Perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing patients in Belgium on the ethics of polygenic embryo screening.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) patients in Belgium on the ethics of PGT for polygenic risk scoring (PGT-P)? DESIGN: In-depth interviews (18 in total, 10 couples, 8 women, n = 28) were performed with patients who had undergone treatment with PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) or chromosomal structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) between 2017 and 2019 in Belgium. Participants were asked about their own experiences with PGT-M/SR and about their viewpoints on PGT-P, including their own interest and their ideas on its desirability, scope and consequences. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the interviews. RESULTS: Participants stated that their experiences with PGT-M/SR had been physically, psychologically and practically difficult. Most participants stated that, partly because of these difficulties, they did not see the added value of knowing the risk scores of embryos via PGT-P. Many participants worried that PGT-P could lead to additional anxieties, responsibilities and complex choices in reproduction and parenthood. They argued that not everything should be controlled and felt that PGT-P, especially non-medical and broad screening, was going too far. With regards to the clinical implementation of PGT-P, participants in general preferred PGT-P to be limited to people with a serious polygenic family history and wanted embryo selection decisions to be made by healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that individuals with experience of PGT-M/SR saw PGT-P as different from PGT-M/SR. They had various ethical concerns with regards to PGT-P, especially regarding broadly offering PGT-P. These stakeholder viewpoints need to be considered regarding potential PGT-P implementation and guidelines.

Attitudes toward genetic testing, family planning and preimplantation genetic testing in families with a germline CDKN2A pathogenic variant.

Individuals with a germline CDKN2A pathogenic variant (PV) have a highly increased life time risk of melanoma and pancreatic cancer. This cross-sectional study assessed the attitudes among toward genetic testing, family planning, and preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in confirmed CDKN2A PV carriers and individuals with a 50% risk of the PV (at-risk carriers) using of a one-time questionnaire.A total of 537 individuals were screened for eligibility, of whom 208 of 366 (57%) confirmed carriers (56% female, median age 54 years [IQR 46-63]) and 39 of 171 (23%) at-risk carriers (59% female, median age of 26 years [IQR 22-32]) participated in the study. Primary motivations for genetic testing were to gain control over their personal and children's cancer risk, as well as increasing cancer surveillance practices. In contrast, concerns about obtaining a mortgage and life insurance were frequently cited as reasons for postponing genetic testing. Family planning decisions remained largely unaffected in both confirmed and at-risk carriers; however, the majority of confirmed carriers were still unaware of their familial or personal cancer risk when starting a family. More than 60% of the participants were unfamiliar with PGT and only a minority (19% of confirmed carriers and 10% of at-risk carriers) would be open to considering PGT as a reproductive option. This study found different attitudes toward genetic testing, family planning, and PGT among individuals affected by the CDKN2A PV. Understanding these different attitudes can help clinicians to address the complexities surrounding these issues, especially for younger individuals facing difficult decisions about the timing of genetic testing, family planning, and the potential use of assisted reproductive options.

Effect of accessibility of a genetic counselor on uptake of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) and carrier screening for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization.

This retrospective cohort study assessed the accessibility of a genetic counselor on uptake of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) and carrier screening in a single academic Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (REI) clinic. A total of 420 patients were evaluated with 219 patients counseled by a REI physician only and 201 patients after the addition of a genetic counselor (GC) to the REI clinic team. Cycles initiated before hiring of a GC (pre-GC) were assessed from June 2018 to December 2018 and after integration of a GC (post-GC) from March 2019 to August 2019. Additionally, information regarding carrier screening was collected if available in the medical record. Results showed more patients utilized PGT-A post-GC (9.5% vs. 5.5%), although the difference between groups did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.12). Individuals who were screened post-GC or who started screening pre-GC and continued screening post-GC were screened for a larger number of conditions than if they were only screened pre-GC (median pre-GC = 3, post-GC = 27, pre- and post-GC = 274; p < 0.0001). The change in practice from using physician-only counseling to counseling with accessibility to a GC did not change the utilization of PGT-A in a single clinic.

