Present to future: what the reasons for declining first-trimester combined testing tell us about accepting or declining cell-free DNA testing

Conditions for autonomous reproductive decision-making in prenatal screening: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women should be able to make autonomous and meaningful decisions about prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities. It remains largely unclear which circumstances facilitate or hinder such a decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate what conditions Dutch pregnant women and professional experts consider important for autonomous reproductive decision-making in prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities, and the extent to which, according to women, those conditions are met in practice.

METHODS

A mixed methods study was conducted in the Netherlands in 2016-2017. A conceptual model was used to interview professional experts (n = 16) and pregnant women (n = 19). Thematic analysis was performed to identify important conditions. Subsequently, a questionnaire assessed the perceived importance of those conditions and the extent to which these were met, in the experience of pregnant women (n = 200).

RESULTS

Professional experts stressed the importance of information provision, and emphasized a rational decision-making model. Pregnant women differed in what information they felt was needed, and this depended on the screening decision made. Questionnaire findings showed that women prioritized discussion and consensus with partners. Information about test accuracy and miscarriage risk of invasive follow-up testing was also considered important. Two key conditions were not adequately met, in the experience of women: (1) having information about miscarriage risk; (2) not being directed by health professionals in decision-making.

CONCLUSION

According to women, discussion and consensus with partners was considered a highly important condition for an autonomous and meaningful decision-making process. Access to information about safety of testing and ensuring that women are not being directed in their decision-making by health professionals seem to be areas for improvement in prenatal care practice.

Neonatal mortality and morbidity in Down syndrome in the time of prenatal aneuploidy testing: a retrospective cohort study

The total uptake of prenatal aneuploidy screening for Down syndrome (DS) is increasing worldwide. As a result of increasing prenatal diagnosis of DS and subsequent termination of pregnancy, livebirth prevalence of DS is decreasing. The aim of this study is to explore the impact of an increasing uptake of prenatal aneuploidy screening on the neonatal mortality and morbidity in DS. This is a retrospective cohort study of 253 neonates with DS born between 2012 and 2018 that were seen at the outpatient clinic of five hospitals in the Netherlands. The medical files were reviewed for maternal and neonatal characteristics and neonatal morbidities. The Dutch national birth registry (Perined) provided mortality numbers of neonates with DS. The results were interpreted in the context of other published studies. Neonatal mortality in DS remained stable, ranging from 1.4 to 3.6%. A congenital heart defect (CHD) was found in 138 of the 251 neonates (55.0%) with atrial septal defect, atrioventricular septal defect, and ventricular septal defect being the most common. The type of CHD in DS did not change over time. Gastro-intestinal defects were present in 22 of the 252 neonates with DS (8.7%), with duodenal atresia as the most reported anomaly. Persistent pulmonary hypertension of the neonate (PPHN) was found in 31 of the 251 infants (12.4%).  Conclusions: Although uptake of prenatal aneuploidy screening increased, neonatal mortality and morbidity in DS appears to be stable. An increased incidence of PPHN was found. What is Known: • The total uptake of prenatal aneuploidy screening for Down syndrome is increasing worldwide. • As a result of increasing prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome and subsequent termination of pregnancy, the livebirth prevalence of Down syndrome is decreasing. What is New: • Although uptake of prenatal aneuploidy screening increased, neonatal mortality and morbidity in Down syndrome appears to be stable. • An increased incidence of persistent pulmonary hypertension of the neonate was found.

Factors involved in the decision to decline prenatal screening with non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)

OBJECTIVE

To investigate factors involved in the decision to decline prenatal screening with noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT).

METHOD

A questionnaire study was conducted among 219 pregnant women in the Netherlands who had declined prenatal screening with NIPT (TRIDENT-2 study). Respondents were selectively recruited from three hospitals and 19 midwifery practices, primarily located in or near socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. 44.3% of the respondents were of non-Western ethnic origin and 64.4% were religious.

RESULTS

Most respondents (77.2%) found the decision to decline NIPT easy to make, and 59.8% had already made the decision before information about NIPT was offered. These respondents were more often religious, multigravida, and had adequate health literacy. The main reasons to decline NIPT were "I would never terminate my pregnancy" (57.1%) and "every child is welcome" (56.2%). For 16.9% of respondents, the out-of-pocket costs (175 euros) played a role in the decision, and the women in this group were more often nonreligious, primigravida, and had inadequate health literacy.

