Expanded carrier screening in reproductive healthcare: perspectives from genetics professionals

Preconception carrier screening in couples seeking IVF: exploring the patient perspective

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the level of understanding, and what are the attitudes and considerations regarding preconception carrier screening (PCS) among couples seeking IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)?

DESIGN

A mixed-methods design was used. Nine interviews were conducted with couples or individual partners (n = 16) who had an initial consultation for IVF/ICSI in the 2 years preceding this study. A questionnaire was completed by 115 participants. No actual PCS was offered.

RESULTS

All interviewed couples expressed a positive attitude towards PCS, and over half of the respondents stated that they would pursue or seriously consider pursuing PCS if possible. Some couples falsely believed that PCS could identify a cause for their fertility problems and increase their chance of conceiving. The desire to make an informed reproductive decision was the most important argument in favour of PCS. The primary argument against PCS was the apprehension of being confronted with reproductive dilemmas. The longer the delay to IVF/ICSI treatment required to perform PCS, the more couples would be inclined to decline screening. Participants indicated that they would prefer to receive information about PCS from a medical specialist at an early stage in their IVF/ICSI treatment.

CONCLUSION

Although attitudes towards PCS were generally positive, some concerns were raised about treatment delays and potential reproductive dilemmas, and some couples had misconceptions about the purpose of screening within the context of their IVF/ICSI treatment. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring information and counselling to the specific needs of couples seeking IVF/ICSI.

Primary care professionals' views on population-based expanded carrier screening: an online focus group study

BACKGROUND

Population-based expanded carrier screening (ECS) involves screening for multiple recessive diseases offered to all couples considering a pregnancy or during pregnancy. Previous research indicates that in some countries primary care professionals are perceived as suitable providers for ECS. However, little is known about their perspectives. We therefore aimed to explore primary care professionals' views on population-based ECS.

METHODS

Four online focus groups with 14 general practitioners (GPs) and 16 community midwives were conducted in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Our findings highlight various perspectives on the desirability of population-based ECS. Participants agreed that ECS could enhance reproductive autonomy and thereby prevent suffering of the child and/or parents. However, they also raised several ethical, societal, and psychological concerns, including a tendency towards a perfect society, stigmatization, unequal access to screening and negative psychosocial consequences. Participants believed that provision of population-based ECS would be feasible if prerequisites regarding training and reimbursement for providers would be fulfilled. most GPs considered themselves less suitable or capable of providing ECS, in contrast to midwives who did consider themselves suitable. Nevertheless, participants believed that, if implemented, ECS should be offered in primary care or by public health services rather than as hospital-based specialized care, because they believed a primary care ECS offer increases access in terms of time and location.

CONCLUSIONS

While participants believed that an ECS offer would be feasible, they questioned its desirability and priority. Studies on the desirability and feasibility of population-based ECS offered in primary care or public health settings are needed.

An ESHG-ESHRE survey on the current practice of expanded carrier screening in medically assisted reproduction

STUDY QUESTION

What is the current practice and views on (expanded) carrier screening ((E)CS) among healthcare professionals in medically assisted reproductive (MAR) practices in Europe?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The findings show a limited support for ECS with less than half of the respondents affiliated to centres offering ECS, and substantial variation in practice between centres in Europe.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The availability of next-generation sequencing, which enables testing for large groups of genes simultaneously, has facilitated the introduction and expansion of ECS strategies, currently offered particularly in the private sector in the context of assisted reproduction.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A cross-sectional survey evaluating practice and current views among professionals working in MAR practice in different European countries was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool. The web-based questionnaire included questions on general information regarding the current practice of (E)CS in MAR and questions on what is offered, to whom the test is offered, and how it is offered. It consisted mostly of multiple-choice questions with comment boxes, but also included open questions on the respondents' attitudes/concerns relevant to (E)CS practice, and room to upload requested files (e.g. guidelines and gene panels). In total, 338 responses were collected from 8 February 2022 to 11 April 2022.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The online survey was launched with an invitation email from the ESHRE central office (n = 4889 emails delivered) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) central office (n = 1790 emails delivered) sent to the ESHRE and ESHG members, and by social media posts. The survey was addressed to European MAR centres or gamete banks and to centres located in non-European countries participating in the European IVF-monitoring Consortium. Two reminder emails were sent. After exclusion of 39 incomplete responses received (e.g. only background information), 299 respondents from 40 different countries were included for analyses.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Overall, 42.5% (127/299) of respondents were affiliated to centres offering ECS. The perceived responsibility to enable prospective parents to make informed reproductive decisions and preventing suffering/burden for parents were the main reasons to offer ECS. A single ECS panel is offered by nearly 45% (39/87 received answers) of the centres offering ECS, 25.3% (22/87) of those centres offer a selection of ECS panels, and 29.9% (26/87) offer whole exome sequencing and a large in silico panel. Different ranges of panel sizes and conditions were included in the ECS panel(s) offered. Most of the respondents (81.8%; 72/88 received answers) indicated that the panels they offer are universal and target the entire population. Pathogenic variants (89.7%; 70/78 received answers), and to a lesser extent, likely pathogenic variants (64.1%%; 50/78 received answers), were included in the ECS report for individuals and couples undergoing MAR with their own gametes. According to 87.9% (80/91 received answers) of the respondents, patients have to pay to undergo an ECS test. Most respondents (76.2%; 61/80 received answers) reported that counselling is provided before and after the ECS test. Preimplantation genetic testing, the use of donor gametes, and prenatal diagnostic testing were the three main reproductive options discussed with identified carrier couples. The main reason, according to the respondents, for not offering ECS in their centre, was the lack of professional recommendations supporting ECS (52.5%; 73/139 received answers) and the high cost for couples or reimbursement not being available (49.6%; 69/139). The challenges and moral dilemmas encountered by the respondents revolved mainly around the content of the offer, including the variants classification and the heterogeneity of the panels, the counselling, and the cost of the test.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Although the total number of respondents was acceptable, the completion rate of the survey was suboptimal. In addition, the heterogeneity of answers to open-ended questions and the ambiguity of some of the answers, along with incomplete responses, posed a challenge in interpreting survey results. It is also plausible that some questions were not easily understood by the respondents. For this reason, response and non-response bias are acknowledged as further limitations of the survey.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The results of this survey could aid in identifying potential challenges or areas for improvement in the current practice of ECS in the MAR field and contribute to the discussion on how to address them. The results underline the need to stimulate a more knowledge-based debate on the complexity and the pros and cons of a possible implementation of ECS in MAR.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

All costs relating to the development process were covered from European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and European Society of Human Genetics funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. A.C. is full-time employee of Juno Genetics. L.H. declared receiving a research grant during the past 36 months from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. She has also participated in a Health Council report of the Netherlands on preconception carrier screening and collaborated with the VSOP Dutch Genetic Alliance (patient umbrella organization on rare and genetic disorders). L.H. and C.v.E. are affiliated with Amsterdam University Medical Centre, a hospital that offers ECS in a non-commercial setting. R.V. received honoraria for presentations from Merck Academy and is unpaid board member of the executive committee of the Spanish Fertility Society. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

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.