Patients' choices and opinions on chorionic villous sampling and non-invasive alternatives for prenatal testing following preimplantation genetic testing for hereditary disorders: A cross-sectional questionnaire study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate choices of and reasoning behind chorionic villous sampling and opinions on non-invasive prenatal testing among women and men achieving pregnancy following preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for hereditary disorders. METHODS: A questionnaire was electronically submitted to patients who had achieved a clinical pregnancy following PGT at the Center for Preimplantation Genetic Testing, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark, between 2017 and 2020. RESULTS: Chorionic villous sampling was declined by approximately half of the patients. The primary reason for declining was the perceived risk of miscarriage due to the procedure. Nine out of 10 patients responded that they would have opted for a non-invasive prenatal test if it had been offered. Some patients were not aware that the nuchal translucency scan offered to all pregnant women in the early second trimester only rarely provides information on the hereditary disorder for which PGT was performed. CONCLUSION: Improved counseling on the array of prenatal tests and screenings available might be required to assist patients in making better informed decisions regarding prenatal testing. Non-invasive prenatal testing is welcomed by the patients and will likely increase the number of patients opting for confirmatory prenatal testing following PGT for hereditary disorders.

Integrative Review of Reproductive Decision Making of Women Who Are BRCA Positive.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize research findings about reproductive decision making among women who are BRCA positive. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and CINAHL. STUDY SELECTION: Articles published in English between 2000 and June 28, 2020, about the reproductive decision making of women with a confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data about participants, study design, analysis, follow-up, and results. We used the modified Downs and Black checklist and Kennelly's qualitative data analysis to rate studies for quality and applicability by using. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included five of 257 screened articles in our synthesis. The total sample size of the five studies was 1,468 women. The most prevalent factors related to reproductive decision making were the impending decisions regarding childbearing and family choices, including decisions about biological children, preventive surgery, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, and prenatal diagnosis to prevent further transmission of a BRCA mutation, and family planning. CONCLUSION: A lack of knowledge exists about the reproductive decision-making processes of women who are BRCA positive. A better understanding of this process would provide nurses and other clinicians with the knowledge needed to support these women through their reproductive life choices.

Literacy assessment of preimplantation genetic patient education materials exceed national reading levels.

PURPOSE: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing (IVF+PGT-M) reduces the risk of having a child affected by a heritable condition, yet only one-third of eligible patients are aware of this reproductive option. Access to education materials written at appropriate literacy levels could raise patients' awareness, but there is a mismatch between patient reading ability and the literacy demand of most materials. This study aimed to systematically identify written education materials on IVF+PGT-M and evaluate their literacy levels. We hypothesized that materials would fail to meet standards set by the Joint Commission and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). METHODS: To identify patient education materials about IVF+PGT-M from academic databases and public-facing sources, an environmental scan was performed. Materials were analyzed using three validated scales: Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, and Clear Communication Index. RESULTS: Seventeen patient education materials about IVF+PGT-M were identified from patient education databases, a consumer search engine, and professional organizations. The median reading level was 14.5 grade, median understandability was 74.2%, and median comprehensibility was 73.3%. CONCLUSIONS: For most American adults, materials about IVF+PGT-M are not readable, understandable, or clear. The Joint Commission requires patient education materials be written at or below 5th grade reading level and the CDC recommends a 90% minimum score for comprehensibility. No evaluated material met these guidelines. Patient education materials that exceed average American literacy skills may perpetuate disparities in the utilization of IVF+PGT-M. Materials that communicate this complicated subject at an understandable level are needed.

Motives and considerations regarding PGT in couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality: a qualitative exploration.