CONCLUSION

The primary factors involved in the decision to decline NIPT were related to personal values and beliefs, consistent with autonomous choice. Out-of-pocket costs of NIPT hinder equal access for some pregnant women.

Ethical Aspects of Prenatal DNA Testing

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) first-trimester screening for fetal aneuploidies, as a non-invasive, safe, and rather accurate method, has changed prenatal screening policies all over the world. Owing to aggressive marketing, cfDNA screening tests exhibit global popularity and a rapid spread in routine prenatal care. However, wide availability of the tests, together with observed difficulties in the test’s interpretation, bring to light several serious ethical concerns. To date it is vital to identify and address the most important ethical, legal, and social issues regarding prenatal screening tests. Furthermore, guidelines and restrictions in certain cfDNA screening advancements that may provide information regarding fetal genetic traits of unknown clinical significance, conditions with variable penetrance, or late-onset conditions, should be considered.

Uptake of fetal aneuploidy screening after the introduction of the non-invasive prenatal test: A national population-based register study

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) has shifted the prenatal screening landscape. Countries are exploring ways to integrate NIPT in their national prenatal screening programs, either as a first- or second-tier test. This study aimed to describe how the uptake of fetal aneuploidy screening changed after the introduction of NIPT as a second-tier and as a first-tier test within the national prenatal screening program of the Netherlands.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A population-based register study in the Netherlands, recording uptake of fetal aneuploidy screening. Data from all pregnant women choosing to have the first-trimester combined test (FCT) or first-tier NIPT between January 2007 and March 2019 were retrospectively collected using national registration systems. Uptake percentages for fetal aneuploidy screening (FCT and NIPT) were calculated and stratified by region and maternal age. Statistical significance was determined using trend analysis and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2013 FCT uptake increased from 14.8% to 29.5% (P = .004). In April 2014 NIPT was introduced as a second-tier test for high-risk women after FCT (TRIDENT-1 study). FCT uptake rose from 29.5% in 2013 to 34.2% in 2015 (P < .0001). After the introduction of NIPT as a first-tier test for all women in April 2017 (TRIDENT-2 study), FCT uptake declined significantly from 35.8% in 2016 to 2.6% in 2018 (P < .0001). NIPT uptake increased to 43.4% in 2018. Regionally, NIPT uptake ranged from 31.8% to 67.9%. Total uptake (FCT and NIPT) between 2007 and 2018 increased significantly from 14.8% to 45.9% (P < .0001). However, total uptake stabilized at 46% for both years of TRIDENT-2 (April 2017-March 2019).

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in total fetal aneuploidy screening uptake up to 45.9% was observed after the introduction of NIPT. Uptake appears to have stabilized within a year after introducing first-tier NIPT.

Facilitating informed choice about non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis of women's experiences

Background

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) can be used to accurately detect fetal chromosomal anomalies early in pregnancy by assessing cell-free fetal DNA present in maternal blood. The rapid diffusion of NIPT, as well as the ease and simplicity of the test raises concerns around informed decision-making and the potential for routinization. Introducing NIPT in a way that facilitates informed and autonomous decisions is imperative to the ethical application of this technology. We approach this imperative by systematically reviewing and synthesizing primary qualitative research on women’s experiences with and preferences for informed decision-making around NIPT.

Methods

We searched multiple bibliographic databases including Ovid MEDLINE, EBSCO Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and ISI Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). Our review was guided by integrative qualitative meta-synthesis, and we used a staged coding process similar to that of grounded theory to conduct our analysis.

Results

Thirty empirical primary qualitative research studies were eligible for inclusion. Women preferred to learn about NIPT from their clinicians, but they expressed dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of information provided during counselling and often sought information from a variety of other sources. Women generally had a good understanding of test characteristics, and the factors of accuracy, physical risk, and test timing were the critical information elements that they used to make informed decisions around NIPT. Women often described NIPT as easy or just another blood test, highlighting threats to informed decision-making such as routinization or a pressure to test.

Conclusions

Women’s unique circumstances modulate the information that they value and require most in the context of making an informed decision. Widened availability of trustworthy information about NIPT as well as careful attention to the facilitation of counselling may help facilitate informed decision-making.