Aspiring toward equitable benefits from genomic advances to individuals of ancestrally diverse backgrounds

Advancements in genomic technologies have shown remarkable promise for improving health trajectories. The Human Genome Project has catalyzed the integration of genomic tools into clinical practice, such as disease risk assessment, prenatal testing and reproductive genomics, cancer diagnostics and prognostication, and therapeutic decision making. Despite the promise of genomic technologies, their full potential remains untapped without including individuals of diverse ancestries and integrating social determinants of health (SDOHs). The NHGRI launched the 2020 Strategic Vision with ten bold predictions by 2030, including "individuals from ancestrally diverse backgrounds will benefit equitably from advances in human genomics." Meeting this goal requires a holistic approach that brings together genomic advancements with careful consideration to healthcare access as well as SDOHs to ensure that translation of genetics research is inclusive, affordable, and accessible and ultimately narrows rather than widens health disparities. With this prediction in mind, this review delves into the two paramount applications of genetic testing-reproductive genomics and precision oncology. When discussing these applications of genomic advancements, we evaluate current accessibility limitations, highlight challenges in achieving representativeness, and propose paths forward to realize the ultimate goal of their equitable applications.

Using a theory informed approach to design, execute, and evaluate implementation strategies to support offering reproductive genetic carrier screening in Australia

BACKGROUND

Health care professionals play a central role in offering reproductive genetic carrier screening but face challenges when integrating the offer into practice. The aim of this study was to design, execute, and evaluate theory-informed implementation strategies to support health care professionals in offering carrier screening.

METHODS

An exploratory multi-method approach was systematically employed based on the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF). Implementation strategies were designed by aligning TDF barriers reported by health care professionals involved in a large carrier screening study, to behaviour change techniques combined with study genetic counsellors' experiential knowledge. The strategies were trialled with a subset of health care professionals and evaluated against controls, using findings from questionnaires and interviews with healthcare professionals. The primary outcome measure was the number of couples who initiated enrolment.

RESULTS

Health care professionals (n = 151) reported barriers in the TDF Domains of skills, e.g., lack of practice in offering screening, and challenges of environmental context and resources, e.g., lack of time, which informed the design of a skills video and a waiting room poster using the TDF-behaviour change technique linking tool. Following implementation, (Skills video n = 29 vs control n = 31 and Poster n = 46 vs control n = 34) TDF barrier scores decreased across all groups and little change was observed in the primary outcome measure. The skills video, though welcomed by health care professionals, was reportedly too long at seven minutes. The waiting room poster was seen as easily implementable.

CONCLUSIONS

As carrier screening moves towards mainstream healthcare, health care professionals report barriers to offering screening. To meet their needs, developing and testing experiential and theory-informed strategies that acknowledge contextual factors are essential.

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.

Scaling-up and future sustainability of a national reproductive genetic carrier screening program

An understanding of factors influencing implementation is essential to realise the benefits of population-based reproductive genetic carrier screening programs. The aim of this study was to synthesise data collected during the Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project (Mackenzie's Mission) to track how priorities shifted over time and identify important factors during scaling-up and for sustainment. We used a multi-method qualitative approach to integrate longitudinal project data collected from 10 project committees with 16 semi-structured interviews conducted with study team members. Both datasets were analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify constructs of interest within early, mid-point, and future implementation phases. Several CFIR constructs were present across implementation. The complexity of implementation presented challenges that were overcome through a quality-designed and packaged product, formal and informal networks and communication, and access to knowledge and information. Addressing the diverse consumer needs through resources and increasing community and non-genetic speciality engagement remained a priority throughout and for future sustainment. Going forward, further addressing program complexities and securing funding were emphasised. By applying an implementation framework, findings from this study may be useful for future effort towards building and/or sustaining reproductive genetic carrier screening programs.

Attitudes of professional stakeholders towards implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening: a systematic review

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) for hundreds of different genetic conditions is technically available for prospective parents, but these tests have not been integrated in a public health policy except for specific sub-groups. We aimed to provide an overview of the perspectives of multiple professional stakeholder groups in order to enhance a responsible implementation of population-based reproductive genetic carrier screening. We conducted a systematic literature search using eight online databases focussing on studies that were published from January 2009 to January 2021. We selected articles dealing with attitudes and opinions from different professional stakeholders, in particular healthcare professionals and policymakers, on how to implement a policy about carrier screening for a reproductive purpose. We identified 18 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Based on our inductive analysis, we identified ten themes categorized in both clinical and program management challenges: ensuring availability of RGCS to all couples who request the test, embedding RGCS as a test offer before pregnancy, providing clear and reliable information, ensuring voluntary participation, developing genetic counselling pre- and post-testing (after positive or negative result), avoiding psychological harm, ensuring equal access, avoiding social pressure, educating and involving a broad spectrum of non-genetic health care professionals, and promoting an independent non-commercial organisational structure. We highlight one major stumbling block on how to responsibly inform couples about hundreds different genetic conditions within constraints regarding time and ability of non-genetic professionals. We promote further research to tackle the issues brought up by this systematic review through pilot studies. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO 2021 # CRD42021233762; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=233762 .

The more you do it, the easier it gets: using behaviour change theory to support health care professionals offering reproductive genetic carrier screening

Recent advances in genomic sequencing have improved the accessibility of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). As awareness and interest grows, non-genetic health care professionals are increasingly offering RGCS to consumers. We conducted a qualitative interview study informed by behaviour change theory to identify influences on health care professionals considered as 'early adopters' offering RGCS through Mackenzie's Mission, an Australian national research study investigating the implementation of free RGCS to couple's preconception or in early pregnancy. Interviews were deductively analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework to examine barriers and enabling factors. In total, we interviewed 31 health care professionals, who were primarily general practitioners (n = 23) offering RGCS through Mackenzie's Mission. Upon analysis, 15 barriers and 44 enablers to implementation were identified and categorised across three health care professional target behaviours 1. Engaging with RGCS, 2. Identifying eligible patients, and 3. Offering RGCS. Whilst all Theoretical Domains Framework domains were present, barriers were predominantly categorised as 'Environmental Context and Resources' e.g., lack of time, followed by 'Knowledge' e.g., lack of understanding about genetics and 'Beliefs about Capabilities' e.g., concern about giving high risk results to patients. Although health care professionals expressed a preference for offering RGCS through a comprehensive and supported model of care, such as Mackenzie's Mission, barriers remain. By understanding what drives current health care professionals' behaviour towards offering RGCS, behaviour change theory provides an avenue to direct future efforts based on evidence and improve service delivery.