PURPOSE: This study aims to describe the motives and considerations of couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality deciding on preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). METHODS: A qualitative exploratory study was conducted using semi-structured dyadic interviews with 13 couples (N = 26) carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality. All couples had an informative consultation in our PGT centre in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Almost all couples considered PGT or natural conception combined with prenatal diagnosis (PND) as the only two reproductive options. Among several considerations mentioned, the majority indicated that the wish to increase the chance of a successful pregnancy was the most important motive to opt for PGT. All couples who opted for PGT had first tried to conceive spontaneously and entered the PGT programme because of their adverse experiences during these attempts (infertility, recurrent miscarriage, termination of pregnancy, birth of an affected child). Couples that refrained from PGT were of advanced maternal age and expressed the long trajectory of PGT as the main reason to refrain. If conceiving spontaneously would not lead to an ongoing pregnancy, these couples also indicated that they would use PGT. CONCLUSION: This study shows that couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality consider PGT and spontaneous conception with PND as relevant reproductive options. They are looking for the option that is in their opinion the fastest way to establish a successful pregnancy. Information on the perceived pros and cons of PGT or spontaneous conception in these couples can help to optimize counselling and psychological support during the decision-making process.

Initial psychometric analysis of novel instruments to assess decisional distress and decisional uncertainty in women who have considered using preimplantation genetic testing.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze psychometric properties of two novel instruments assessing decisional distress and uncertainty experienced by individuals considering preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). METHODS: The new PGT Decisional Distress instrument (22 items) assesses negative/positive emotions. The new PGT Decisional Uncertainty instrument assesses Clarity about test benefits/disadvantages (5 items) and Certainty of having adequate information/support to make a good decision (7 items). Scales ranged from 0 to 4. Psychometrics (central tendencies, internal consistency reliability, and discriminant validity) were evaluated. Stratified analysis by decision stage was conducted. All participants had considered or used PGT in the previous 6 months. RESULTS: N = 106 females (mean age 36.5 ± 4.8 years; 16% non-Caucasian; 9% Hispanic) across 16 US states completed an online anonymous questionnaire. On average, respondents reported minimal distress (mean 0.96), high clarity (mean 3.26), and high certainty (mean 3.06), particularly those who had already decided compared to undecided women (P ≤ .02). Instruments had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α's 0.92-0.94) and displayed sufficient inter-individual variability (SD's 0.75-0.89). Correlations confirmed expected patterns of association between instruments (P's < .01), indicating discriminant validity. CONCLUSION: We document initial reliability and validity of new instruments to measure emotional distress and uncertainty in female patients who have recently considered PGT for single-gene or chromosomal disorders.

Attitudes toward preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy among patients with recurrent pregnancy loss in Japan.

AIM: To examine attitudes toward preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) because it has been performed worldwide in spite of little evidence regarding whether it can improve the live birth rate and prevent miscarriage. There has been no study to examine attitudes toward PGT-A in patients with RPL. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study that used a questionnaire to examine attitudes toward PGT-A, the desire for PGT-A and the factors associated with this desire in 386 patients with RPL between November 2014 and January 2019. RESULTS: Overall, 25.1% of patients desired PGT-A and 35.2% answered that they knew about it. Regarding the reasons for wanting PGT-A, 42.3% thought that it would insure a live birth and with complete case analysis, showed that the patients' wish for PGT-A as a means of giving live birth was affected by their IVF-ET history (adjusted odds ratio 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-7.2) and whether they had any knowledge of PGT-A (2.4, 1.1-5.3). Those with a higher total family income (3.5, 1.2-10.1) and a previous IVF-ET (4.6, 2.0-10.3) tended to want PGT-A as a means of avoiding miscarriage. CONCLUSION: The majority had no opinion or a poor knowledge of PGT-A. More patients who self-assessed as knowing about PGT-A or who had undergone IVF-ET had the above type of misunderstanding. Accurate and up-to-date information from facilities different from those in which PGT-A is performed is necessary before reaching a decision on PGT-A.

How does carrier status for recessive disorders influence reproductive decisions? A systematic review of the literature.