Trial registration

PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018086261.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2168-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Limits to the scope of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): an analysis of the international ethical framework for prenatal screening and an interview study with Dutch professionals

Background

The introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for foetal aneuploidies is currently changing the field of prenatal screening in many countries. As it is non-invasive, safe and accurate, this technique allows for a broad implementation of first-trimester prenatal screening, which raises ethical issues, related, for instance, to informed choice and adverse societal consequences. This article offers an account of a leading international ethical framework for prenatal screening, examines how this framework is used by professionals working in the field of NIPT, and presents ethical guidance for the expansion of the scope of prenatal screening in practice.

Methods

A comparative analysis of authoritative documents is combined with 15 semi-structured interviews with professionals in the field of prenatal screening in the Netherlands. Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

The current ethical framework consists of four pillars: the aim of screening, the proportionality of the test, justice, and societal aspects. Respondents recognised and supported this framework in practice, but expressed some concerns. Professionals felt that pregnant women do not always make informed choices, while this is seen as central to reproductive autonomy (the aim of screening), and that pre-test counselling practices stand in need of improvement. Respondents believed that the benefits of NIPT, and of an expansion of its scope, outweigh the harms (proportionality), which are thought to be acceptable. They felt that the out-of-pocket financial contribution currently required by pregnant women constitutes a barrier to access to NIPT, which disproportionally affects those of a lower socioeconomic status (justice). Finally, professionals recognised but did not share concerns about a rising pressure to test or discrimination of disabled persons (societal aspects).

Conclusions

Four types of limits to the scope of NIPT are proposed: NIPT should generate only test outcomes that are relevant to reproductive decision-making, informed choice should be (made) possible through adequate pre-test counselling, the rights of future children should be respected, and equal access should be guaranteed. Although the focus of the interview study is on the Dutch healthcare setting, insights and conclusions can be applied internationally and to other healthcare systems.

Ethics of routine: a critical analysis of the concept of 'routinisation' in prenatal screening

In the debate surrounding the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in prenatal screening programmes, the concept of routinisation is often used to refer to concerns and potential negative consequences of the test. A literature analysis shows that routinisation has many different meanings, which can be distinguished in three major versions of the concept. Each of these versions comprises several inter-related fears and concerns regarding prenatal screening and particularly regarding NIPT in three areas: (1) informed choice, (2) freedom to choose and (3) consequences for people with a disability. Three of the strongest arguments raised under the flag of routinisation are assessed for their validity: the threat that NIPT poses to informed choice, the potential increase in uptake of first-trimester prenatal screening and its consequences for social pressure to participate in screening or terminate affected pregnancies, and the negative consequences for disabled people. These routinisation arguments lack empirical or normative ground. However, the results of this analysis do not imply that no attention should be paid to possible problems surrounding the introduction of NIPT. At least two problems remain and should be addressed: there should be an ongoing debate about the requirements of informed choice, particularly related to an expanded scope of prenatal screening. Also, reproductive autonomy can only be achieved when expecting parents' options are variegated, real and valuable, so that they can continue to choose whether or not to screen or to terminate a pregnancy.

Women's decision making regarding prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy: A qualitative comparison between 2003 and 2016

OBJECTIVE

Situational factors of prenatal screening have changed in recent decades. To explore the effect of a changing context on women's decision making, differences and similarities in the decision-making process of pregnant women regarding prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy between two periods in time were studied.

DESIGN

A qualitative comparison was made between a dataset of 22 semi-structured interviews with pregnant women from 2003 and a newly collected dataset with 19 semi-structured interviews from 2016.

FINDINGS

Overall, women reported similar considerations in their decision-making process in 2003 and 2016, suggesting that decision making has not essentially changed. In 2016, women were still making a deliberate decision, however for some women costs and societal views as to what is acceptable did appear to impact the decision-making process. Moreover, new screening possibilities (e.g. improved test characteristics and including more conditions to be screened) seemed to impact the decision outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Since most women based their decisions mainly on their personal values and personal experiences rather than on situational factors, the results suggest that the changing context with regard to prenatal screening had no major effect on women's decision making. It therefore seems unlikely that future changes in the field of prenatal screening will drastically change the decision-making process of pregnant women as long as informed and deliberate decision making is safeguarded.