Genetic Counselling Needs for Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: A Scoping Review

Reproductive genetic carrier screening provides individuals and couples with information regarding their risk of having a child affected by an autosomal recessive or X-linked recessive genetic condition. This information allows them the opportunity to make reproductive decisions in line with their own beliefs and values. Traditionally, carrier screening has been accessed by family members of affected individuals. In recent years, improvements to accessibility and updates to recommendations suggest that all women planning or in early pregnancy should be offered reproductive genetic carrier screening. As uptake moves towards the population scale, how can the genetic counselling needs of such large-scale screening be met? A scoping review of the literature was performed to ascertain what the genetic counselling needs of reproductive genetic carrier screening are, and what future research is needed. Four broad themes were identified in the existing literature: (1) The offer-when and in what context to offer screening; (2) Information-the importance of and what to include in education, and pre- and post-test counselling; (3) Who and how-who the genetic counselling is performed by and how; (4) Personalization-how do we find the balance between standardized and individualized approaches? Based on the existing literature, we present a set of recommendations for consideration in implementing population-scale reproductive genetic carrier screening as well as suggested areas for future research.

Challenges of preconception genetic testing in France: A qualitative study

Preconception genetic testing is carried out to inform couples on their carrier status for recessive or X-linked genetic disease, and aims to extend their possible reproductive choices. These genetic tests are available in several countries and are currently being considered in France in the context of bioethics laws revision, raising multiple medical, ethical, and societal concerns. To provide insights into questions relative to preconception genetic testing implementation, we conducted, through a qualitative research methodology, individual and group interviews in families with experience of genetic disease, physicians and researchers in the human and social sciences, and an ethics committee. In particular, the respondents agreed on the importance of a free test and an informed choice. The economic stakes of the test appeared to be a major determinant of its development for the participants. The use of genetic data has been a source of raised fears of a eugenic drift. The remaining questions were relative to the pathologies to be tested, the access to the test, its supervision, the role of physicians and in particular of primary care professionals. Based on individual opinions and collective debates, our work delimits the challenges of preconception genetic testing implementation in France through a qualitative methodology, providing further data necessary to its introduction in the health care system.

Expanded carrier screening in the United States: A systematic evidence review exploring client and provider experiences

The aim of carrier screening is to identify prospective parents at risk of having a pregnancy affected with an autosomal recessive or X-linked disorder. Though minimal guideline-based screening is available, expanded carrier screening (ECS) is quickly becoming a feasible option for the general population due to its growing availability and affordability. However, the impact of ECS on clients and providers remains relatively unexplored. We performed a systematic evidence review to identify publications describing client-, provider-, and test-related outcomes. We searched several biomedical databases for articles published between January 1, 2003 and May 31, 2021. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they described genetic counseling and/or genetic testing for carrier screening (minimal guideline-based or ECS) in a prenatal or preconception setting in the United States. Title and abstract screening were performed using the Raayan web application or customized Google Forms. Full-text review and data extraction of included articles were performed using custom Google Forms. Two researchers performed a multistep selection process independently for validation purposes. Of 5413 unique articles screened, 36 studies were included with several studies contributing to multiple outcomes. Twenty described outcomes relating to patients/clients, 10 described provider-based outcomes, and 16 described test-based outcomes. Findings suggest that client and provider perceptions of ECS and minimal guideline-based carrier screening are multifaceted. Though clients have expressed desire for ECS, clinical uptake and impact on reproductive decision-making varies. Additionally, though genetic counselors seem to be comfortable with ECS, most other reproductive care providers seem to prefer minimal guideline or ancestry-based screening due to perceived barriers, such as time needed for ECS results disclosure and follow-up, as well as the desire to have panels set by professional societies/recommendations. There are limitations within the gathered literature, leading to potential uncertainty in the generalizability of our review. We outline several recommendations for future studies, including the need to examine variant interpretation and use of next-generation sequencing.

Couple-based expanded carrier screening provided by general practitioners to couples in the Dutch general population: psychological outcomes and reproductive intentions

Purpose

The aim of expanded preconception carrier screening (ECS) is to inform any couple wishing to conceive about their chances of having children with severe autosomal or X-linked recessive conditions. Responsible implementation of ECS as reproductive genetic screening in routine care requires assessment of benefits and harms. We examined the psychological outcomes of couple-based ECS for 50 autosomal recessive (AR) conditions provided by general practitioners (GPs) to couples from the Dutch general population.

Methods

Dutch GPs invited 4,295 women aged 18–40. We examined anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI-6), worry, decisional conflict (DCS) over time in participants declining GP counseling or attending GP counseling with/without testing.

Results

One hundred ninety couples participated; 130 attended counseling, of whom 117 proceeded with testing. No carrier couples were identified. Before counseling, worry (median 6.0) and anxiety (mean 30–34) were low and lower than the population reference (36.4), although some individuals reported increased anxiety or worry. At follow-up, test acceptors reported less anxiety than test decliners (mean 29 vs. 35); differences in anxiety after testing compared to before counseling were not meaningful. Most participants (90%) were satisfied with their decision (not) to undergo testing.

Conclusion

Some individuals reported temporarily clinically relevant distress. Overall, the psychological outcomes are acceptable and no barrier to population-wide implementation.

First French study relative to preconception genetic testing: 1500 general population participants' opinion

Background

Until very recently, preconception genetic testing was only conducted in particular communities, ethnic groups or families for which an increased risk of genetic disease was identified. To detect in general population a risk for a couple to have a child affected by a rare, recessive or X-linked, genetic disease, carrier screening is proposed in several countries. We aimed to determine the current public opinion relative to this approach in France, using either a printed or web-based questionnaire.

Results

Among the 1568 participants, 91% are favorable to preconception genetic tests and 57% declare to be willing to have the screening if the latter is available. A medical prescription by a family doctor or a gynecologist would be the best way to propose the test for 73%, with a reimbursement from the social security insurance. However, 19% declare not to be willing to use the test because of their ethic or moral convictions, and the fear that the outcome would question the pregnancy. Otherwise, most participants consider that the test is a medical progress despite the risk of an increased medicalization of the pregnancy.

Conclusion

This first study in France highlights a global favorable opinion for the preconception genetic carrier testing under a medical prescription and a reimbursement by social security insurance. Our results emphasize as well the complex concerns underpinned by the use of this screening strategy. Therefore, the ethical issues related to these tests include the risk of eugenic drift mentioned by more than half of the participants.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-01754-z.

Health practitioners' perceptions of the barriers and enablers to the implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening: A systematic review

Background

As interest in reproductive genetic carrier screening rises, with increased availability, the role of healthcare practitioners is central in guiding uptake aligned with a couples' values and beliefs. Therefore, practitioners' views on implementation are critical to the success of any reproductive genetic carrier screening programme.

Aim

To explore healthcare practitioners' perceptions of the barriers and enablers to implementation.

Materials & Methods

We undertook a systematic review of the literature searching seven databases using health practitioner, screening and implementation terms returning 490 articles.

Results

Screening led to the inclusion of 26 articles for full‐text review. We found three interconnected themes relating to reproductive genetic carrier screening: (i) use and impact, (ii) practitioners' beliefs and expectations and (iii) resources.

