Molecular testing in newborn screening: VUS burden among true positives and secondary reproductive limitations via expanded carrier screening panels.

PURPOSE: Expanded carrier screening (ECS) gene panels have several limitations, including variable content, current knowledge of disease-causing variants, and differing reporting policies. This study evaluated if the disease-associated variants identified in affected neonates who screened positive by California newborn screening (NBS) for an inherited metabolic disorder (IMD) by tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) would likely be reported by ECS gene panels. METHODS: Retrospective review of neonates referred by the California Department of Public Health for a positive NBS by multianalyte MS/MS from January 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six neonates screened positive for ≥1 NBS MS/MS indication. Nineteen neonates (14%) were ultimately diagnosed with an IMD, all of whom had abnormal biochemical testing. Eighteen of the 19 underwent molecular testing; 10 (56%) neonates had ≥1 variants of uncertain significance, 9 of whom were of non-White ancestry. ECS panels would have been negative for 56% (20/36) of parents with an affected neonate, 85% (17/20) of whom were of non-White ancestry. CONCLUSION: The number of variants of uncertain significance identified in this cohort highlights the need for more diversified variant databases. Due in part to the lack of diversity in currently sequenced populations, genomic sequencing cannot replace biochemical testing for the diagnosis of an IMD.

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.

Barriers to completion of expanded carrier screening in an inner city population.

PURPOSE: The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics emphasizes a "consistent and equitable approach for offering carrier screening." At our academic center, publicly insured prenatal patients underwent universal expanded carrier screening (ECS) to promote equitable care. The aim of the study was to evaluate rates, time, and barriers to complete ECS. This was defined as post-test counseling and partner testing after a patient was found heterozygous for a pathogenic variant. METHODS: In this descriptive retrospective cohort study from 2018 to 2021, patients were offered ECS, consisting of 283 recessive and X-linked genes. Heterozygotes were contacted by genetic counselors (≤5 attempts) for education and partner testing. Rates of counseling, partner testing, diagnostic procedures, follow-up times, and barriers to completion were assessed. RESULTS: During this time, 643 women underwent ECS. Of these 643 women, 462 were heterozygotes and 326 of 462 had undergone counseling. Two hundred twenty-two of 462 partners obtained testing, with a median of 32 days from patient to partner result. Approximately 21 couples were heterozygous for the same pathogenic variant. One patient pursued diagnostic testing. CONCLUSION: ECS offers useful information; however, this study highlights significant barriers to completion. There was suboptimal patient follow-up and low partner screening, perhaps from insufficient time to educate and counsel. Future directions include implementing quality measures to ensure optimal completion.

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.

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.

Pregnant Latinas' perspectives on pursuing expanded carrier screening: "It is better to know than not".

With the advance of genetic technologies, the use of expanded carrier screening (ECS) in the prenatal setting is growing. ECS tests for a wide range of inherited genetic disorders regardless of racial/ethnic background and family history. Latinxs are an important ECS stakeholder group as they are the largest minority group with the highest fertility rate in the United States. Yet, the Latinx population has, to date, been underrepresented and understudied in genetics/genomics research. We conducted a study to explore the knowledge and perspectives of pregnant Latinas regarding ECS in which descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to analyze the data. Thirty-two pregnant Latinas - mostly of low educational levels (no education beyond high school) and with less than $20,000 annual household income living in rural areas were surveyed, provided with education about ECS, and interviewed. Participants were found to possess limited knowledge about ECS prior to being interviewed. Most (68.8%), however, expressed interest in pursuing ECS following the educational component that explained ECS. Their interest was mainly driven by the desire to know their baby's chance of developing a genetic disorder, the low risk of ECS procedures for both pregnant Latinas and their fetus, and the opportunity to better prepare for raising a child with a genetic condition. Our findings contribute to the limited research in the genetics/genomics field by providing in-depth insights into the perspectives of pregnant Latinas regarding ECS. Obstetric providers and genetic counselors should provide culturally appropriate education and counseling to empower pregnant Latinas to make informed decisions about the use of ECS.

Carrier burden of over 300 diseases in Han Chinese identified by expanded carrier testing of 300 couples using assisted reproductive technology.

