A clinical perspective on ethical arguments around prenatal diagnosis and preimplantation genetic diagnosis for later onset inherited cancer predispositions

Familial Cancer

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 9-14

  Clancy, Tara ^a  

^a MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

BRCA1 2; Cancer predispositions; Ethical issues; FAP; HNPCC; Preimplantation genetic diagnosis; Prenatal diagnosis

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

ADENOMATOUS POLYP; BREAST CANCER; CANCER GENETICS; CANCER RISK; CANCER SUSCEPTIBILITY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DECISION MAKING; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; FETUS DEVELOPMENT; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC RISK; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETIC SERVICE; HUMAN; INTESTINE CANCER; MEDICAL CARE; MEDICAL ETHICS; OVARY CANCER; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TERMINATION; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS; FEMALE; GENES, BRCA1; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PREGNANCY; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 77349088325     PISSN: 13899600     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10689-009-9271-7     Document Type: Review

References (73)

1. EE Ekwo J-O Kim CA Gosselink 1987 Parental perceptions of the burden of genetic disease Am J Med Genet 28 955 963 10.1002/ajmg.1320280422 1:STN:280:DyaL1c%2FnsVClug%3D%3D 3688034 (Pubitemid 17163767)
2. PG Frets HJ Duivenvoorden F Verhage, et al. 1990 Factors influencing the reproductive decision after genetic counseling Am J Med Genet 35 496 502 10.1002/ajmg.1320350411 1:STN:280:DyaK3c3ktVahuw%3D%3D 2333878 (Pubitemid 20109009)
3. A Drugan A Greb MP Johnson, et al. 1990 Determinants of parental decisions to abort for chromosome abnormalities Prenat Diagn 10 483 490 10.1002/pd.1970100802 1:STN:280:DyaK3M%2FpsFentg%3D%3D 2267225
4. DC Wertz SR Janes JM Rosenfield, et al. 1992 Attitudes toward the prenatal diagnosis of cystic fibrosis: factors in decision making among affected families Am J Hum Genet 50 1077 1085 1:STN:280:DyaK383jvVCqsw%3D%3D 1570837
5. MI Evans MA Sobiecke EL Krivchenia, et al. 1996 Parental decisions to terminate/continue following abnormal cytogenetic prenatal diagnosis: "What" is still more important than "When" Am J Med Genet 61 353 355 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8628(19960202)61:4<353::AID-AJMG9>3.0.CO;2-V 1:STN:280:DyaK28vjtV2ltw%3D%3D 8834047 (Pubitemid 26043434)
6. Beeson D, Doksom T (2001) Family values and resistance to genetic counseling. In: Hoffmaster B (ed) Bioethics in context. Temple, Philadelphia
7. A Middleton J Hewison RF Mueller 2001 Prenatal diagnosis for inherited deafness-what is the potential demand? J Genet Couns 10 121 131 10.1023/A:1009439630457 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2FksVWgug%3D%3D 11767801
8. HC Gooding K Boehm RE Thompson, et al. 2002 Issues surrounding prenatal testing for achondroplasia Prenat Diagn 22 933 940 10.1002/pd.437 12378581 (Pubitemid 35175998)
9. D Callahan 1986 How technology is reframing the abortion debate Hastings Cent Rep 16 33 42 10.2307/3562468 1:STN:280:DyaL287mslCmtw%3D%3D 3514547
10. Harris J (1985) The value of life. Routledge, London
11. M Tooley 1972 Abortion and infanticide Philos Public Aff 2 37 65
12. DG Jones 1998 Anatomy and ethics: an exploration of some ethical dimensions of contemporary anatomy Clin Anat 11 100 105 10.1002/(SICI)1098- 2353(1998)11:2<100::AID-CA6>3.0.CO;2-Y 1:STN:280:DyaK1c7mvVOnsg%3D%3D 9509922 (Pubitemid 28101244)
13. D Marquis 1989 Why abortion is immoral J Philos 4 183 202 10.2307/2026961
14. Finnis J (1994) Abortion and health care ethics. In: Gillon R (ed) Principles of health care ethics. John Wiley, Chichester
15. M Reichlin 1997 The argument from potential: a reappraisal Bioethics 11 1 23 10.1111/1467-8519.00041 11656607
16. Warnock Report (1984) Report of the committee of inquiry into human fertilisation and embryology, cmnd 9314. HMSO, London