Discussion

Barriers and enablers to implementation were present within each theme and grouping these determinants by (a) community for example lack of public interest, (b) practitioner for example lack of practitioner time and (c) organisation for example lack of effective metrics, reveals a preponderance of practitioner barriers and organisational enablers. Linking barriers with potential enablers leaves several barriers unresolved (e.g., costs for couples) implying additional interventions may be required.

Conclusion

Future research should draw on the findings from this study to develop and test strategies to facilitate appropriate offering of reproductive genetic carrier screening by healthcare practitioners.

What is already known?

Availability of reproductive genetic carrier screening is rising.

Screening is often focused on ethnically specific conditions or for those with a family history of disease.

Commonly, carriers do not have family history of disease.

What does this review add?

Identifies practitioner barriers to implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening, for example, beliefs and expectations.

Matches identified practitioner barriers to enablers to implementation.

Highlights where additional implementation support is required, for example, lack of practitioner confidence.

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

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) entails a screening offer for carrier status for multiple recessive disorders simultaneously and allows testing of couples or individuals regardless of ancestry or geographic origin. Although universal ECS—referring to a screening offer for the general population—has generated considerable ethical debate, little attention has been given to the ethics of preconception ECS for patients applying for assisted reproduction using their own gametes. There are several reasons why it is time for a systematic reflection on this practice. Firstly, various European fertility clinics already offer preconception ECS on a routine basis, and others are considering such a screening offer. Professionals involved in assisted reproduction have indicated a need for ethical guidance for ECS. Secondly, it is expected that patients seeking assisted reproduction will be particularly interested in preconception ECS, as they are already undertaking the physical, emotional and economic burdens of such reproduction. Thirdly, an offer of preconception ECS to patients seeking assisted reproduction raises particular ethical questions that do not arise in the context of universal ECS: the professional’s involvement in the conception implies that both parental and professional responsibilities should be taken into account. This paper reflects on and provides ethical guidance for a responsible implementation of preconception ECS to patients seeking assisted reproduction using their own gametes by assessing the proportionality of such a screening offer: do the possible benefits clearly outweigh the possible harms and disadvantages? If so, for what kinds of disorders and under what conditions?

Current attitudes and preconceptions towards expanded carrier screening in the Eastern Chinese reproductive-aged population

PURPOSE

A growing number of Chinese individuals of reproductive age will face the choice of accepting or refusing expanded carrier screening (ECS). This study aimed to explore the awareness, wishes, and possible misconceptions of ECS among this population, as well as factors affecting their decision-making.

METHODS

Chinese reproductive-aged individuals in Eastern China who sought cell-free fetal DNA screening and peripheral blood karyotype were invited to complete a 31-item ECS survey by scanning a specific quick response code. We evaluated the relationship between awareness, attitudes, and intentions to participate in ECS, along with possible misconceptions.

RESULTS

Overall, 93.1% of participants intended to undergo ECS at their expenses, and 53.6% indicated they would pay less than 1000 CNY (approximately 145 USD) for the test. Around 96.5% of participants had misconceptions about ECS and genetic diseases. Participants whose first reaction was interest, who had prior awareness of the test, or who perceived benefits were more likely to intend to use ECS (p < 0.001). Participants with a bachelor's degree or above or with a household income over 150,000 CNY (approximately 21,700 USD) would be more likely to pay ≥ 1000 CNY (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that overall, the Eastern Chinese reproductive-aged population has positive attitudes towards ECS, although there are some misconceptions about ECS and genetic disorders. Population-based ECS appears to be desired by the reproductive-aged people in Eastern China. Steps should be taken to offer ECS along with pre- and post-test education and genetic counseling to raise awareness and to reduce misconceptions.

Interest in expanded carrier screening among individuals and couples in the general population: systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Through carrier screening, prospective parents can acquire information about whether they have an increased risk of conceiving a child affected with an autosomal recessive or X-linked condition. Within the last decade, advances in genomic technologies have facilitated a shift from condition-directed carrier screening to expanded carrier screening (ECS). Following the introduction of ECS, several studies have been performed to gauge the interest in this new technology among individuals and couples in the general population.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize evidence from empirical studies that assess the interest in ECS among individuals and couples in the general population. As the availability and accessibility of ECS grow, more couples who are a priori not at risk based on their personal or family history will be presented with the choice to accept or decline such an offer. Their attitudes and beliefs, as well as the perceived usefulness of this screening modality, will likely determine whether ECS is to become a widespread reproductive genetic test.

SEARCH METHODS

Four databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) were systematically searched to identify English language studies performed between January 2009 and January 2019 using the following search terms: carrier screening, carrier testing, attitudes, intention, interest, views, opinions, perspectives and uptake. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported on intentions to undergo a (hypothetical) ECS test, uptake of an actual ECS offer or both. Two researchers performed a multistep selection process independently for validation purposes.

OUTCOMES

Twelve empirical studies performed between 2015 and 2019 were included for analysis. The studies originated from the USA (n = 6), the Netherlands (n = 3), Belgium (n = 1), Sweden (n = 1) and Australia (n = 1). The sample size of the studies varied from 80 to 1669. In the included studies, 32%–76% of respondents were interested in a (hypothetical) ECS test, while uptake rates for actual ECS offers ranged from 8% to 50%. The highest overall uptake was observed when ECS was offered to pregnant women (50%). By contrast, studies focusing on the preconception population reported lower overall uptake rates (8–34%) with the exception of one study where women were counseled preconception in preparation for IVF (68.7%).

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Our findings suggest that there may be discrepancies between prospective parents’ reported intentions to undergo ECS and their actual uptake, particularly during the preconception period. As ECS is a new and relatively unknown test for most future parents, the awareness and comprehension within the general population could be rather limited. Adequate pre- and post-test counseling services should be made available to couples offered ECS to ensure informed reproductive decision-making, together with guidelines for primary health care professionals. Due to restricted nature of the samples and methods of the underlying primary studies, some of the reported results might not be transferable to a broader population. More research is needed to see if the observed trends also apply to a broader and more diverse population.

Improving access to genetic testing for adults with intellectual disability: A literature review and lessons from a quality improvement project in East London

Recent advances in genetic research have led to an increased focus on genetic causes of intellectual disability (ID) and have raised new questions about how and when clinicians offer genetic testing and the nature of communication around this decision with patients and carers. Determining the right approach to such discussions is complicated by complexities of communication, consent, and capacity and ethical concerns about genetic testing in this population. In this article, we briefly discuss the recent advances in genetic research relevant to people with intellectual disability, highlighting the challenges that might arise when undertaking genetic testing in this population. We then describe how we have used a Quality Improvement methodology to develop a clinical pathway for routine genetic testing for adults with intellectual disability in a clinical setting in East London.

Should Clinicians Leave "Expanded" Carrier Screening Decisions to Patients?

Many patients choose to undergo some type of carrier screening when pregnant or planning to become pregnant. "Expanded" carrier screening products test all patients for the same conditions, regardless of family history, race, or ethnicity. Proponents of expanded screening argue that testing everyone for everything can identify more couples at risk of having an affected fetus. However, most conditions on expanded carrier screening panels do not adhere to criteria recommended by professional organizations and can leave patients with a positive test result but little helpful information about actual clinical risk for their future baby. Confusion persists about whether clinicians should leave carrier screening decisions to patients.

