Patient-reported anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing cancer genetic risk information with family members.

While prior studies have largely focused on family communication of diagnostic single-gene test results or specific types of cancer testing results, far less work has investigated family communication of cancer-related genetic results that include multi-gene panels, a broad array of cancer types/stages, and participants without family history of cancer. The study we report here examined individuals' anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing genetic information with family members. An 80+ gene panel was performed on participants recruited from Mayo Clinic, diagnosed with different cancer types, who did not have a family history suggestive of an inherited risk. Participants completed a 49-item survey before receiving genetic test results. Family variant testing was provided to family members at no cost, allowing factors influencing intent to share to be examined in the absence of financial burdens. In all, 1721 of 2984 individuals who received genetic testing completed the survey (57.7% completion rate). Participants' intent to share with parents, siblings, and children was inversely related to the number of anticipated barriers to sharing and directly related to the number of anticipated benefits to sharing. Of those participants who did not intend to share with parents, siblings, and adult children, 64.8%, 30.3%, and 67.6% reported that there were no barriers, while 17.1%, 24.5%, and 40.2.% reported there were no benefits. Findings indicate that barriers to sharing genetic information with family members vary across family member types, and an inability to identify at least one benefit of sharing with family members is a predictor of intent not to share.

Privacy Risks in Prenatal Aneuploidy and Carrier Screening: What Obstetricians and Their Patients Need to Know.

Modern prenatal genetic screening techniques such as cell-free fetal DNA and expanded carrier screening genotype substantial amounts of maternal and fetoplacental DNA. Although DNA can be deidentified by stripping protected health information from genetic data, anonymized DNA can be reidentified using genetic databases, raising long-term genetic privacy concerns for both mother and fetus. In this commentary, we explore the evolution of prenatal genetic screening and how modern screening techniques may pose unanticipated privacy risks. We highlight knowledge gaps and outline steps to improve patient awareness of and control over their genetic privacy, including specific recommendations for laboratories and prenatal care practitioners who offer screening. We also encourage our colleagues who provide prenatal care to be well informed about the privacy implications of the genetic tests we order and to be vocal advocates for our patients' genetic privacy, both with the laboratories that perform these tests and in the public sphere.

Young people's moral attitudes and motivations towards direct-to-consumer genetic testing for inherited risk of Alzheimer disease.

PURPOSE: Since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved sales of genetic tests for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) risk, a heated debate has arisen over whether these tests should indeed be offered online and direct-to-consumer (DTC). As this debate progresses, it is important to understand the ethical perspectives and motivations of young people, who are a key target group for DTC services. METHODS: Thirty-one grandchildren of people with LOAD, aged 16-26, were interviewed about their moral attitudes and motivations with regards to DTC genetic testing for LOAD. RESULTS: Even though most participants claimed that people should have the right to access these services, they also expressed concerns about potential distress in response to learning about risk, particularly for minors. About a third were interested in testing, primarily to gain self-knowledge regarding one's health; however, face-to-face services were vastly preferred over the online option. CONCLUSION: While DTC genetic companies often market their services as a "fun consumer product", DTC testing for LOAD was largely understood as a serious health screening procedure and a vulnerable moment in the lives of young people in Alzheimer's families. This points to the importance of appropriate standards of information and support to young people pre- and post-testing.

Parents, their children, whole exome sequencing and unsolicited findings: growing towards the child's future autonomy.

In a previous study we found that parents of children with developmental delay (DD) favoured acceptance of unsolicited findings (UFs) for medically actionable conditions in childhood, but that preferences diverged for UFs with no medical actionability, or only in adulthood, and regarding carrier status. Sometimes the child's future autonomy formed a reason for withholding UFs for the present, despite an unfavourable prognosis concerning the child's cognitive capabilities. This might be different for children undergoing whole exome sequencing (WES) for reasons other than DD and who are expected to exert future autonomy. This is the focus of the current study. We conducted nine qualitative, semi-structured interviews with parents of children, ages <1-15, after consenting to WES, but prior to feedback of results, and with three adolescent children. Several parents wished to receive any information that might in whatever way be relevant to the health and well-being of their child, and to a lesser extent wished the inclusion of information about non-actionable disorders and information concerning carrier status of autosomal recessive disorders. Although parents understood the rationale behind the centre's UFs disclosure policy, they also felt that they needed this information in order to be able to exert their parental responsibility and take good care of a child still dependent on them. Parents reason from their notion of parental responsibility but are also inclined to take adolescent children's preferences seriously and acknowledge the child's incipient autonomy as a ground for granting an increasing degree of self-determination on the road to adulthood.