17. Glover J (1989) Fertility and the family: the Glover report on reproductive technologies to the European commission. Fourth Estate, London
18. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (1990) Available at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Ukpga-19900037-en-1.htm cited 01/02/09
19. The 1990 Act was amended by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (2008) Available at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga-20080022-en-1 cited 01/02/09
20. A McLaren 1986 Embryo research Nature 320 570 10.1038/320570b0 1:STN:280:DyaL283gtlKisg%3D%3D 3702990
21. M Lockwood 1988 Warnock versus Powell (and Harradine): when does potentiality count? Bioethics 2 187 213 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1988.tb00048.x 11659014
22. AR Thornhill CE de Die-Smulders JP Geraedts, et al. 2005 ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) Hum Reprod 20 35 48 10.1093/humrep/deh579 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2M%2FltVGrug%3D%3D 15539444
23. Gunning J (1999) Legal regulation concerning preimplantation diagnosis. In: Hildt E, Graumann S (eds) Genetics in human reproduction. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 261-272
24. H Watt 2004 Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: choosing the "Good Enough" child Health Care Anal 12 51 60 10.1023/B:HCAN.0000026653.01543.3a 15186080 (Pubitemid 39030684)
25. MG Katz L Fitzgerald A Bankier, et al. 2002 Issues and concerns of couples presenting for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) Prenat Diagn 22 1117 1122 10.1002/pd.498 12454970 (Pubitemid 35448401)
26. F Kastrinos EM Stoffel J Balmaña, et al. 2007 Attitudes toward prenatal genetic testing in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis Am J Gastroenterol 102 1284 1290 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01168.x 17355417 (Pubitemid 46802017)
27. Glover J (1992) Future people, disability, and screening. In: Laslett P, Fishkin J (eds) Justice between age groups and generations. Yale University Press, New Haven
28. T Shakespeare 1998 Choices and rights: eugenics, genetics and disability equality Disabil Soc 13 665 681 10.1080/09687599826452 11660717
29. A Kerr S Cunningham-Burley A Amos 1998 Drawing the line: an analysis of lay people's discussions about the new genetics Public Underst Sci 7 113 133 10.1088/0963-6625/7/2/002 11660565
30. E Parens A Asch 1999 The disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing Hastings Cent Rep 29 5 S1 S22 10.2307/3527746 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3c%2FlsFWhsw%3D%3D 10587809
31. DC Wertz BM Knoppers 2002 Serious genetic disorders: can or should they be defined? Am J Med Genet 108 29 35 10.1002/ajmg.10212 11857546 (Pubitemid 34101379)
32. HFEA (2007) List of conditions licensed by the HFEA. Available at http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/PGD-list.pdf cited 01/02/09 (this is not a complete list of licensed conditions)
33. HFEA (2004) HFEA licenses PGD for inherited colon cancer. Available at http://www.hfea.gov.uk/en/1049.html cited 01/02/09
34. HFEA (2005) Choices and boundaries: should people be able to select embryos free from an inherited susceptibility to cancer? Available at http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/Choices-Boundaries.pdf cited 01/02/09
35. HFEA (2006) Authority decision on the use of PGD for lower penetrance, later onset inherited conditions. Available at http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/The- Authority-decision---Choices-and-boundaries.pdf cited 01/02/09
36. SG Post 1992 Huntington's disease: prenatal screening for late onset disease J Med Ethics 18 75 78 10.1136/jme.18.2.75 1:STN:280:DyaK38zhvVahtA%3D%3D 1535662
37. M Decruyenaere G Evers-Kiebooms A Boogaerts, et al. 2007 The complexity of reproductive decision-making in asymptomatic carriers of the Huntington mutation Eur J Hum Genet 15 453 462 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201774 17245406 (Pubitemid 46487700)