Feasibility of couple-based expanded carrier screening offered by general practitioners

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) aims to inform couples' reproductive choice, preferably before conception. As part of an implementation study in which trained general practitioners (GPs) offered a population-based ECS couple-test, we evaluated the feasibility of the test-offer and degree of participant informed choice (IC). Trained GPs from nine practices in the northern Netherlands invited 4295 female patients aged 18-40 to take part in couple-based ECS. Inclusion criteria were having a male partner, planning for children and not being pregnant. We evaluated the feasibility of the organizational aspects, GP competence and the content of the pre-test counselling. Participant satisfaction, evaluation of pre-test counselling and degree of IC were measured using a longitudinal survey. We explored GP experiences and their views on future implementation through semi-structured interviews. 130 consultations took place. All participating GPs were assessed by genetic professionals to be competent to conduct pre-test counselling. Most (63/108 (58%)) consultations took place within the planned 20 min (median 20, IQR 18-28). GPs considered couples' prior knowledge level an important determinant of consultation length. 91% of patients were (very) satisfied with the GP counselling. After pre-test counselling, 231/237(97%) participants had sufficient knowledge and 206/231(88%) had a positive attitude and proceeded with testing. Our pilot demonstrates that offering couple-based ECS through trained and motivated GPs is feasible. Future large-scale implementation requires a well-informed general public and a discussion about appropriate reimbursement for GPs and health care coverage for couples. Providing (more) test information pre-appointment may help reduce average consultation time.

The evolving landscape of expanded carrier screening: challenges and opportunities

Carrier screening allows individuals to learn their chance of passing on an autosomal or X-linked condition to their offspring. Initially introduced as single-disease, ancestry-based screening, technological advances now allow for the possibility of multi-disease, pan-ethnic carrier screening, which we refer to as “expanded carrier screening.” There are numerous potential benefits to expanded carrier screening, including maximizing the opportunity for couples to make autonomous reproductive decisions, and efficiency and marginal additional costs of including more conditions if the test is already being offered. While numerous laboratories currently offer expanded carrier screening services, it is not yet commonly used in clinical practice, and there is a lack of consensus among experts about the service, including whether this should be offered to individuals and couples, whether this should be offered preconception or prenatally, and what conditions to include in screening programs. Challenges for expanded carrier screening programs include a lack of demand from the public, low prioritization by health systems, the potential for pressure to undergo screening, the possibility of disability-based discrimination, needed adaptations to pre- and post-test counseling, technical limitations, and the evolving technological and socio-political landscape.

Structurating Expanded Genetic Carrier Screening: A Longitudinal Analysis of Online News Coverage

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) is a genetic test that is designed to assess the risk of a healthy person passing down a genetic disorder, such as spinal muscular atrophy, to future children. ECS screens for up to several hundred disorders in one test, expanding on traditional carrier screening tests that target one or a few genetic disorders. However, little is known about how this health technology is being presented to the public in media coverage. Accordingly, this study is a qualitative content analysis of online news and information of ECS over a 6-year period, beginning in 2010 when the technology was publicly available. Results indicate that major coverage themes were consistent across the years included, although content within those themes changed over time. Using structuration theory to guide analysis, results reveal that online news and information from 2010 to 2015 structurated ECS as a health technology innovation, an opportunity for business and investment, and a tool for family planning. Results are discussed in terms of implications for future research, for health journalism practice, and for clinical interactions.

Patient actions and reactions after receiving negative results from expanded carrier screening

With the expansion of carrier screening to general preconception and prenatal patient populations, most patients will receive negative results, which we define as indicating <25% risk of having a child with a genetic condition. Because there is limited experience with expanded carrier screening, it is important to understand how receiving negative results affects patients, especially as providers, payers, and policymakers consider whether to offer it. In this mixed-methods study, we asked preconception patients enrolled in the NextGen study about their expectations and experiences receiving negative expanded carrier screening results. Participants completed surveys at study enrollment (n = 110 women, 51 male partners), after receiving carrier results (n = 100 women, 38 male partners), after receiving secondary findings (n = 98 women, 36 male partners), and 6 months after receiving results (n = 95 women, 28 male partners). We also interviewed a subset of participants 12 to 24 months after receiving results (n = 24 women, 12 male partners). We found minimal negative emotional impact and privacy concerns, increased confidence in reproductive plans, and few changes to health behaviors, although some patients made health decisions based on misunderstandings of their results. These findings suggest that expanded carrier screening causes minimal psychosocial harms, but systems are needed to reduce the risk of misinterpreting results.

Adopted Individuals' Views on the Utility and Value of Expanded Carrier Screening

Adoptees may not have family medical history and ethnicity information. Carrier screening assesses reproductive risk. Expanded carrier screening (ECS) screens for many genetic conditions regardless of a patient's knowledge of family history and ethnicity. This study aimed to better understand the opinions and attitudes of adopted individuals on the use of ECS in determining a patient's reproductive genetic risks. Specifically, the study assessed how adopted individuals feel that results of ECS may be useful to them and whether adoptees feel that meeting with a genetics professional in the process of undergoing ECS would be useful. Adult adoptees (N = 124) were recruited online. Their opinions on ECS were explored. The majority reported they had never been offered carrier screening (92%). The majority of adoptees wanted ECS (76%). Neither the amount of contact with biological relatives nor having medical knowledge about biological relatives was significantly associated with adoptees' desire to pursue ECS. There was a significant positive correlation between adoptees of higher education levels and the amount they would pay for ECS (p = 0.004). The majority of participants (95%) indicated a genetics professional would be helpful when undergoing ECS. The findings suggest this population may want ECS and support from genetics healthcare professionals. Advocacy for genetic counseling and testing for adoptees appears justifiable.

Attitudes of sperm, egg and embryo donors and recipients towards genetic information and screening of donors

BACKGROUND

Gamete and embryo donors undergo genetic screening procedures in order to maximise the health of donor-conceived offspring. In the era of genomic medicine, expanded genetic screening may be offered to donors for the purpose of avoiding transmission of harmful genetic mutations. The objective of this study was to explore the attitudes of donors and recipients toward the expanded genetic screening of donors.

METHODS

Qualitative interview study with thematic analysis, undertaken in a tertiary fertility centre. Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven recipients and nine donors from three different cohorts (sperm, egg and embryo donors/recipients).

RESULTS

Donors and recipients acknowledged the importance of genetic information and were comfortable with the existing level of genetic screening of donors. Recipients recognised some potential benefits of expanded genetic screening of donors; however both recipients and donors were apprehensive about extended genomic technologies, with concerns about how this information would be used and the ethics of genetic selectivity.

CONCLUSION

Participants in donor programs support some level of genetic screening of donors, but are wary of expanding genetic screening beyond current levels.