BACKGROUND: Expanded carrier screening (ECS) has become a common practice for identifying carriers of monogenic diseases. However, existing large gene panels are not well-tailored to Chinese populations. In this study, ECS testing for pathogenic variants of both single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in 330 genes implicated in 342 autosomal recessive (AR) or X-linked diseases was carried out. We assessed the differences in allele frequencies specific to the Chinese population who have used assisted reproductive technology (ART) and the important genes to screen for in this population. METHODOLOGY: A total of 300 heterosexual couples were screened by our ECS panel using next-generation sequencing. A customed bioinformatic algorithm was used to analyze SNVs and CNVs. Guidelines from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology were adapted for variant interpretation. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) SNVs located in high homology regions/deletions and duplications of one or more exons in length were independently verified with other methods. RESULTS: 64.83% of the patients were identified to be carriers of at least one of 342 hereditary conditions. We identified 622 P/LP variants, 4.18% of which were flagged as CNVs. The rate of at-risk couples was 3%. A total of 149 AR diseases accounted for 64.05% of the cumulative carrier rate, and 48 diseases had a carrier rate above 1/200 in the test. CONCLUSION: An expanded screening of inherited diseases by incorporating different variant types, especially CNVs, has the potential to reduce the occurrence of severe monogenic diseases in the offspring of patients using ART in China.

Lessons Learned from Large-Scale, First-Tier Clinical Exome Sequencing in a Highly Consanguineous Population.

We report the results of clinical exome sequencing (CES) on >2,200 previously unpublished Saudi families as a first-tier test. The predominance of autosomal-recessive causes allowed us to make several key observations. We highlight 155 genes that we propose to be recessive, disease-related candidates. We report additional mutational events in 64 previously reported candidates (40 recessive), and these events support their candidacy. We report recessive forms of genes that were previously associated only with dominant disorders and that have phenotypes ranging from consistent with to conspicuously distinct from the known dominant phenotypes. We also report homozygous loss-of-function events that can inform the genetics of complex diseases. We were also able to deduce the likely causal variant in most couples who presented after the loss of one or more children, but we lack samples from those children. Although a similar pattern of mostly recessive causes was observed in the prenatal setting, the higher proportion of loss-of-function events in these cases was notable. The allelic series presented by the wealth of recessive variants greatly expanded the phenotypic expression of the respective genes. We also make important observations about dominant disorders; these observations include the pattern of de novo variants, the identification of 74 candidate dominant, disease-related genes, and the potential confirmation of 21 previously reported candidates. Finally, we describe the influence of a predominantly autosomal-recessive landscape on the clinical utility of rapid sequencing (Flash Exome). Our cohort's genotypic and phenotypic data represent a unique resource that can contribute to improved variant interpretation through data sharing.

A guidelines-consistent carrier screening panel that supports equity across diverse populations.

PURPOSE: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) suggest carrier screening panel design criteria intended to ensure meaningful results. This study used a data-driven approach to interpret the criteria to identify guidelines-consistent panels. METHODS: Carrier frequencies in >460,000 individuals across 11 races/ethnicities were used to assess carrier frequency. Other criteria were interpreted on the basis of published data. A total of 176 conditions were then evaluated. Stringency thresholds were set as suggested by ACOG and/or ACMG or by evaluating conditions already recommended by ACOG and ACMG. RESULTS: Forty and 75 conditions had carrier frequencies of ≥1 in 100 and ≥1 in 200, respectively; 175 had a well-defined phenotype; and 165 met at least 1 severity criterion and had an onset early in life. Thirty-seven conditions met conservative thresholds, including a carrier frequency of ≥1 in 100, and 74 conditions met permissive thresholds, including a carrier frequency of ≥1 in 200; thus, both were identified as guidelines-consistent panels. CONCLUSION: Clear panel design criteria are needed to ensure quality and consistency among carrier screening panels. Evidence-based analyses of criteria resulted in the identification of guidelines-consistent panels of 37 and 74 conditions.

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.

Current Updates on Expanded Carrier Screening: New Insights in the Omics Era.

Genetic carrier screening has been successfully used over the last decades to identify individuals at risk of transmitting specific DNA variants to their newborns, thus having an affected child. Traditional testing has been offered based on familial and/or ethnic backgrounds. The development of high-throughput technologies, such as next-generations sequencing, able to allow the study of large genomic regions in a time and cost-affordable way, has moved carrier screening toward a more comprehensive and extensive approach, i.e., expanded carrier screening (ECS). ECS simultaneously analyses several disease-related genes and better estimates individuals' carrier status. Indeed, it is not influenced by ethnicity and is not limited to a subset of mutations that may arise from poor information in some populations. Moreover, if couples carry out ECS before conceiving a baby, it allows them to obtain a complete estimation of their genetic risk and the possibility to make an informed decision regarding their reproductive life. Despite these advantages, some weakness still exists regarding, for example, the number of genes and the kind of diseases to be analyzed and the interpretation and communication of the obtained results. Once these points are fixed, it is expectable that ECS will become an ever more frequent practice in clinical settings.