Genotype-first approach to the detection of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk, and effects of risk disclosure to biobank participants.

Genotype-first approach allows to systematically identify carriers of pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes conferring a high risk of familial breast and ovarian cancer. Participants of the Estonian biobank have expressed support for the disclosure of clinically significant findings. With an Estonian biobank cohort, we applied a genotype-first approach, contacted carriers, and offered return of results with genetic counseling. We evaluated participants' responses to and the clinical utility of the reporting of actionable genetic findings. Twenty-two of 40 contacted carriers of 17 pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants responded and chose to receive results. Eight of these 22 participants qualified for high-risk assessment based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Twenty of 21 counseled participants appreciated being contacted. Relatives of 10 participants underwent cascade screening. Five of 16 eligible female BRCA1/2 variant carriers chose to undergo risk-reducing surgery, and 10 adhered to surveillance recommendations over the 30-month follow-up period. We recommend the return of results to population-based biobank participants; this approach could be viewed as a model for population-wide genetic testing. The genotype-first approach permits the identification of individuals at high risk who would not be identified by application of an approach based on personal and family histories only.

Experience with Parent Follow-Up for Communication Outcomes after Newborn Screening Identifies Carrier Status.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct interviews with a multiyear sample of parents of infants found to have heterozygous status for sickle cell hemoglobinopathy or cystic fibrosis during newborn blood screening (NBS). STUDY DESIGN: Interviewers with clinical backgrounds telephoned parents, and followed a structured script that blended follow-up and research purposes. Recruiting followed several steps to minimize recruiting bias as much as possible for a NBS study. RESULTS: Follow-up calls were conducted with parents of 426 infant carriers of sickle cell hemoglobinopathy, and 288 parents of cystic fibrosis carriers (34.8% and 49.6% of those eligible). Among these, 27.5% and 7.8% had no recollection of being informed of NBS results. Of those who recalled a provider explanation, 8.6% and 13.0% appraised the explanation negatively. Overall, 7.4% and 13.2% were dissatisfied with the experience of learning about the NSB result. Mean anxiety levels were low but higher in the sickle cell hemoglobinopathy group (P < .001). Misconceptions that the infant might get the disease were present in 27.5% and 7.8% of parents (despite zero actual risk for disease). Several of these data were significantly predicted by NBS result, health literacy, parental age, and race/ethnicity factors. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centered public health follow-up can be effective after NBS identifies carrier status. Psychosocial complications were uncommon, but harms were substantial enough to justify mitigation.

Ethical Dilemmas Linked to Fragile X Testing of Minors-a Preliminary Survey Among Professionals.

Asymptomatic female carriers of the FMR1 premutation at childbearing age have been mostly identified through prenatal genetic testing, which is routinely proposed in Israel. During the last few years, a premutation phenotype in males and females has been defined-FXAND, including neuropsychiatric disorder, learning difficulties, endocrine dysfunction, and premature ovarian failure. So when a family at risk is identified, should individuals be tested for premutation even if minors? In order to understand what professionals' views are with regard to testing FMR1 premutation in minors, we performed a questionnaire testing both ethical attitudes and knowledge. Eighty-two percent of professionals would positively consider fragile X testing in minors, and an additional 15.4% would consider it in boys only. The specific phenotype of full mutation is recognized well by health professionals, while the premutation phenotype is not well known. There is a need to expand awareness on the fragile X premutation phenotype through better information. Testing of fragile X premutation status in minors should be considered, when at risk due to family history.