Time Costs for Genetic Counseling in Preconception Carrier Screening with Genome Sequencing

Advances in technology and the promise of personalized health care are driving greater use of genome sequencing (GS) for a variety of clinical scenarios. As health systems consider adopting GS, they need to understand the impact of GS on the organization and cost of care. While research has documented a dramatic decrease in the cost of sequencing and interpreting GS, few studies have examined how GS impacts genetic counseling workloads. This study examined the time needed to provide genetic counseling for GS in the context of preconception carrier screening. Genetic counselors prospectively reported on the time spent in the results disclosure process with 107 study participants who were part of the NextGen study. We found that the median time for results disclosure was 64 min (ranged from 5 to 229 min). Preparation work was the most time-consuming activity. Qualitative data from journal entries, debrief interviews with genetic counselors, and detailed case conference notes provided information on factors influencing time for results disclosure and implications for practice. Results suggest that expanded carrier screening could require significant increases in genetic counseling time, unless we are able to generate new resources to reduce preparation work or develop other strategies such as the creation of new models to deliver this type of service.

Pros and cons of implementing a carrier genetic test in an infertility practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Carrier screening is promptly evolving thanks to the rapid development of new technologies and mutation knowledge. Expanded carrier screening is already being used in assisted reproduction. Medical, ethical, psychological and legal aspects appear from the general public, patients, healthcare providers and scientific societies. Pros and cons of implementing this technique are highlighted.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent publications show the development of wider gene screening panels with lowering cost. Human genome is continually being updated as are the number of mutations and their corresponding phenotype known. Classical criteria established to consider a genetic screening protocol are nowadays overtaken, and scientific societies are developing guidelines and criteria adapted to expanded genetic testing. There is no universal agreement on the mutations that should be included in the panel. Patients' perceptions on carrier genetic testing seem to be positive. Counselling patients is of paramount importance stressing implications when testing positive on their clinical decision making. Gamete donor genetic testing implies a modified approach and blinded matching must be offered.

SUMMARY

There are important positive aspects implementing a carrier genetic test in assisted reproductive technique, but controversial issues appear. Reproductive providers must be appropriately aware and follow the new guidelines.

Preconception carrier screening for multiple disorders: evaluation of a screening offer in a Dutch founder population

Technological developments have enabled carrier screening for multiple disorders. This study evaluated experiences with a preconception carrier screening offer for four recessive disorders in a Dutch founder population. Questionnaires were completed by 182 attendees pretesting and posttesting and by 137 non-attendees. Semistructured interviews were conducted with seven of the eight carrier couples. Attendees were mainly informed about the existence of screening by friends/colleagues (49%) and family members (44%). Familiarity with the genetic disorders was high. Knowledge after counseling increased (p < 0.001); however, still 9%, compared to 29% before counseling, wrongly mentioned an increased risk of having an affected child if both parents are carriers of different disorders. Most attendees (97%) recalled their test results correctly, but two couples reported being carrier of another disorder than reported. Overall, 63% felt worried while waiting for results but anxiety levels returned to normal afterwards. In all, 2/39 (5%) carriers felt less healthy. Screened individuals were very satisfied; they did not regret testing (97%) and would recommend testing to others (97%). The majority (94%) stated that couples should always have a pretest consultation, preferably by a genetic counselor rather than their general practitioner (83%). All carrier couples made reproductive decisions based on their results. Main reason for non-attendance was unawareness of the screening offer. With expanded carrier screening, adequately informing couples pretest and posttesting is of foremost importance. Close influencers (family/friends) can be used to raise awareness of a screening offer. Our findings provide lessons for the implementation of expanded carrier screening panels in other communities and other settings.

Business and Breakthrough: Framing (Expanded) Genetic Carrier Screening for the Public

A growing body of research has given attention to issues surrounding genetic testing, including expanded carrier screening (ECS), an elective medical test that allows planning or expecting parents to consider the potential occurrence of genetic diseases and disorders in their children. These studies have noted the role of the mass media in driving public perceptions about such testing, giving particular attention to ways in which coverage of genetics and genetic testing broadly may drive public attitudes and choices concerning the morality, legality, ethics, and parental well-being involved in genetic technologies. However, few studies have explored how mass media are covering the newer test, ECS. Drawing on health-related framing studies that have shown in varying degrees the impact particular frames such as gain/loss and thematic/episodic can have on the public, this study examines the frame selection employed by online media in its coverage of ECS. This analysis-combined with an analysis of the sources and topics used in such coverage and how they relate to selected frames-helps to clarify how mass media are covering an increasingly important medical test and offers considerations of how such coverage may inform mass media scholarship as well as health-related practices.

Pre- and post-testing counseling considerations for the provision of expanded carrier screening: exploration of European geneticists' views

Background

Carrier screening is generally performed with the aim of identifying healthy couples at risk of having a child affected with a monogenic disorder to provide them with reproductive options. Expanded carrier screening (ECS), which provides the opportunity for multiple conditions to be screened in one test, offers a more cost-effective and comprehensive option than screening for single disorders. However, implementation of ECS at a population level would have implications for genetic counseling practice.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with sixteen European clinical and molecular geneticists with expertise in carrier screening to explore their views on the implementation of ECS in the clinical setting.

Results

Using inductive content analysis, we identified content categories relevant to the pre- and post-test settings. Participants believed ECS would ideally be targeted at couples before pregnancy. There was some disagreement regarding the acceptability of performing ECS in individuals, with several participants actively opposing individual-based screening. In addition, participants discussed the importance of ensuring informed and voluntary participation in ECS, recommending measures to minimize external pressure on prospective parents to undergo testing. A need for adequate counseling to foster informed, autonomous reproductive decision-making and provide support for couples found to be at risk was emphasized.

Conclusions

Practical challenges in optimizing pre-test education and post-test counseling should not be underestimated and they should be carefully addressed before implementing ECS in the clinical setting.

Outcomes of an International Workshop on Preconception Expanded Carrier Screening: Some Considerations for Governments

Background

Consideration of expanded carrier screening has become an emerging issue for governments. However, traditional criteria for decision-making regarding screening programs do not incorporate all the issues relevant to expanded carrier screening. Further, there is a lack of consistent guidance in the literature regarding the development of appropriate criteria for government assessment of expanded carrier screening. Given this, a workshop was held to identify key public policy issues related to preconception expanded carrier screening, which governments should consider when deciding whether to publicly fund such programs.

Methods

In June 2015, a satellite workshop was held at the European Society of Human Genetics Conference. It was structured around two design features: (1) the provision of information from a range of perspectives and (2) small group deliberations on the key issues that governments need to consider and the benefits, risks, and challenges of implementing publicly funded whole-population preconception carrier screening.

Results

Forty-one international experts attended the workshop. The deliberations centered primarily on the conditions to be tested and the elements of the screening program itself. Participants expected only severe conditions to be screened but were concerned about the lack of a consensus definition of “severe.” Issues raised regarding the screening program included the purpose, benefits, harms, target population, program acceptability, components of a program, and economic evaluation. Participants also made arguments for consideration of the accuracy of screening tests.

