The uptake and outcome of prenatal and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington's disease in the Netherlands (1998-2008).

We aimed to study reproductive behaviour of couples opting for prenatal diagnosis (PND) and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for Huntington's disease (HD). In the Netherlands, exclusion PND is available for persons at 50% risk, whereas exclusion PGD is not allowed. All 162 couples who underwent PND or PGD for HD between 1998 and 2008 and referrals for exclusion PGD to Belgium were included. Couples' reproductive information was collected until December 2010; 132 couples (81.5%) underwent PND in 262 pregnancies, 54 (33.3%) started PGD, and 25 used both. Sixteen percent of PND couples used exclusion PND and 6% used exclusion PGD. The outcomes were 76.5% of PND couples delivered ≥1 unaffected child(ren) after PND, and 44.4% of PGD couples delivered ≥1 PGD child(ren) (mean 2.5 cycles/couple). Couples opting for PGD secondarily (after a previous pregnancy) had more frequently terminated a pregnancy for HD (87.0%) compared with couples secondarily opting for PND (55.2%; p = 0.015). At-risk or HD expansion carrier males were underrepresented in the group of couples primarily opting for PGD (25%) and overrepresented in the secondary PGD group (64%). We conclude that couples reconsider their choices in every subsequent pregnancy based on their previous experience, personal beliefs and the gender of the at-risk partner.

Real and expected delivery rates of patients with myotonic dystrophy undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection and preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to analyse the reproductive outcome of a large cohort of myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) patients undergoing ICSI and PGD. The secondary outcome parameter of this study was ovarian response as a way to express gonadal function in female DM1 patients. METHODS: Prospective cohort study. Real and expected cumulative delivery rates are descriptive. The reproductive outcome per cycle was compared with that of a control group of patients with X-linked recessive disorders. The comparative analysis of ovarian stimulation parameters in the study group versus the control group was carried out using both bivariate (crude) and multivariate (linear regression) analysis. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 2005, 205 cycles of ICSI and PGD were carried out for DM1 in 78 couples. The real cumulative delivery rate (max 6 cycles) overall was 46%. The expected overall cumulative delivery rate was 72%. Multivariate analysis did not show a significant difference in total dose of gonadotrophins used for ovarian stimulation between Group A (in which the female partner was affected) and a control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that ICSI and PGD for DM1 offer good reproductive outcome, both in cumulative terms and per treatment cycle. There is no evidence of impaired gonadal function in female DM1 patients.