Estimates of live birth prevalence of children with Down syndrome in the period 1991-2015 in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

In Western countries, increasing maternal age has led to more pregnancies with a child with Down syndrome (DS). However, prenatal screening programs, diagnostic testing and termination of pregnancy influence the actual DS live birth (LB) prevalence as well. The aim of this study is to examine these factors in the Netherlands for the period 1991-2015. In our study, we establish a baseline for DS LB prevalence before non-invasive prenatal testing will be made available to all pregnant women in the Netherlands in 2017.

METHODS

Full nationwide data from the Dutch cytogenetic laboratories were used to evaluate the actual DS LB prevalence. In addition, nonselective DS prevalence, which is the DS LB prevalence that would be expected in absence of termination of pregnancies, was estimated on the basis of maternal age distribution in the general population.

RESULTS

Because of an increase in maternal age, nonselective DS prevalence increased from around 15.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.9-17.4] per 10 000 LBs in 1991 (311 children in total) to around 22.6 (95% CI 20.3-24.9) per 10 000 in 2015 (385), the increase levelling off in recent years. Actual LB prevalence rose from around 11.6 (95% CI 10.9-12.2) per 10 000 in 1991 (230 children) to an estimated peak of 15.9 (95% CI 15.6-16.2) per 10 000 in 2002 (322), gradually decreasing since to 11.1 (95% CI 10.8-11.5) per 10 000 in 2015 (190). Reduction of DS LBs resulting from elective terminations had been fairly constant between 1995 and 2002 at around 28% and rose afterwards from 35% in 2003 to around 50% in 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of expansion of antenatal screening in the Netherlands in the 1990s and early 2000s, actual DS LB prevalence increased during this period. However, after 2002, this trend reversed, probably because of informing all pregnant women about prenatal testing since 2004 and the implementation of a national screening program in 2007.

A Framework for Describing the Influence of Service Organisation and Delivery on Participation in Fetal Anomaly Screening in England

Objective. The aim of this research was to explore the influence of service organisation and delivery on providers and users' interactions and decision-making in the context of Down's syndrome screening. Methods. A qualitative descriptive study involving online interviews conducted with a purposive sample of 34 community midwives, 35 pregnant women, and 15 partners from two maternity services in different health districts in England. Data were analysed using a combination of grounded theory principles and content analysis and a framework was developed. Results. The main emerging concepts were organisational constraints, power, routinisation, and tensions. Providers were concerned about being time-limited that encouraged routine, minimal information-giving and lacked skills to check users' understanding. Users reported their participation was influenced by providers' attitudes, the ambience of the environment, asymmetric power relations, and the offer and perception of screening as a routine test. Discordance between the national programme's policy of nondirective informed choice and providers' actions of recommending and arranging screening appointments was unexpected. Additionally, providers and users differing perceptions of emotional effects of information, beliefs, and expectations created tensions within them, between them, and in the antenatal environment. Conclusions. A move towards a social model of care may be beneficial to empower service users and create less tension for providers and users.

The clinical utility of DNA-based screening for fetal aneuploidy by primary obstetrical care providers in the general pregnancy population

Objective:

To assess the clinical utility of cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based screening for aneuploidies offered through primary obstetrical care providers to a general pregnancy population.

Methods:

Patient educational materials were developed and validated and providers were trained. Serum was collected for reflexive testing of cfDNA failures. Providers and patients were surveyed concerning knowledge, decision making, and satisfaction. Pregnancy outcome was determined by active or passive ascertainment.

Results:

Between September 2014 and July 2015, 72 providers screened 2,691 women. The five largest participating practices increased uptake by 8 to 40%. Among 2,681 reports, 16 women (0.6%) were screen-positive for trisomy 21, 18, or 13; all saw genetic professionals. Twelve were confirmed (positive predictive value (PPV), 75%; 95% CI, 48–93%) and four were false-positives (0.15%). Of 150 failures (5.6%), 79% had a negative serum or subsequent cfDNA test; no aneuploidies were identified. Of 100 women surveyed, 99 understood that testing was optional, 96 had their questions answered, and 95 received sufficient information. Pretest information was provided by the physician/certified nurse midwife (55) or office nurse/educator (40); none was provided by genetic professionals.

Conclusion:

This first clinical utility study of cfDNA screening found higher uptake rates, patient understanding of basic concepts, and easy incorporation into routine obstetrical practices. There were no reported cases of aneuploidy among cfDNA test failures.

Genet Med advance online publication 12 January 2017