The use of expanded carrier screening of gamete donors.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the sperm and egg donor rejection rates after expanded carrier screening (ECS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Using an ECS panel looking at 46/47 genes, 17.6% of donors were rejected. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The use of ECS is becoming commonplace in assisted reproductive technology, including testing of egg and sperm donors. Most national guidelines recommend rejection of donors if they are carriers of a genetic disease. If the use of ECS increases, there will be a decline in the number of donors available. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A review of the current preconception ECS panels available to donors was carried out through an online search. The genetic testing results of donors from Cryos International were analysed to determine how many were rejected on the basis of the ECS. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Data on gamete donors and their carrier status was provided by Cryos International, who screen donors using their own bespoke ECS panel. The ECS panels identified through the review were compared to the Cryos International panel and data. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 16 companies and 42 associated ECS panels were reviewed. There were a total of 2673 unique disorders covered by the panels examined, with a mean of 329 disorders screened. None of these disorders were common to all panels. Cryos International screen 46 disorders in males and 47 in females. From 883 candidate donors, 17.6% (155/883) were rejected based on their ECS result. Carriers of alpha-thalassaemia represented the largest proportion of those rejected (19.4%, 30/155), then spinal muscular atrophy (15.5%, 24/155) and cystic fibrosis (14.8%, 23/155). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Panel information was found on company websites and may not have been accurate. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study highlights the need for consistent EU regulations and guidelines that allow genetic matching of gamete donors to their recipients, preventing the need to reject donors who are known carriers. A larger ECS panel would be most beneficial; however, this would not be viable without matching of donors and recipients. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No specific funding was obtained. J.C.H. is the founder of Global Women Connected, a platform to discuss women's health issues and the Embryology and PGD Academy, who deliver education in clinical embryology. She has been paid to give a lecture by Cryos in 2019. A-B.S. is an employee of Cryos International. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Clinical validity and utility of preconception expanded carrier screening for the management of reproductive genetic risk in IVF and general population.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the clinical validity and utility of preconception Expanded Carrier Screening (ECS) application on the management of prospective parents? SUMMARY ANSWER: The high detection rate of at-risk couples (ARCs) and the high proportion opting for IVF/preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) treatment demonstrate the clinical utility of ECS in the preconception space in IVF and general population. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: About 2-4% of couples are at risk of conceiving a child with an autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic disorder. In recent years, the increasing cost-effectiveness of genetic diagnostic techniques has allowed the creation of ECS panels for the simultaneous detection of multiple recessive disorders. Comprehensive preconception genetic screening holds the potential to significantly improve couple's genetic risk assessment and reproductive planning to avoid detectable inheritable genetic offspring. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A total of 3877 individuals without a family history of genetic conditions were analyzed between January 2017 and January 2020. Of the enrolled individuals, 1212 were gamete donors and 2665 were patients planning on conceiving from both the IVF and the natural conception group. From the non-donor cohort, 1133 were analyzed as individual patients, while the remaining ones were analyzed as couples, for a total of 766 couples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A focused ECS panel was developed following American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology ACOG-recommended criteria (prevalence, carrier rate, severity), including highly penetrant severe childhood conditions. Couples were defined at-risk when both partners carried an autosomal recessive pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (PLP) on the same gene or when the woman was a carrier of an X-linked PLP variant. ARC detection rate defined the clinical validity of the ECS approach. Clinical utility was evaluated by monitoring ARCs reproductive decision making. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 402 individuals (10.4%) showed PLP for at least one of the genes tested. Among the 766 couples tested, 173 showed one carrier partner (22.6%), whereas 20 couples (2.6%) were found to be at increased risk. Interestingly, one ARC was identified as a result of cascade testing in the extended family of an individual carrying a pathogenic variant on the Survival Of Motor Neuron 1SMN1 gene. Of the identified ARCs, 5 (0.7%) were at risk for cystic fibrosis, 5 (0.7%) for fragile X syndrome, 4 (0.5%) for spinal muscular atrophy, 4 (0.5%) for Beta-Thalassemia/Sickle Cell Anemia, 1 (0.1%) for Smith-Lemli-Opitz Syndrome and 1 (0.1%) for Duchenne/Becker Dystrophy. Fifteen ARCs were successfully followed up from both the IVF and the natural conception groups. All of these (15/15) modified their reproductive planning by undergoing ART with Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Monogenic disease and Aneuploidies (PGT-M and PGT-A). To date, 6/15 (40%) couples completed their PGT cycle with euploid/unaffected embryos achieving a pregnancy after embryo transfer and three of them have already had an unaffected baby. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The use of a limited panel of core gene-disease pairs represents a limitation on the research perspective as it can underestimate the rate of detectable carriers and ARCs in this cohort of prospective parents. Expanding the scope of ECS to a larger panel of conditions is becoming increasingly feasible, thanks to a persistent technological evolution and progressive cataloging of gene-disease associations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These results highlight the potential clinical validity and utility of ECS in reducing the risk of a pregnancy affected by a detectable inheritable genetic condition. The steady reduction in the costs of genetic analyses enables the expansion of monogenic testing/screening applications at the preimplantation stage, thus, providing valid decisional support and reproductive autonomy to patients, particularly in the context of IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was used for this study. A.C., M.F., S.C., M.P., L.G., and C.P. are employees of Igenomix Italy. C.S. is the head of the scientific board of Igenomix. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Attitudes of sperm donors towards offspring, identity release and extended genetic screening.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is sperm donors' attitude towards offspring, anonymity and extended genetic screening? DESIGN: An online questionnaire for sperm donors was administered at Cryos International in the USA and Denmark between 9 and 30 September 2020. A total of 233 donors (37 in the USA and 196 in Denmark) completed the questionnaire. This study is unique because it was performed in a setting that allows donors to choose to be either ID-release or non-ID-release donors. RESULTS: Most donors had two motives to donate: helping childless people and/or financial compensation. ID-release donors differed significantly from non-ID-release donors in numerous aspects of the donation, including relationships with the offspring, information sharing with others and wanting information about offspring. In general, donors had a very positive attitude towards genetic testing and extended genetic screening. CONCLUSIONS: Offering the possibility for donors to be either ID-release or non-ID-release allows more donors to be recruited than if only one option were available. The multiple differences between the two donor types suggests that these are groups with profoundly different attitudes towards donation. The general attitude of donors towards genetic testing and expanded genetic screening is very positive but further studies on the attitude of candidate donors are needed.

