaine-foam sonography combined with power Doppler (HyLiFoSy-PD) compared to laparoscopy and dye testing in tubal patency assessment in cases of infertility

Background

Tubal patency testing is an essential part of female subfertility evaluation. Hysterosalpingogram is less invasive and less expensive compared to laparoscopy and dye testing (LDT), i.e., laparoscopic chromopertubation. Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) uses commercial echogenic gel foam that is easily visible on ultrasound to assess the tubes. It offers a safer and less painful alternative to HSG, with no radiation exposure. Hysterosalpingo-lidocaine-foam sonography with power Doppler (HyLiFoSy-PD) uses lidocaine-made gel foam as a contrast medium. It was postulated to as to be less painful and easier to detect on ultrasound, compared with hysterosalpingo-foam sonography using other contrast media and that it can also be used whenever the commercial gel used with HyFoSy is not available or is relatively expensive.

Methodology

This prospective diagnostic accuracy study was carried out between February 2018 and 2020 at the Cairo Fetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cairo University. One hundred twenty-two infertile patients, who were already scheduled for LDT as a part of their infertility work-up, were consecutively recruited for this study. The HyLiFoSy-PD (index test) was performed 1 week before the scheduled LDT for these patients. Using an intrauterine pediatric Folley’s balloon catheter, 20 ml of lidocaine-made gel foam was slowly infused intrauterine, while observing their flow in both fallopian tubes using a grayscale and power Doppler transvaginal two-dimensional ultrasound system. All patients then underwent LDT (reference test). The results of HyLiFoSy-PD were compared with those of LDT to determine the accuracy of HyLiFoSy-PD in tubal patency assessment. We also assessed the procedure duration, associated pain, and other complications.

Results

Comparing HyLiFoSy-PD with LDT in the 115 patients who completed the procedure, results showed 98.1% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 99% positive predictive value, 81.8% negative predictive value, 9.81 positive likelihood ratio, 0.02 negative likelihood ration, and 97.4% overall accuracy in the assessment of tubal patency (odds ratio = 463.5 with confidence interval = 79.39–2706; P-value: 0.687). The median procedure duration was 11 min. All patients experienced some degree of pain during the procedure with 91 patients (79%) reported mild pain and 24 patients (21%) reported moderate pain.

Conclusion

HyLiFoSy-PD was found to be an accurate tool in tubal patency assessment. It was also found to be safe and well-tolerated.

Considerations on the use of carrier screening testing in human reproduction: comparison between recommendations from the Italian Society of Human Genetics and other international societies

PURPOSE

Carrier screening (CS) is a term used to describe a genetic test performed on individuals without family history of genetic disorders, to investigate the carrier status for pathogenic variants associated with multiple recessive conditions. The advent of next-generation sequencing enabled simultaneous CS for an increasing number of conditions; however, a consensus on which diseases to include in gene panels and how to best develop the provision of CS is far to be reached. Therefore, the provision of CS is jeopardized and inconsistent and requires solving several important issues.

METHODS

In 2020, the Italian Society of Human Genetics (SIGU) established a working group composed of clinical and laboratory geneticists from public and private fields to elaborate a document to define indications and best practice of CS provision for couples planning a pregnancy.

RESULTS

Hereby, we present the outcome of the Italian working group's activity and compare it with previously published international recommendations (American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG)). We determine a core message on genetic counseling and nine main subject categories to explore, spanning from goals and execution to technical scientific, ethical, and socio-economic topics. Moreover, a level of agreement on the most critical points is discussed using a 5-point agreement scale, demonstrating a high level of consensus among the four societies.

CONCLUSIONS

This document is intended to provide genetic and healthcare professionals involved in human reproduction with guidance regarding the clinical implementation of CS.

ART Innovations: Fostering Women's Psychophysical Health between Bioethics Precepts and Human Rights

Infertility is a highly relevant global issue affecting the reproductive health of at least 15% of reproductive-aged couples worldwide. The scope and severity of the infertility problem is even more prevalent in developing countries, mostly due to untreated reproductive tract infections (RTIs). Infertility, however, goes beyond the mere inability to procreate, but brings about profound psychological, social, and ethical implications of enormous magnitude. In vitro fertilization (IVF) and other assisted reproduction technologies (ARTs) have gradually become widespread therapeutic options. After all, the implementation of medically assisted reproductive procedures in order to overcome infertility is in keeping with the tenets of the reproductive rights agenda laid out at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994. Nonetheless, concerns still linger about how to implement and regulate such interventions in an ethically tenable fashion. The unremitting pace at which such techniques develop have upset the very notion of sexuality relating to reproduction as well as the concept of family itself. That rift risks causing a crisis in terms of bioethics sustainability and enforcement, which is bound to happen when science and innovation outpace the bioethical precepts on which we rely for essential guidance in medical practice. The authors argue in favor of an approach to regulation and policy-making that puts on the forefront a thorough assessment as to potential risks that such interventions might entail for foundational bioethics principles and inalienable human rights.