Introduction: Carrier screening for recessive disorders is undertaken by prospective parents to inform their reproductive decisions. With the growing availability of affordable and comprehensive expanded carrier screening (ECS), it is expected that carrier screening will become a standard practice in the future. However, the impact of positive carrier screening results on the reproductive decisions of at-risk couples (ARCs) remains underexplored.Areas covered: We performed a systematic literature review to identify peer-reviewed publications describing the reproductive decisions of ARCs. Our search identified 19 relevant publications spanning the period 1994-2018. By synthesizing available evidence, we found that most ARCs chose to prevent the birth of an affected child and the decision to utilize preventive reproductive options was strongly influenced by the clinical nature of a disorder. However, there was also some heterogeneity in reproductive decisions within the same recessive disorders, suggesting that choices of ARCs can be influenced by factors other than the clinical nature of a disorder.Expert opinion: ECS is becoming increasingly common, which will result in the routine identification of many ARCs. Reproductive decision-making by ARCs is a complex and emotionally challenging process, highlighting the critical role of genetic counseling in the care for these potentially vulnerable patients.

Beyond the biopsy: predictors of decision regret and anxiety following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy.

STUDY QUESTION: What factors are associated with decision regret and anxiety following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)? SUMMARY ANSWER: The majority of patients viewed PGT-A favourably regardless of their outcome; although patients with negative outcomes expressed greater decision regret and anxiety. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: PGT-A is increasingly utilized in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles to aid in embryo selection. Despite the increasing use of PGT-A technology, little is known about patients' experiences and the possible unintended consequences of decision regret and anxiety related to PGT-A outcome. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Anonymous surveys were distributed to 395 patients who underwent their first cycle of autologous PGT-A between January 2014 and March 2015. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: There were 69 respondents who underwent PGT-A at a university-affiliated fertility centre, completed the survey and met inclusion criteria. Respondents completed three validated questionnaires including the Brehaut Decision Regret (DR) Scale, short-form State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6) and a health literacy scale. The surveys also assessed demographics, fertility history, IVF and frozen embryo transfer cycle data. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The majority of respondents were Caucasian, >35 years of age and educated beyond an undergraduate degree. The majority utilized PGT-A on their first IVF cycle, most commonly to 'maximize the efficiency of IVF' or reduce per-transfer miscarriage risk. The overall median DR score was low, but 39% of respondents expressed some degree of regret. Multiple regression confirmed a relationship between embryo ploidy and decision regret, with a lower number of euploid embryos associated with a greater degree of regret. Patients who conceived following euploid transfer reported less regret than those who miscarried or failed to conceive (P < 0.005). Decision regret was inversely associated with number of living children but not associated with age, education, race, insurance coverage, religion, marital status or indication for IVF/PGT-A. Anxiety was greater following a negative pregnancy test or miscarriage compared to successful conception (P < 0.0001). Anxiety was negatively associated with age, time since oocyte retrieval and number of living children, and a relationship was observed between anxiety and religious affiliation. Overall, decision regret was low, and 94% of all respondents reported satisfaction with their decision to pursue PGT-A; however, patients with a negative outcome were more likely to express decision regret and anxiety. LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION: This survey was performed at a single centre with a relatively homogenous population, and the findings may not be generalizable. Reasons for caution include the possibility of response bias and unmeasured differences among those who did and did not respond to the survey, as well as the possibility of recall bias given the retrospective nature of the survey. Few studies have examined patient perceptions of PGT-A, and our findings should be interpreted with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Overall decision regret was low following PGT-A, and the vast majority deemed the information gained valuable for reproductive planning regardless of outcome. However, more than one-third of the respondents expressed some degree of regret. Respondents with no euploid embryos were more likely to express regret, and those with a negative outcome following euploid embryo transfer expressed both higher regret and anxiety. These data identify unanticipated consequences of PGT-A and suggest opportunities for additional counselling and support surrounding IVF with PGT-A. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was obtained for this study. D.H.M. reports personal fees, honorarium, and travel expenses from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, personal fees and travel expenses from Granata Bio, and personal fees from Biogenetics Corporation, The Sperm and Embryo Bank of New York, and ReproART: Georgian American Center for Reproductive Medicine. All conflicts are outside the submitted work.