Conclusion

A wide range of issues require careful consideration by governments that want to assess expanded carrier screening. Traditional criteria for government decision-making regarding screening programs are not a “best fit” for expanded carrier screening and new models of decision-making with appropriate criteria are required. There is a need to define what a “severe” condition is, to build evidence regarding the reliability and accuracy of screening tests, to consider the equitable availability and downstream effects on and costs of follow-up interventions for those identified as carriers, and to explore the ways in which the components of a screening program would be impacted by unique features of expanded carrier screening.

Stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of genetic carrier screening in a changing landscape

Background

In most countries, genetic carrier screening is neither offered, nor embedded in mainstream healthcare. Technological developments have triggered a two-fold transition in carrier screening: the expansion from screening one single disorder to many disorders simultaneously, and offering screening universally, regardless of ancestry. This study aims to identify general and population-specific barriers and needs reflected by stakeholders regarding the implementation of carrier screening in a changing landscape.

Methods

Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch key stakeholders working in the practical and scientific field of carrier screening. The constellation approach was used to categorise barriers and needs into three levels: culture, structure and practice.

Results

Barriers on a cultural level include: undecidedness about the desirability of carrier screening, and a lack of priority of screening in mainstream healthcare. On a structural level barriers included: need for organisational structures in healthcare for embedding carrier screening, need for guidelines, financial structures, practical tools for overcoming challenges during counselling, and a need for training and education of both professionals and the public. A lack of demand for screening by the public, and a need for a division of responsibilities were barriers on a practical level.

Conclusion

The absence of a collective sense of urgency for genetic carrier screening, a lack of organisational structures, and uncertainty or even disagreement about the responsibilities seem to be important barriers in the implementation of carrier screening. Stakeholders therefore suggest that change agents should be formally acknowledged to strategically plan broadening of current initiatives and attune different stakeholders.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2083-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Attitudes of European Geneticists Regarding Expanded Carrier Screening

OBJECTIVE

To explore attitudes of clinical and molecular geneticists about the implementation of multi-disease or expanded carrier screening (ECS) for monogenic recessive disorders.

DESIGN

Qualitative; semistructured interviews.

SETTING

In person or via Skype. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim.

PARTICIPANTS

European clinical and molecular geneticists with expertise in carrier screening (N = 16).

METHODS

Inductive content analysis was used to identify common content categories in the data.

RESULTS

Participants recognized important benefits of ECS, but they also identified major challenges, including limited benefit of ECS for most couples in the general population, lack of knowledge on carrier screening among nongenetic health care providers and the general public, potential negative implications of ECS for society, and limited economic resources. Participants favored an evidence-based approach to the implementation of population-wide ECS and were reluctant to actively offer ECS in the absence of demonstrable benefits. However, there was a consensus among the participants that ECS should be made available to couples who request the test. In addition, they believed ECS could be routinely offered to all people who use assisted reproduction.

CONCLUSION

Although a limited ECS offer is practical, it also raises concerns over equality in access to screening. A comprehensive risk-benefit analysis is needed to determine the desirability of systematic population-wide ECS.

Designing expanded carrier screening panels: results of a qualitative study with European geneticists

Aim: To explore the views of clinical and molecular geneticists on the inclusion of disorders and specific pathogenic mutations into expanded carrier screening (ECS) tests for reproductive purposes. Materials & methods: In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 16 European geneticists between April and September 2014. Results: All participants supported carrier screening for severe, childhood-onset autosomal recessive disorders with known natural history. Some participants were also in favor of screening for late-onset and X-linked disorders. Regarding selection of specific pathogenic mutations, our participants argued that ECS should include highly penetrant pathogenic mutations with known genotype–phenotype associations. Conclusion: This study highlights main challenges surrounding the development of ECS panels and offers suggestions for future research in this rapidly advancing field.

Advantages of expanded universal carrier screening: what is at stake?

Expanded universal carrier screening (EUCS) entails a twofold expansion of long-standing (preconception) carrier screening programmes: it not only allows the simultaneous screening of a large list of diseases ('expanded'), but also refers to a pan-ethnic screening offer ('universal'). Advocates mention three main moral advantages of EUCS as compared with traditional (targeted and/or ancestry-based) forms of carrier screening: EUCS will (1) maximise opportunities for autonomous reproductive choice by informing prospective parents about a much wider array of reproductive risks; (2) provide equity of access to carrier testing services; (3) reduce the risk of stigmatisation. This empirical ethics study aims to widen this account and provide a balanced picture of the potential pros and cons of EUCS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 health (policy) professionals and representatives of patient organisations about their views on carrier screening including a possible EUCS scenario. Stakeholders acknowledged the potential benefits of EUCS, but also expressed five main moral concerns: (1) Does EUCS respond to an urgent problem or population need? (2) Is it possible to offer couples both understandable and sufficient information about EUCS? (3) How will societal views on 'reproductive responsibility' change as a result of EUCS? (4) Will EUCS lead to a lower level of care for high-risk populations? (5) Will EUCS reinforce disability-based stigmatisation? While having the potential to overcome some moral limits inherent in traditional carrier screening, EUCS comes with moral challenges of its own. More research is needed to (further) anticipate the ethical and practical consequences of EUCS.

Responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening

This document of the European Society of Human Genetics contains recommendations regarding responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening. Carrier screening is defined here as the detection of carrier status of recessive diseases in couples or persons who do not have an a priori increased risk of being a carrier based on their or their partners' personal or family history. Expanded carrier screening offers carrier screening for multiple autosomal and X-linked recessive disorders, facilitated by new genetic testing technologies, and allows testing of individuals regardless of ancestry or geographic origin. Carrier screening aims to identify couples who have an increased risk of having an affected child in order to facilitate informed reproductive decision making. In previous decades, carrier screening was typically performed for one or few relatively common recessive disorders associated with significant morbidity, reduced life-expectancy and often because of a considerable higher carrier frequency in a specific population for certain diseases. New genetic testing technologies enable the expansion of screening to multiple conditions, genes or sequence variants. Expanded carrier screening panels that have been introduced to date have been advertised and offered to health care professionals and the public on a commercial basis. This document discusses the challenges that expanded carrier screening might pose in the context of the lessons learnt from decades of population-based carrier screening and in the context of existing screening criteria. It aims to contribute to the public and professional discussion and to arrive at better clinical and laboratory practice guidelines.

Swedish healthcare providers' perceptions of preconception expanded carrier screening (ECS)-a qualitative study

Reproductive autonomy, medicalization, and discrimination against disabled and parental responsibility are the main ongoing ethical debates concerning reproductive genetic screening. To examine Swedish healthcare professionals' views on preconception expanded carrier screening (ECS), a qualitative study involving academic and clinical institutions in Sweden was conducted in September 2014 to February 2015. Eleven healthcare professionals including clinicians, geneticists, a midwife, and a genetic counselor were interviewed in depth using a semi-structured interview guide. The questionnaire was constructed after reviewing the main literature and meetings with relevant healthcare providers. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and content analyzed for categories and subcategories. Participants nurtured many ethical and non-ethical concerns regarding preconception ECS. Among the ethical concerns were the potential for discrimination, medicalization, concerns with prioritization of healthcare resources, and effects on reproductive freedom. The effects of implementation of preconception ECS, its stakeholders, regulations, and motivation are some of non-ethical concerns. These concerns, if not addressed, may affect the uptake and usage of carrier screening within Swedish healthcare system. As this is a qualitative study with a small non-random sample size, the findings cannot be generalized. The participants had little to no working experience with expanded screening panels. Moreover, the interviews were conducted in English, a second language for the participants, which might have limited the expression of their views. However, the authors claim that the findings may be pertinent to similar settings in other Scandinavian countries.