Prenatal genetic testing for cystic fibrosis: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and an ethics review.

PURPOSE: We aimed to assess the clinical value of prenatal testing for cystic fibrosis (CF) and whether ethical considerations would affect endpoint selection. METHODS: To determine effectiveness, we conducted a systematic literature review whose protocol outlined search strategies across eight databases, study inclusion criteria, and prespecified literature screening, data extraction, and synthesis processes. We conducted a scoping search on ethical considerations. RESULTS: The genetic test showed good diagnostic performance. A change in clinical management was observed: termination of pregnancy (TOP) occurred in most cases where two pathogenic variants were identified in a fetus of carrier parents (158/167; 94.6%). The TOP rate was lower in pregnancies where CF was diagnosed after fetal echogenic bowel detection (~65%). TOP and caring for a child with CF were both associated with poor short-term parental psychological outcomes. Ethical analyses indicated that informed decisions should have been the main endpoint, rather than CF-affected births prevented. CONCLUSION: CF testing leads to fewer CF-affected births. It is difficult to assess whether this means the test is valuable, since patients may not value TOP primarily in terms of maternal or fetal health outcomes, psychological or otherwise. The value of testing should arguably be measured in terms of improving patient autonomy rather than health.

Drugs, genes and screens: The ethics of preventing and treating spinal muscular atrophy.

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is the most common genetic disease that causes infant mortality. Its treatment and prevention represent the paradigmatic example of the ethical dilemmas of 21st-century medicine. New therapies (nusinersen and AVXS-101) hold the promise of being able to treat, but not cure, the condition. Alternatively, genomic analysis could identify carriers, and carriers could be offered in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. In the future, gene editing could prevent the condition at the embryonic stage. How should these different options be evaluated and compared within a health system? In this paper, we discuss the ethical considerations that bear on the question of how to prioritize the different treatments and preventive options for SMA, at a policy level. We argue that despite the tremendous value of what we call 'ex-post' approaches to treating SMA (such as using pharmacological agents or gene therapy), there is a moral imperative to pursue 'ex-ante' interventions (such as carrier screening in combination with prenatal testing and preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or gene editing) to reduce the incidence of SMA. There are moral reasons relating to autonomy, beneficence and justice to prioritize ex-ante methods over ex-post methods.

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.

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.

Values and value conflicts in implementation and use of preconception expanded carrier screening - an expert interview study.

BACKGROUND: Endeavors have been made to found and incorporate ethical values in most aspects of healthcare, including health technology assessment. Health technologies and their assessment are value-laden and could trigger problems with dissemination if they contradict societal norms. Per WHO definition, preconception expanded carrier screening is a new health technology that warrants assessment. It is a genetic test offered to couples who have no known risk of recessive genetic diseases and are interested pregnancy. A test may screen for carrier status of several autosomal recessive diseases and X-linked at one go. The technique has been piloted in the Netherlands and is discussed in other countries. The aim of the study was to examine values and value conflicts that healthcare experts recounted in relation to the discussion of implementation and use of preconception ECS in Sweden. METHODS: We interviewed ten experts, who were associated with influencing health policymaking in Sweden. We employed systematizing expert interviews, which endeavor to access experts' specialist knowledge. There were four female and six male informants, of which four were physicians, three bioethicists, one a legal expert, one a theologian and one a political party representative in the parliament. The participants functioned as members of two non-governmental bodies and three governmental organizations. We employed thematic analysis to identify themes, categories and subcategories. RESULTS: Two main themes surfaced: values and value conflicts. The main categories of Respect for persons, Solidarity, Human dignity, Do no harm, Health and Love formed the first theme, while values conflicting with autonomy and integrity respectively, constituted the second theme. Concepts relating to respect for persons were the most commonly mentioned among the participants, followed by notions alluding to solidarity. Furthermore, respondents discussed values conflicting with Swedish healthcare ones such as equality and solidarity. CONCLUSIONS: The experts highlighted values and concepts that are distinctive of welfare states such as Sweden and delineated how preconception ECS could challenge such values. Moreover, the analysis revealed that certain values were deemed more substantive than others, judging by the extent and detail of inference; for example, respect for persons and solidarity were on top of the list.