Preconception expanded carrier screening: Impact of information presented by text or video on genetic knowledge and attitudes.

Preconception expanded carrier screening (ECS) aims to identify couples with an increased risk of having a child with an autosomal recessive (AR) disorder before pregnancy, thereby enabling reproductive choices. Genetic knowledge and experiential knowledge both influence the uptake of ECS. As people in the general public often lack such knowledge, it is essential to provide appropriate and understandable information when offering ECS. This study investigated the effect of an educational video, compared to an educational text, on the knowledge and attitudes toward preconception ECS in the general population. Both the text and video consisted of a brief educational summary on AR inheritance and on the type of disorders included in ECS, with the progressive neurodegenerative condition mucopolysaccharidosis type III (MPS III) as an example. Participants in the reproductive age were invited in collaboration with a research agency. Respondents (N = 789) were offered an educational video prior to completing an online questionnaire that examined genetic knowledge, the perceived severity of MPS III, perceived risk, and attitudes toward ECS. Outcomes were compared to reference data collected previously in which respondents had been offered an educational text (N = 781). We first again studied the attitudes toward ECS in a smaller educational text group (N = 266) in order to assess whether attitudes had changed over time due to increased media coverage on ECS, which did not reveal any significant changes. Respondents who were offered the video had a better genetic knowledge, perceived MPS III as more severe, perceived their risks higher and were more likely to participate in ECS compared to those who were offered text. Online video may well be used as supportive tool to the genetic counseling process, creating more knowledge on ECS and severe genetic disorders included in preconception screening panels.

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.

Expanded carrier screening for recessively inherited disorders: economic burden and factors in decision-making when one individual in a couple is identified as a carrier.