Genetic Counselors' Perspectives and Practices Regarding Expanded Carrier Screening after Initial Clinical Availability

Expanded carrier screening (ECS), introduced in 2009, identifies carriers for dozens or hundreds of recessive diseases. At the time of its introduction into clinical use, perspectives of the genetic counseling community regarding ECS were unknown. We conducted a survey in early 2012 of GCs and report the results here. They represent a snapshot of opinions and usage at that time, providing a baseline for comparison as the technology continues to evolve and as usage increases. The survey assessed personal perspectives, opinions on clinical implementation and clinical utilization of ECS. The sample included 337 GCs of varying clinical fields, of whom 150 reported practicing in reproductive settings. Our findings demonstrate that, at the time, GCs indicated general agreement with ECS as a concept - for example, most GCs agreed that carrier screening should address diseases outside of current guidelines and also indicated personal interest in electing ECS. There were also disagreements or concerns expressed regarding appropriate pre- and post-test counseling (e.g., the content and delivery mode of adequate informed consent) and practical implementation (e.g., the amount of time available for follow-up care). This was the first quantitative study of a large number of GCs and it revealed initial overall support for ECS among the GC profession. The authors plan to re-administer a similar survey, which may reveal changes in opinions and/or utilization over time. A follow up survey would also allow further exploration of questions uncovered by these data.

Expanded carrier screening in an infertile population: how often is clinical decision making affected?

PURPOSE

Options for preconception genetic screening have grown dramatically. Expanded carrier screening (ECS) now allows for determining carrier status for hundreds of genetic mutations by using a single sample, and some recommend ECS prior to in vitro fertilization. This study seeks to evaluate how often ECS alters clinical management when patients present for infertility care.

METHODS

All patients tested with ECS at a single infertility care center from 2011 to 2014 were evaluated. The overall rate of positive ECS results and the number of couples who were carriers of the same genetic disorder were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 6,643 individuals were tested, representing 3,738 couples; 1,666 (25.1%) of the individuals had a positive test result for at least one disorder. In 8 of the 3,738 couples, both members of the couple were positive for the same genetic disorder or had a test result that placed them at risk of having an affected child. Three of eight cases were cystic fibrosis. In this cohort, ECS affected clinical care eight times after 6,643 tests (0.12%, confidence interval: 0.05-0.24%) in 3,738 couples (0.21%, confidence interval: 0.09-0.42%).

CONCLUSIONS

ECS is becoming more widespread. In a large case series, ECS affected clinical decision making for patients presenting for infertility care in 0.21% of cases. This information must be weighed when utilizing these tests and may be a helpful part of patient counseling.Genet Med 18 11, 1097-1101.

Expanded carrier screening: A review of early implementation and literature

Carrier screening is the practice of testing individuals to identify those at increased risks of having children affected by genetic diseases. Professional guidelines on carrier screening have been available for more than 15 years, and have historically targeted specific diseases that occur at increased frequencies in defined ethnic populations. Enabled by rapidly evolving technology, expanded carrier screening aims to identify carriers for a broader array of diseases and may be applied universally (equally across all ethnic groups). This new approach deviates from the well-established criteria for screening models. In this review, we summarize the rationale for expanded carrier screening using available literature regarding clinical and technical data, as well as provider perspectives. We also discuss important avenues for further research in this burgeoning field.

Expanded carrier screening in reproductive medicine-points to consider: a joint statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine

The Perinatal Quality Foundation and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, in association with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and the National Society of Genetic Counselors, have collaborated to provide education for clinicians and laboratories regarding the use of expanded genetic carrier screening in reproductive medicine. This statement does not replace current screening guidelines, which are published by individual organizations to direct the practice of their constituents. As organizations develop practice guidelines for expanded carrier screening, further direction is likely. The current statement demonstrates an approach for health care providers and laboratories who wish to or who are currently offering expanded carrier screening to their patients.

Targeted carrier screening for four recessive disorders: high detection rate within a founder population

In a genetically isolated community in the Netherlands four severe recessive genetic disorders occur at relatively high frequency (pontocerebellar hypoplasia type 2 (PCH2), fetal akinesia deformation sequence (FADS), rhizomelic chondrodysplasia punctata type 1 (RCDP1), and osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) type IIB/III. Over the past decades multiple patients with these disorders have been identified. This warranted the start of a preconception outpatient clinic, in 2012, aimed at couples planning a pregnancy. The aim of our study was to evaluate the offer of targeted genetic carrier screening as a method to identify high-risk couples for having affected offspring in this high-risk subpopulation. In one year, 203 individuals (92 couples and 19 individuals) were counseled. In total, 65 of 196 (33.2%) tested individuals were carriers of at least one disease, five (7.7%) of them being carriers of two diseases. Carrier frequencies of PCH2, FADS, RCDP1, and OI were 14.3%, 11.2%, 6.1%, and 4.1% respectively. In individuals with a positive family history for one of the diseases, the carrier frequency was 57.8%; for those with a negative family history this was 25.8%. Four PCH2 carrier-couples were identified. Thus, targeted (preconception) carrier screening in this genetically isolated population in which a high prevalence of specific disorders occurs detects a high number of carriers, and is likely to be more effective compared to cascade genetic testing. Our findings and set-up can be seen as a model for carrier screening in other high-risk subpopulations and contributes to the discussion about the way carrier screening can be offered and organized in the general population.

Kinderwunsch als genetisches Risiko?

Erweiterte präkonzeptionelle Anlageträgerscreenings auf seltene, rezessive Erkrankungen haben sich in jüngster Zeit als neuartige Form genetischer Diagnostik herausgebildet. Bisher werden Tests auf mehr als 100 Anlageträgerschaften von kommerziellen Unternehmen angeboten, eine künftige Übernahme in öffentliche Gesundheitssysteme wird jedoch bereits diskutiert. Falls Mann und Frau die gleiche rezessive Anlage tragen, eröffnet die Diagnostik ihnen verschiedene Alternativen, um die Geburt eines kranken Kindes zu vermeiden. Erweiterte Trägerscreenings haben jedoch problematische gesellschaftliche Implikationen und werfen ungelöste Fragen auf, u. a. wie die getesteten Krankheiten ausgewählt werden und wie eine angemessene genetische Beratung zu gewährleisten ist. Die Vermutung, die Etablierung solcher Screenings sei unvermeidbar, könnte sich als vorschnell erweisen.