38. C Roberts S Franklin 2004 Experiencing new forms of genetic choice: Findings from an ethnographic study of preimplantation genetic diagnosis Hum Fertil 7 285 293 10.1080/14647270400016449 (Pubitemid 40100678)
39. T Krahn 2000 Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: does age of onset matter (anymore)? Med Health Care Philos 12 187 202 10.1007/s11019-008-9171-x
40. JA Robertson 2003 Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the ethical debate ethical issues in new uses of preimplantation genetic diagnosis Hum Reprod 18 465 471 10.1093/humrep/deg100 12615807 (Pubitemid 36329307)
41. Melville A (2008) Patients' attitudes to the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for familial adenomatous polyposis. MSc Dissertation, University of Manchester
42. Musgrave H (2008) Patients' attitudes to the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. MSc Dissertation, University of Manchester
43. G Evans A Baildam A Brain, et al. 2009 Risk reducing mastectomy: outcomes in 10 European Centres J Med Genet 46 254 258 10.1136/jmg.2008.062232 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1M3msFSktw%3D%3D 18996907
44. Metcalfe KA, Birenbaum-Carmeli D, Lubinski J et al, The Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group (2008) International variation in rates of uptake of preventive options in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Int J Cancer 122:2017-2022
45. G de Wert 1998 Ethics of predictive DNA-testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer Patient Educ Couns 35 43 52 10.1016/S0738-3991(98)00082-2 9832896 (Pubitemid 29037813)
46. U Menon J Harper A Sharma, et al. 2007 Views of BRCA gene mutation carriers on preimplantation genetic diagnosis as a reproductive option for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer Hum Reprod 22 1573 1577 10.1093/humrep/dem055 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2szgvFKjtw%3D%3D 17428877 (Pubitemid 47055145)
47. AD Staton AW Kurian K Cobb, et al. 2008 Cancer risk reduction and reproductive concerns in female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers Fam Cancer 7 179 186 10.1007/s10689-007-9171-7 18026853
48. G Quinn S Vadaparampil C Wilson, et al. 2009 Attitudes of high-risk women toward preimplantation genetic diagnosis Fertil Steril 91 2361 2368 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.019 18440521
49. D Fortuny J Balmaña B Graña, et al. 2009 Opinion about reproductive decision making among individuals undergoing BRCA1/2 genetic testing in a multicentre Spanish cohort Hum Reprod 24 1000 1006 10.1093/humrep/den471 19112076
50. C Williams K Ehrich B Farsides, et al. 2007 Facilitating choice, framing choice: staff views on widening the scope of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in the UK Socl Sci Med 65 1094 1105 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.033 (Pubitemid 47247990)
51. R Scott C Williams K Ehrich, et al. 2007 The appropriate extent of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis: health professionals' and scientists' views on the requirement for a significant risk of a serious genetic condition Med Law Rev 15 320 356 10.1093/medlaw/fwm010 17884840
52. International Huntington Association and World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Huntington's disease 1994 Guidelines for the molecular genetics predictive test in Huntington's disease J Med Genet 31 555 559 10.1136/jmg.31.7.555
53. M Bloch MR Hayden 1990 Opinion: predictive testing for Huntington disease in childhood: challenges and implications Am J Hum Genet 46 1 4 1:STN:280:DyaK3c7gt1CitQ%3D%3D 2136787
54. Working Party of the Clinical Genetics Society 1994 Report on the genetic testing of children J Med Genet 31 785 797 10.1136/jmg.31.10.785
55. The American Society of Human Genetics Board of Directors The American College of Medical Genetics Board of Directors 1995 Points to consider: ethical, legal, and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents Am J Hum Genet 57 1233 1241