What are patients doing with their mosaic embryos? Decision making after genetic counseling.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient decisions regarding mosaic embryos and their impact on clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Review of patients who had genetic counseling regarding mosaic embryos. SETTING: Academic department. PATIENT(S): Ninety-eight patients who had mosaic embryos but no euploid embryos. INTERVENTION(S): Genetic counseling to discuss mosaic-embryo transfer (MET) after preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Patient decisions regarding MET. Outcomes for patients who pursued MET were compared with those for patients who pursued additional in vitro fertilization or intrauterine insemination cycles. Decisions regarding prenatal testing after MET were assessed. RESULT(S): Initially, 29.6% of patients pursued MET and 41.8% attempted a new treatment cycle. Only 6.1% of patients discarded their mosaic embryos without further treatment. Of the remaining patients, 2.0% transported their mosaic embryos to a different facility and 20.5% had not taken further action while their embryos remain stored. Patients who pursued additional cycles were more likely to have an ongoing pregnancy compared with those who pursued MET (51.2% vs. 27.6%; P<.05); however, there was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of patients who had at least one biochemical pregnancy or spontaneous abortion. Ultimately, 32.7% of patients underwent MET, and 54.5% of pregnant patients pursued amniocentesis. CONCLUSION(S): MET is desired by a substantial proportion of patients who do not have euploid embryos. Patients who opt for additional treatment cycles have a greater chance of achieving an ongoing pregnancy compared with those who pursue MET; however, future studies are needed to compare the cost-effectiveness for both options.

To test or not to test? A framework for counselling patients on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A).

STUDY QUESTION: What is the treatment path and cumulative live birth (CLB) rate from a single oocyte retrieval of patients who intend to pursue PGT-A at the start of an IVF cycle compared to matched controls? SUMMARY ANSWER: The choice of PGT-A at the start of the first IVF cycle decreases the CLB per oocyte retrieval for patients <38 years of age, however patients ≥38 years of age benefit significantly per embryo transfer (ET) when live birth (LB) is evaluated. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: PGT-A has been shown to reduce the practice of transferring multiple embryos and to confer a higher live birth rate per transfer. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a retrospective cohort study from December 2014 to September 2016, involving 600 patients: those intending PGT-A for their first IVF cycle (N = 300) and their matched controls. Post-hoc power calculations (alpha of 0.05, power of 0.80) indicated that our study was powered adequately to demonstrate significant differences in CLB per retrieval and LB per transfer. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The study was performed at a large academically affiliated infertility practice where approximately 80% of patients have insurance coverage for fertility care. Patients were identified through electronic medical records, and those who intended to pursue PGT-A at the start of stimulation were assessed. Patients were matched by age, time of oocyte retrieval and oocyte yield to the same number of controls. CLB outcomes per single retrieval, including the fresh and frozen transfers arising from the initial stimulation cycle, were calculated. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: PGT-A was not beneficial when CLB rate was assessed per retrieval, however its benefits were significant when LB rate was assessed per transfer. First cycle, <38 year-old patients who intended to have PGT-A had a significantly (P < 0.001) lower CLB rate per oocyte retrieval compared to controls (49.4% vs. 69.1%). Conversely, patients ≥ 38 years in the PGT-A group had similar CLB rates compared to controls per oocyte retrieval, while LB rates per transfer were doubled compared to controls (62.1% vs. 31.7%; P < 0.001). Of the first-cycle PGT-A and control patients, 25.3% and 2.3% failed to achieve a transfer, respectively. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This is not a true intention-to-treat study, due to its retrospective nature. Additionally, the number of patients with two or more previous miscarriages was significantly greater in the PGT-A group as compared to controls, however a sub-analysis showed that this failed to impact outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The findings indicate that PGT-A may be detrimental for those <38 years old undergoing their first IVF cycle. PGT-A has the greatest clinical impact when a transfer is achieved in the ≥38 years old population. This study evaluates the typical treatment path following a patient's choice to pursue PGT-A at the cycle start, and can be used as a guide for counselling patients in relation to age and cycle number. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Blurring boundaries. Interviews with PGT couples about comprehensive chromosome screening.

