Protestant Christian attitudes to ART

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.

Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Comparing Abrahamic Monotheistic Religions

The impact of culture and religion on sexual and reproductive health and behavior has been a developing area of study in contemporary time. Therefore, it is crucial for people using reproductive procedures to understand the religious and theological perspectives on issues relating to reproductive health. This paper compares different perspectives of three Abrahamic faiths, i.e., Judaism, Christianity, and Islam on ARTs. Procreation, family formation, and childbirth within the context of marriage have all been advocated by these three major religions of the world. Judaism permits the use of all assisted reproductive technologies when the oocyte and sperm come from the husband and wife, respectively. The different denominations of Christianity have diverse views on reproductive practices. Although the Vatican does not approve of assisted reproduction, Protestant, Anglican, and other religious groups are free to use it. ARTs are acceptable in Sunni Islam, although they can only be carried out if the couples are married. Shia Islam, however, permits third-party donations to married couples under specific restrictions. This comparison reveals that while the three major world religions utilize assisted reproduction in distinct ways, there are also many comparable aspects of each religion.

Ethical and moral perspectives of individuals who considered/used preimplantation (embryo) genetic testing

This study examined perspectives on the ethical implications of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) among individuals who actually (not hypothetically) used or considered using PGT. Most of the prior patient-centered research on PGT ethics used qualitative designs (9 out of the 11 articles) and focused only on single gene testing. This cross-sectional study used an anonymous online questionnaire; 15 items assessed potential ethical concerns involved in PGT decision-making, including clinical indications for PGT, the greater implications of PGT for society, and unused embryo disposition. N = 207 individuals (mean female/male age 35.7/38.9 years, 21% Hispanic or non-White) who had recently used or considered using PGT for single gene (60%) or for chromosomal testing (40%) completed the questionnaire. Most respondents supported PGT screening for disease conditions with childhood or adult onset that are untreatable (64%-85% across items); most opposed PGT for trait selection (76%-81%). Most respondents agreed that PGT aids in parental decision-making (66%-67%), although some expressed concern over potential unforeseen consequences (25%-30%). Regarding disposition of embryos without known genetic abnormalities, most respondents favored freezing indefinitely (86%) or donating to another family (69%), while for embryos with genetic abnormalities, most respondents favored donating to research (78%) or destroying them (62%). Stratification by religious affiliation revealed several differences, such as less acceptance of PGT for diseases that occur in adulthood and have no treatment options among Protestants (p = .015) and greater willingness to donate surplus embryos to research among participants without a religious affiliation (p < .001). These results are limited by the relatively homogeneous sample of participants (mostly White, married, and predominantly college-educated). In summary, participants who considered/used PGT found PGT acceptable overall for screening for disease conditions; most opposed using PGT for trait selection. Our novel questionnaire provides a structured tool for assessing the ethical perspectives surrounding the use of PGT.