An European overview of genetic counselling supervision provision.

Genetic testing is becoming more commonplace in general and specialist health care, and should always be accompanied by genetic counselling, according to legislation in many European countries and recommendations by professional bodies. Personal and professional competence is necessary to provide safe and effective genetic counselling. Clinical and counselling supervision of genetics healthcare practitioners plays a key role in quality assurance, providing a safe environment not only for patients but for professionals too. However, in many European countries, genetic counsellors are still an emerging professional group and counselling supervision is not routinely offered and there are no enough evidences on the impact of these insufficiencies. This study aimed to explore the current status of genetic counselling supervision provision across Europe and to ascertain factors that might be relevant for the successful implementation of counselling supervision. A total of 100 practitioners responded to an online survey; respondents were from 18 countries, with the majority working in France (27%) and Spain (17%). Only 34 participants reported having access to genetic counselling supervision. Country of origin, the existence of a regulation system and years of experience were factors identified as relevant, influencing access and characteristics of counselling supervision. Although there is a growing number of genetic counsellors trained at European level, just a few countries have implemented and required as mandatory the access to genetic counselling supervision. Nevertheless, this is essential to ensure a safe and effective genetic counselling and should be regulated at the European genetic healthcare services.

Optimising the diagnosis and referral of achondroplasia in Europe: European Achondroplasia Forum best practice recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Achondroplasia is the most common form of skeletal dysplasia, with serious comorbidities and complications that may occur from early infancy to adulthood, requiring lifelong management from a multidisciplinary team expert in the condition The European Achondroplasia Forum guiding principles of management highlight the importance of accurate diagnosis and timely referral to a centre specialised in the management of achondroplasia to fully support individuals with achondroplasia and their families, and to appropriately plan management. The European Achondroplasia Forum undertook an exploratory audit of its Steering Committee to ascertain the current situation in Europe and to understand the potential barriers to timely diagnosis and referral. RESULTS: Diagnosis of achondroplasia was primarily confirmed prenatally (66.6%), at Day 0 (12.8%) or within one month after birth (12.8%). For suspected and confirmed cases of achondroplasia, a greater proportion were identified earlier in the prenatal period (87.1%) with fewer diagnoses at Day 0 (5.1%) or within the first month of life (2.6%). Referral to a specialist centre took place after birth (86.6%), predominantly within the first month, although there was a wide variety in the timepoint of referral between countries and in the time lapsed between suspicion or confirmed diagnosis of achondroplasia and referral to a specialist centre. CONCLUSIONS: The European Achondroplasia Forum guiding principles of management recommend diagnosis of achondroplasia as early as possible. If concerns are raised at routine ultrasound, second line investigation should be implemented so that the diagnosis can be reached as soon as possible for ongoing management. Clinical and radiological examination supported by molecular testing is the most effective way to confirm diagnosis of achondroplasia after birth. Referral to a centre specialised in achondroplasia care should be made as soon as possible on suspicion or confirmation of diagnosis. In countries or regions where there are no official skeletal dysplasia reference or specialist centres, priority should be given to their creation or recognition, together with incentives to improve the structure of the existing multidisciplinary team managing achondroplasia. The length of delay between diagnosis of achondroplasia and referral to a specialist centre warrants further research.

A retrospective study on the efficacy of prenatal diagnosis for pregnancies at risk of mitochondrial DNA disorders.

PURPOSE: Prenatal diagnosis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) disorders is challenging due to potential instability of fetal mutant loads and paucity of data connecting prenatal mutant loads to postnatal observations. Retrospective study of our prenatal cohort aims to examine the efficacy of prenatal diagnosis to improve counseling and reproductive options for those with pregnancies at risk of mtDNA disorders. METHODS: We report on a retrospective review of 20 years of prenatal diagnosis of pathogenic mtDNA variants in 80 pregnant women and 120 fetuses. RESULTS: Patients with undetectable pathogenic variants (n = 29) consistently had fetuses free of variants, while heteroplasmic women (n = 51) were very likely to transmit their variant (57/78 fetuses, 73%). In the latter case, 26 pregnancies were terminated because fetal mutant loads were >40%. Of the 84 children born, 27 were heteroplasmic (mutant load <65%). To date, no medical problems related to mitochondrial dysfunction have been reported. CONCLUSION: Placental heterogeneity of mutant loads questioned the reliability of chorionic villous testing. Fetal mutant load stability, however, suggests the reliability of a single analysis of amniotic fluid at any stage of pregnancy for prenatal diagnosis of mtDNA disorders. Mutant loads under 40% reliably predict lack of symptoms in the progeny of heteroplasmic women.

Segregation of mitochondrial DNA mutations in the human placenta: implication for prenatal diagnosis of mtDNA disorders.

BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) disorders have a high clinical variability, mainly explained by variation of the mutant load across tissues. The high recurrence risk of these serious diseases commonly results in requests from at-risk couples for prenatal diagnosis (PND), based on determination of the mutant load on a chorionic villous sample (CVS). Such procedures are hampered by the lack of data regarding mtDNA segregation in the placenta.The objectives of this report were to determine whether mutant loads (1) are homogeneously distributed across the whole placentas, (2) correlate with those in amniocytes and cord blood cells and (3) correlate with the mtDNA copy number. METHODS: We collected 11 whole placentas carrying various mtDNA mutations (m.3243A>G, m.8344A>G, m.8993T>G, m.9185T>C and m.10197G>A) and, when possible, corresponding amniotic fluid samples (AFSs) and cord blood samples. We measured mutant loads in multiple samples from each placenta (n= 6-37), amniocytes and cord blood cells, as well as total mtDNA content in placenta samples. RESULTS: Load distribution was homogeneous at the sample level when average mutant load was low (<20%) or high (>80%) at the whole placenta level. By contrast, a marked heterogeneity was observed (up to 43%) in the intermediate range (20%-80%), the closer it was to 40%-50% the mutant load, the wider the distribution. Mutant loads were found to be similar in amniocytes and cord blood cells, at variance with placenta samples. mtDNA content correlated to mutant load in m.3243A>G placentas only. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that (1) mutant load determined from CVS has to be interpreted with caution for PND of some mtDNA disorders and should be associated with/substituted by a mutant load measurement on amniocytes; (2) the m.3243A>G mutation behaves differently from other mtDNA mutations with respect to the impact on mtDNA copy number, as previously shown in human preimplantation embryogenesis.