OBJECTIVE: Comprehensive chromosome examination is a promising approach to Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT). Next to testing of specific chromosomes, such as in the case of reduced fertility due to chromosomal translocations, it allows testing of all chromosomes. Hence it potentially reduces the time to pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage. But comprehensive testing also introduces some ethical issues. For example, what is the role of the professional in the decision making regarding embryos with chromosomal abnormalities that are potentially viable? Which chromosomal abnormalities should be communicated to people undergoing fertility treatment? With this paper we wanted to explore the ethical issues related to comprehensive chromosome screening in Preimplantation Genetic Testing. DESIGN: In order to explore these issues, we interviewed seven couples undergoing PGT for chromosomal translocations at the VUB University Hospital, Belgium. We presented them with three fictional cases: the transfer of an embryo with trisomy 21, of an embryo with a sex chromosome aneuploidy and of an embryo with a chromosomal microdeletion. RESULTS: We found that opinions regarding the role of fertility professionals in deciding which embryos to transfer were mixed. Moreover, where to draw the line between healthy and unhealthy embryos was unclear. We also found that couples, although they thought that comprehensive chromosome testing had certain benefits, also considered the increased waiting time for transfer a heavy burden. CONCLUSIONS: In the light of comprehensive chromosome screening of embryos, persons undergoing fertility treatment may have views on the burdens and benefits of the techniques that are not analogous to the views of professionals.

Views of parents of children with sickle cell disease on pre-implantation genetic diagnosis.

Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is an option for parents who have a child with sickle cell disease (SCD) to have another child without SCD. We conducted a survey of 19 parents with at least one child with SCD to investigate views on PGD. Before education, 44% of parents were aware of PGD. All parents rated PGD education as important. All parents considering another child also reported interest in using PGD if insurance covered its costs. Parents who have a child with SCD appear to be interested in PGD and educational tools informing this group about PGD should be developed.

Reproductive Decision Support: Preferences and Needs of Couples at Risk for Hereditary Cancer and Clinical Geneticists.

For couples at high risk of transmitting a cancer predisposition to offspring, reproductive decision-making can be challenging. As the choice between available reproductive options is preference-sensitive, the use of a decision aid can support these couples in their decisional process. The present study aims to investigate preferences and needs of involved stakeholders regarding the development and implementation of a patient decision aid. Semi-structured interviews assessing the needs and preferences regarding the content and functionalities of a decision support program were conducted among seven couples at risk for hereditary cancer and among eight clinical geneticists involved in oncogenetic counseling. Many similarities were found between the expressed preferences and needs of both stakeholder groups concerning the content, barriers and facilitating factors regarding the use of the decision aid, and its implementation. Emphasis was placed on the use of simple non-medical language, an extensive explanation of the procedures and techniques used in prenatal diagnosis (PND) and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and the role of health care providers to refer couples to the decision aid. Both stakeholder groups were in favor of incorporating narrative stories in the decision aid. Integrating the present findings with knowledge on reproductive decisional motives and considerations is essential in guiding the development of a decision aid that corresponds to the preferences and needs of end-users. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR5467.

Review of patient decision-making factors and attitudes regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

The increasing technical complexity and evolving options for repro-genetic testing have direct implications for information processing and decision making, yet the research among patients considering preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is narrowly focused. This review synthesizes the literature regarding patient PGD decision-making factors, and illuminates gaps for future research and clinical translation. Twenty-five articles met the inclusion criteria for evaluating experiences and attitudes of patients directly involved in PGD as an intervention or considering using PGD. Thirteen reports were focused exclusively on a specific disease or condition. Five themes emerged: (1) patients motivated by prospects of a healthy, genetic-variant-free child, (2) PGD requires a commitment of time, money, energy and emotions, (3) patients concerned about logistics and ethics of discarding embryos, (4) some patients feel sense of responsibility to use available technologies, and (5) PGD decisions are complex for individuals and couples. Patient research on PGD decision-making processes has very infrequently used validated instruments, and the data collected through both quantitative and qualitative designs have been inconsistent. Future research for improving clinical counseling is needed to fill many gaps remaining in the literature regarding this decision-making process, and suggestions are offered.