PURPOSE: When undergoing expanded carrier screening (ECS), couples are often screened sequentially to reduce need for a second individual's test. It is unknown how often partners of individuals found to be carriers complete the recommended testing with a sequential approach and what factors contribute to decision-making regarding partner testing. Additionally, the economic burden placed on individuals by ECS testing and its effect on partner testing has not been evaluated. METHODS: In part 1, all individuals at a university-affiliated reproductive endocrinology and infertility practice identified to be carriers of a recessively inherited mutation using the Counsyl/Foresight ECS were included. Conditions were categorized by severity according to a previously described classification system. In part 2, all individuals who underwent ECS with a single test provider between September 1, 2013 and February 1, 2020 were contacted via email to complete a confidential and anonymized online survey. RESULTS: In part 1, a total of 2061 patients were screened. 36.9% were carriers of one or more recessively inherited disorders. Twenty-seven percent of positively screened individuals did not have their partner screened. Carriers of a moderate condition had a trend towards a reduced odds for having their partner screened compared to a profound condition (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-1.05, p = 0.06). Number of conditions was not predictive of subsequent partner screening (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72-1.25, p = 0.72). In part 2, the cost of ECS was not covered by insurance for 54.5% (103/189) and most paid over $300 out-of-pocket for testing (47.6%). The most common reason for not completing partner testing was that the results would not alter their course when seeking conception (33.3%). 73.5% of patients knew that the largest benefit of ECS comes from knowing a partner's results as well as their own. CONCLUSIONS: Not all carriers of recessively inherited disorders choose to undergo partner screening. Patients found to be carrier of more debilitating genetic disorders may be more likely to screen their reproductive partners. For many, ECS testing is not covered by insurance, and this test may impose a significant economic burden. For some patients, the results of ECS would not change what they would do when seeking conception. Providers should evaluate whether a patient's ECS result would change their treatment course prior to testing.

Female and male perspectives on male partner roles in expanded carrier screening.

PURPOSE: To explore facilitators and barriers for male partner follow through carrier screening (CS) after their female partners were identified as carriers, from both male and female perspectives. METHODS: Participants were either females identified as a carrier through CS (512 participants) or males who had CS (125 participants). Participants were recruited via e-mails with survey links. The survey explored factors surrounding decisions to pursue CS or not. RESULTS: Males who attended the females' CS appointment were more likely to have CS (OR: 2.07). More male partners of females identified as carriers of severe or profound conditions pursued CS (82.0%) than male partners of females who were carriers for moderate conditions (50.0%). Logistic factors were more impactful for males who pursued CS. Females whose male partners did not test endorsed personal belief factors as most impactful, reporting the perceived low risk (75.0%) and his low concern for the specific condition (65.5%) were the top reasons their partners did not test. CONCLUSION: Many factors impact how male partners appraise reproductive risk from CS and make decisions regarding their own screening. Advising that male partners attend CS appointments may increase the likelihood of follow through CS. Thorough and repeated risk counseling is indicated.

Preconception carrier screening yield: effect of variants of unknown significance in partners of carriers with clinically significant variants.

PURPOSE: Expanded preconception carrier screening (ECS) identifies at-risk couples (ARCs) for multiple diseases. ECS reports currently include only pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (P/LPVs). Variants of unknown significance (VUS) are not reported, unlike genomic or chromosomal array test results in other post/prenatal settings. Couples who are P/LP and VUS carriers (P/LP*VUS) may be at risk, particularly in genes with high P/LP carrier rates. We examined the possible contribution of P/LP*cVUS (coding, nonsynonymous VUS) matings to ECS yield in an Ashkenazi Jewish cohort, a population with well-established preconception screening. METHODS: We analyzed 672 Ashkenazi Jewish genome sequences (225,456 virtual matings) for variants in three different gene sets and calculated the rates of P/LP*P/LP and P/LP*cVUS matings. RESULTS: Across 180 genes, we identified 4671 variants: 144 (3.1%) P/LP and 1963 (42%) VUS. Across gene sets, the proportion of P/LP*P/LP and P/LP*cVUS ARCs was 2.7-3.8% and 6.8-7.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Disregarding VUS in ECS may miss ARCs. Even if only 10% of couples currently classified as P/LP*cVUS are ultimately reclassified as P/LP*P/LP, ECS yield would increase by ≈20%. While current understanding of VUS precludes VUS reporting in ECS, these findings underscore the importance of VUS reclassification. This will crucially depend on enlarging population frequency databases, especially of affected individuals.

Expanded carrier screening should not be mandatory for gamete donors.

More and more centers are imposing expanded carrier screening (ECS) on their gamete donors. In some clinics and gamete banks, gamete donors are not given this right, contrary to the freedom to decline genetic screening in the general population. The possible social and psychological burdens that are recognized for infertility patients and the general population are downplayed for gamete donors. The procedure of imposing ECS on gamete donors shows that the interests of the recipients are valued higher than those of the donors. The general ethical argument defended here is the principle of proportionality: the burdens imposed on donors have to be balanced against the potential benefits for the offspring and the recipients. The risk reduction of ECS is below 1% and is too small to outweigh the potential dangers and disadvantages for donors. The conclusion is that clinics may ask, but not compel, donors to submit to ECS provided that they offer appropriate genetic and psychological counseling.