Expanded Preconception Carrier Screening in Clinical Practice: Review of Technology, Guidelines, Implementation Challenges, and Ethical Quandaries.

In the last 10 years, expanded preconception carrier screening has become widely available and helps patients/couples make more informed decisions with regard to their reproductive options and facilitates more effective preconception planning, prenatal diagnosis, condition-specific counseling, and condition-specific care. This review provides an overview of expanded preconception carrier screening's high-throughput genotyping and sequencing approaches, current guidelines, implementation challenges and evolving ethical quandaries.

Preventing lives affected by hemophilia: A mixed methods study of the views of adults with hemophilia and their families toward genetic screening.

BACKGROUND: Genomic sequencing technologies have made the possibility of population screening for whole panels of genetic disorders more feasible than ever before. As one of the most common single gene disorders affecting the UK population, hemophilia is an attractive candidate to include on such screening panels. However, very little is known about views toward genetic screening amongst people with hemophilia or their family members, despite the potential for a wide range of impacts on them. METHODS: Twenty-two in-depth qualitative interviews were undertaken to explore the views of adults with hemophilia and their family members, recruited through the Haemophilia Society UK. These interviews were used to develop a survey, the Haemophilia Screening Survey (UK), which was distributed in paper and online format through the support group, receiving 327 returns between January and June 2018. RESULTS: Fifty-seven per cent of the sample supported preconception carrier screening of the population for hemophilia, and 59% supported prenatal carrier screening. Key reasons for support included a desire to reduce pregnancy terminations and increase awareness of hemophilia. Despite support for screening however, 90% of the sample disagreed with pregnancy terminations for hemophilia. CONCLUSIONS: Families and adults living with hemophilia are more supportive of screening for information and preparation purposes than to prevent boys with hemophilia from being born. A distinction was made between preventing the disease and preventing the lives of people with it, with support shown for the use of screening to achieve the former, but not at the expense of the latter.

The aims of expanded universal carrier screening: Autonomy, prevention, and responsible parenthood.

Expanded universal carrier screening (EUCS) entails a population-wide screening offer for multiple disease-causing mutations simultaneously. Although there is much debate about the conditions under which EUCS can responsibly be introduced, there seems to be little discussion about its aim: providing carrier couples with options for autonomous reproductive choice. While this links in with current accounts of the aim of foetal anomaly screening, it is different from how the aim of ancestry-based carrier screening has traditionally been understood: reducing the disease burden in the population. The reasons why the aim of EUCS is presented in terms of 'autonomy' rather than 'prevention' have not been spelled out in the literature. This paper seeks to fill this gap by considering the morally relevant similarities and dissimilarities between foetal anomaly screening, ancestry-based carrier screening and EUCS. When carrier screening is performed in the prenatal period, enhancing autonomy appears the most appropriate aim of EUCS, as the alternative of 'prevention through selective abortion' would urge women to terminate wanted pregnancies. However, when screening is conducted in the preconception period, carrier couples can avoid the birth of affected children by other means than selective abortion, for instance preimplantation genetic diagnosis. To the extent that this increased control over passing on a genetic disorder raises questions of parental responsibility, it seems necessary that the account of the aims of EUCS is wider than only in terms of enhancing reproductive autonomy.

Ethical and Psychosocial Issues in Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) for Newborns.

In this article, I review some of the ethical issues that have arisen in the past when genetic testing has been done in newborns. I then suggest how whole genome sequencing may raise a new set of issues. Finally, I introduce a series of other articles in which the authors address different controversies that arise when whole genome sequencing is used in the newborn period.

Reverse pre-symptomatic testing for Huntington disease: double disclosure when 25% at-risk children reveal the genetic status to their parent.