Ethical considerations in gene selection for reproductive carrier screening

Genetic carrier screening for reproductive purposes has existed for half a century. It was originally offered to particular ethnic groups with a higher prevalence of certain severe recessive or X-linked genetic conditions, or (as carrier testing) to those with a family history of a particular genetic condition. Commercial providers are increasingly offering carrier screening on a user-pays basis. Some countries are also trialing or offering public reproductive genetic carrier screening with whole populations, rather than only to those known to have a higher chance of having a child with an inherited genetic condition. Such programs broaden the ethical and practical challenges that arise in clinical carrier testing. In this paper we consider three aspects of selecting genes for population reproductive genetic carrier screening panels that give rise to important ethical considerations: severity, variable penetrance and expressivity, and scalability; we also draw on three exemplar genes to illustrate the ethical issues raised: CFTR, GALT and SERPINA1. We argue that such issues are important to attend to at the point of gene selection for RGCS. These factors warrant a cautious approach to screening panel design, one that takes into account the likely value of the information generated by screening and the feasibility of implementation in large and diverse populations. Given the highly complex and uncertain nature of some genetic variants, careful consideration needs to be given to the balance between delivering potentially burdensome or harmful information, and providing valuable information to inform reproductive decisions.

Clinical validity and utility of preconception expanded carrier screening for the management of reproductive genetic risk in IVF and general population

STUDY QUESTION

What is the clinical validity and utility of preconception Expanded Carrier Screening (ECS) application on the management of prospective parents?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The high detection rate of at-risk couples (ARCs) and the high proportion opting for IVF/preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) treatment demonstrate the clinical utility of ECS in the preconception space in IVF and general population.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

About 2-4% of couples are at risk of conceiving a child with an autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic disorder. In recent years, the increasing cost-effectiveness of genetic diagnostic techniques has allowed the creation of ECS panels for the simultaneous detection of multiple recessive disorders. Comprehensive preconception genetic screening holds the potential to significantly improve couple's genetic risk assessment and reproductive planning to avoid detectable inheritable genetic offspring.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A total of 3877 individuals without a family history of genetic conditions were analyzed between January 2017 and January 2020. Of the enrolled individuals, 1212 were gamete donors and 2665 were patients planning on conceiving from both the IVF and the natural conception group. From the non-donor cohort, 1133 were analyzed as individual patients, while the remaining ones were analyzed as couples, for a total of 766 couples.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A focused ECS panel was developed following American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology ACOG-recommended criteria (prevalence, carrier rate, severity), including highly penetrant severe childhood conditions. Couples were defined at-risk when both partners carried an autosomal recessive pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (PLP) on the same gene or when the woman was a carrier of an X-linked PLP variant. ARC detection rate defined the clinical validity of the ECS approach. Clinical utility was evaluated by monitoring ARCs reproductive decision making.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 402 individuals (10.4%) showed PLP for at least one of the genes tested. Among the 766 couples tested, 173 showed one carrier partner (22.6%), whereas 20 couples (2.6%) were found to be at increased risk. Interestingly, one ARC was identified as a result of cascade testing in the extended family of an individual carrying a pathogenic variant on the Survival Of Motor Neuron 1SMN1 gene. Of the identified ARCs, 5 (0.7%) were at risk for cystic fibrosis, 5 (0.7%) for fragile X syndrome, 4 (0.5%) for spinal muscular atrophy, 4 (0.5%) for Beta-Thalassemia/Sickle Cell Anemia, 1 (0.1%) for Smith-Lemli-Opitz Syndrome and 1 (0.1%) for Duchenne/Becker Dystrophy. Fifteen ARCs were successfully followed up from both the IVF and the natural conception groups. All of these (15/15) modified their reproductive planning by undergoing ART with Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Monogenic disease and Aneuploidies (PGT-M and PGT-A). To date, 6/15 (40%) couples completed their PGT cycle with euploid/unaffected embryos achieving a pregnancy after embryo transfer and three of them have already had an unaffected baby.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The use of a limited panel of core gene-disease pairs represents a limitation on the research perspective as it can underestimate the rate of detectable carriers and ARCs in this cohort of prospective parents. Expanding the scope of ECS to a larger panel of conditions is becoming increasingly feasible, thanks to a persistent technological evolution and progressive cataloging of gene-disease associations.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These results highlight the potential clinical validity and utility of ECS in reducing the risk of a pregnancy affected by a detectable inheritable genetic condition. The steady reduction in the costs of genetic analyses enables the expansion of monogenic testing/screening applications at the preimplantation stage, thus, providing valid decisional support and reproductive autonomy to patients, particularly in the context of IVF.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funding was used for this study. A.C., M.F., S.C., M.P., L.G., and C.P. are employees of Igenomix Italy. C.S. is the head of the scientific board of Igenomix.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.