Challenges, Dilemmas and Factors Involved in PGD Decision-Making: Providers' and Patients' Views, Experiences and Decisions.

Providers and patients are considering and pursuing PGD for ever-more conditions, but questions arise concerning how they make, view and experience these decisions, and what challenges they may face. Thirty-seven in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted (with 27 IVF providers and 10 patients). Patients and providers struggled with challenges and dilemmas about whether to pursue PGD in specific cases, and how to decide. Respondents varied in how they viewed, experienced and made these choices, and for which conditions to pursue PGD (from lethal, childhood-onset conditions to milder, treatable, or adult-onset disorders). Several factors were involved, including differences in gene penetrance, predictability, and phenotypic expression, and disease severity, age of onset, treatability, stigma and degree of disability. Providers and patients face questions regarding possibilities of screening for more than one condition in one set of embryos, and limitations of PGD (e.g., inaccurate results). Characteristics of providers (e.g., amount of PGD experience, understandings of genetics, and use of genetic counselors), and of patients (e.g., related to broader moral and social attitudes) can also affect these decisions. These data, the first to examine several key questions concerning PGD, suggest that providers and patients confront several dilemmas. These findings have critical implications for future practice, guidelines, education and research.

Is pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) more of a strain regarding satisfaction with marital quality for male or female partners? A three-year follow-up study.

INTRODUCTION: Men and women with a hereditary genetic disease are faced with different options when they plan to become parents. One is pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) which is a combination of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and genetic analysis of the embryo before implantation. The present study focuses on how men and women planning for PGD experience the quality of marital satisfaction when they apply for treatment and again, three years later. METHODS: The study was a prospective cohort study where all couples (n = 22) applying for PGD during 2010 and 2011 were eligible. Nineteen women and 17 men (i.e. 17 couples and two women) participated. Participants answered several questionnaires (Dyadic Adjustment Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Parental Stress Questionnaire) before PGD treatment, and again three years later. RESULTS: Women who underwent PGD rated the quality of their marital relationship similarly to that of first-time parents and IVF couples, whereas men rated the marital quality somewhat lower than the contrasts groups. Satisfaction with marital quality was stable over the three-year period although men were less satisfied than women on both occasions. At year three, there was a significant correlation between martial satisfaction and parental stress in men, and between martial satisfaction and anxiety and depression in women. DISCUSSION: Men are equally, or more, affected by their situation than their female partners, with consequences for satisfaction with marital quality. For this reason they should be included in any counselling offered.

Acceptable applications of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) among Israeli PGD users.

The use of PGD technology to select against genetic disorders and traits is increasing. Although PGD may eliminate some of the obstacles related to conservative options of prenatal diagnosis, it can raise personal, social and moral questions. Ethical issues concerning the justified uses of PGD are a subject of ongoing debate among medical and bioethical communities. Although attitudes toward the acceptable uses of PGD were evaluated among population groups worldwide, bioethics councils were criticized for ignoring public perspectives. In the last decade PGD has been widely used in Israel. The ethical guidelines were created solely by medical-bioethics experts and, some felt, totally isolated from public opinions. Semi-structured in-depth interviews of 37 users (carriers of autosomal recessive, dominant and X-linked disorders, and HLA-matching) were performed. The interviews explored attitudes toward ethical and sociological aspects of PGD. The overall results of this study show highly favorable attitudes of Israeli PGD users toward medical applications. Furthermore, our subjects demonstrate a more permissive stand toward the controversial application of social sex selection albeit with strong objection to esthetic means of selection. PGD users are coping with both genetic disease and load of the PGD procedure. Taking into consideration their opinion is important since it reflects the gains and burdens of these procedures alongside the demand for future optional services. Their attitudes should play an important role in the professional discussion concerning the justified uses of PGD and should significantly influence the design of policy making in this field.