Predictive testing for Huntington disease (HD) in 25% at-risk individuals is testing with full knowledge, and sometimes assuming, that the parent does not want to know his status. The goal of this study was to understand: (1) the differences in the motivation between 25% and 50% at-risk individuals to be tested and (2) the consequences of "double disclosure", including parental reactions. Test requests from 25% at-risk individuals were rare (155/1611, 10%). We compared their motivation with those of 1456 50% at-risk individuals. The principal motivation to have the test for both groups was "to know" (48% versus 58%, p = 0.049), but the desire to have children was more frequent in the 25% at-risk group (32% versus 17%, p < 0.001). Sixty percent of the 25% at-risk group went through the testing procedure: 15% (n = 14) were variant positive for HD. Testees reported four adverse reactions of their parent (22%): one committed suicide and three became depressed. This result highlights the impact of "double disclosure", a bad result for the person themselves and the transmitting parent. It is the responsibility of the team to anticipate this outcome with the 25% at-risk individuals: children revealing the genetic status to their parent. They should help the testees and their family to find a satisfactory solution to help prevent adverse reactions. This includes ensuring that the candidate is well-infomed abour the testing options and consequences to her/himself but also to her/his parent. The at-risk parent should be offered to discuss the implications of their child's testing.

How do genetically disabled adults view selective reproduction? Impairment, identity, and genetic screening.

BACKGROUND: Genomic medicine is rapidly evolving, particularly in the domain of reproduction. Population carrier screening for a range of disorders is becoming possible using whole genome/exome sequencing. However, very little is known about the views of genetically disabled adults toward selective reproduction. METHODS: Forty-three in-depth qualitative interviews were carried out with adults living with different types of genetic condition, recruited through support groups and clinics. Interviews covered participants' experiences of their condition and their views toward genetic intervention in reproduction. Thematic analysis of the data using NVivo 11 was undertaken, and participants were assigned categories as either supporting, not-supporting, or having ambivalent views toward selective reproduction. RESULTS: The majority of participants (65%) expressed either disapproval of, or held ambivalent views toward, selective reproduction. Key reasons for non-support included regarding genetic impairment as part of personal identity and the prioritization of social and environmental barrier removal. Key reasons for support of selective reproduction included negative and externalizing attitudes toward genetic impairment and a belief in the importance of informed reproductive decision-making. CONCLUSION: The degree to which participants identified with their impairment, more so than how they valued it, was significant in determining attitudes toward selective reproduction. Those who supported genetic screening viewed their impairment as separate to themselves, while participants who considered their impairment as integral to their identity were most likely to report ambivalent or negative attitudes. Policymakers and stakeholders considering the role of genetic carrier screening panels might usefully engage with adults affected by heritable disease as well as disability identity politics when considering the acceptability and social impact of genetic screening programs.

Implementing carrier screening for cystic fibrosis outside the clinic: ethical analysis in the light of the personalist view.

BACKGROUND: Cystic Fibrosis (CF) is an autosomal recessive genetic disease. Two models for screening CF are normally used: newborn screening and population-based CF carrier screening. In turn, there are three main models of population-based CF carrier screening: prenatal carrier screening, preconception carrier screening, and carrier screening outside clinical settings. AIM: To evaluate, in the light of the personalist view, the use of carrier screenings for CF outside the clinic, i.e. in non-clinical settings, such as school and workplaces. METHODS: Analysis has been carried out according to the "Personalist approach" (also called "Triangular model"), an ethical method for performing ethical analysis within HTA process. It includes factual, anthropological and ethical data in a ''triangular'' normative reflection process. FINDINGS: Implementing carrier screening for cystic fibrosis outside the clinical settings allows acquisition of knowledge for informing reproductive choices, that can be considered as valuable; benefit-risk ratio seems to be not much favorable; autonomous and responsible decisions can be taken only under certain conditions; economic advantage is difficult to determine; therefore, from a personalist view, implementing carrier screenings outside the clinic seems not to be ethically justified. CONCLUSIONS: In accordance with the personalist perspective, public health programs providing carrier screenings outside the clinic should not be implemented.