56. American College of Obstetricians, Gynecologists 2008 Committee opinion no. 410: ethical issues in genetic testing Obstet Gynecol 111 1495 1502
57. Feinberg J (1980) The child's right to an open future. In: Aiken W, La Fallette H (eds) Whose child? Children's rights, parental authority and state power. Littlefield Adams, Totowa
58. DS Davis 1997 Genetic dilemmas and the child's right to an open future Hastings Cent Rep 27 7 15 1:STN:280:DyaK2s3nvVSisA%3D%3D 9131346
59. AR Thornhill CE de Die-Smulders JP Geraedts, et al. 2005 ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) Hum Reprod 20 35 48 10.1093/humrep/deh579 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2M%2FltVGrug%3D%3D 15539444
60. HFEA (2008) Human fertilisation and embryology authority code of practice, 8th edn (consultation draft). pp 82-83 Available at http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/2008-11-12-CoP8-Code-for-consultation-final-for- website1.pdf cited 01/02/09
61. Goossens V, Harton G, Moutou C et al. (2008) ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection VIII: cycles from January to December 2005 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2006 Hum. Reprod 23:2629-2645 Supplementary Table IVc: List of indications under "others" for monogenic diseases with PCR, data VIII http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/data/den238/DC1/1 cited 06/06/09
62. Goossens V, Harton G, Moutou C et al. (2009) ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection IX: cycles from January to December 2006 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2007 Hum. Reprod Advance Access April 29, 2009; doi: doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep059 Supplementary Table IVc: List of indications under "others" for monogenic diseases, data IX http://humrep.oxfordjournals. org/cgi/data/dep059/DC1/3 cited 06/06/09
63. A Clarke 1991 Is non-directive genetic counselling possible? Lancet 335 1145 1147 10.1016/0140-6736(90)91139-2
64. Sorenson JR (1993) Genetic counseling: values that have mattered. In: Bartels DM, LeRoy BS, Caplan AL (eds) Prescribing our future. Aldine de Gruyter, New York
65. RG Resta 1997 Eugenics and nondirectiveness in genetic counseling J Genet Couns 6 255 258 10.1023/A:1025624505382 11656644
66. S Kessler 1997 Psychological aspects of genetic counseling. XI. Nondirectiveness revisited Am J Med Genet 72 164 171 10.1002/(SICI)1096- 8628(19971017)72:2<164::AID-AJMG8>3.0.CO;2-V 1:STN:280: DyaK1c%2FisFKlsQ%3D%3D 9382137 (Pubitemid 27426081)
67. American Society of Human Genetics Ad Hoc Committee on Genetic Counseling 1975 Genetic counseling Am J Hum Genet 27 240 242
68. RM Veatch 1972 Models for ethical medicine in a revolutionary age. What physician-patient roles foster the most ethical relationship? Hastings Cent Rep 2 5 7 1:STN:280:DyaE2M%2Fht1OhsQ%3D%3D 4679693
69. M Parker 2001 Genetics and the interpersonal elaboration of ethics Theor Med 22 451 459 10.1023/A:1013062902531 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2Fot1ChtA%3D%3D (Pubitemid 34036708)
70. LS Lehmann JC Weeks N Klar, et al. 2000 Disclosure of familial genetic information: perceptions of the duty to inform Am J Med 109 705 711 10.1016/S0002-9343(00)00594-5 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M%2FoslCrsg%3D%3D 11137485 (Pubitemid 32013018)
71. E Claes G Evers-Kiebooms A Boogaerts, et al. 2003 Communication with close and distant relatives in the context of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in cancer patients Am J Med Genet 116A 11 19 10.1002/ajmg.a.10868 12476445
72. N Hallowell C Foster R Eeles, et al. 2003 Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information J Med Ethics 29 74 83 10.1136/jme.29.2.74 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s7pvVWgtQ%3D%3D 12672886 (Pubitemid 36511314)
73. L Plantinga MR Natowicz NE Kass, et al. 2003 Disclosure, confidentiality and families: experiences and attitudes of those with genetic versus nongenetic medical conditions Am J Med Genet 119C 51 59 10.1002/ajmg.c.10006 12704638