Prenatal screening: Current practice, new developments, ethical challenges

Bioethics

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 1-8

  de Jong, Antina ^a   Maya, Idit ^b,c,d   van Lith, Jan M M ^e  

^a Education Council of the Netherlands   (Netherlands)

^b HASHARON HOSPITAL   (Israel)

^c RABIN MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^d TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^e LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Ethical issues; Informed consent; NIPT; Prenatal screening; Reproductive autonomy

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ABORTION; ANEUPLOIDY; BLOOD; CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; FEMALE; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; KARYOTYPING; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; MORALITY; NETHERLANDS; PARENT; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; TRENDS; UNITED KINGDOM;

ABORTION, EUGENIC; ANEUPLOIDY; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; DNA; FEMALE; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC TESTING; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; KARYOTYPING; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; MORALS; NETHERLANDS; PARENTS; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMEN; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 84918519054     PISSN: 02699702     EISSN: 14678519     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12123     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. J. Murray et al. Screening for Cystic Fibrosis. Health Technol Assess 1999; 3: i-104.
2. Health Council of the Netherlands. Screening Between Hope and Hype. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, 2008.
3. http://fetalanomaly.screening.nhs.uk/; http://www.rivm.nl/Documen ten_en_publicaties/Professioneel_Praktisch/Draaiboeken/Preventie _Ziekte_Zorg/Draaiboek_prenatale_screening_downsyndroom_en _Structureel_Echoscopisch_Onderzoek.
4. UK National Screening Committee/NHS Screening Programmes (www.screening.nhs.uk) and is used under the Open Government Licence v1.0.
5. A. Tabor & Z. Alfirevic. Update on Procedure-Related Risks for Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques. Fetal Diagn Ther 2010; 27: 1-7.
6. R. Akolekar et al. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Ultrasound Obstetr Gynecol 2014. DOI: 10.1002/uog.14636.
7. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics (ACOG). Committee Opinion No. 545: Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120: 1532-1534.
8. A. Syngelaki et al. Challenges in the Diagnosis of Fetal Non- Chromosomal Abnormalities at 11-13 Weeks. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 90-102.
9. C.M. Bilardo et al. Increased Nuchal Translucency in Euploid Fetuses-What Should we be Telling the Parents? Prenat Diagn 2010; 30: 93-102.
10. J. Fisher. First-trimester Screening: Dealing with the Fall-Out. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 46-49.
11. R. van Ravenswaaij et al. First-trimester Serum PAPP-A and fß-hCG Concentrations and other Maternal Characteristics to Establish Logistic Regression-Based Predictive Rules for Adverse Pregnancy Outcome. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 50-57.
12. E. Lisenka et al. Genomic microarrays in mental retardation: from copy number variation to gene, from research to diagnosis. J Med Genet 2010; 47: 289-297.
13. S.H. Eik-Nes. The 18-week Fetal Examination and Detection of Anomalies. Prenat Diagn 2010; 30: 624-630.
14. T.-H. Bui & V. Meiner. State of the art in prenatal diagnosis. In: Leuzinger-Bohleber M et al., editors. The Janus Face of Prenatal Diagnostics. A European Study Bridging Ethics, Psycholanalysis, and Medicine. London: Karnac Books, 2008. p. 61-86.
15. L. Hui & D.W. Bianchi. Prenatal Pharmacotherapy for Fetal Anomalies: a 2011 Update. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 735-743.
16. J. Jani et al. Tracheal Diameter at Birth in Severe Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Treated by Fetal Endoscopic Tracheal Occlusion. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 699-704.
17. M.W. Bebbington et al. Open Fetal Surgery for Myelomeningocele. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 689-694.
18. J.L. Callaway. The Clinical Utility of Microarray Technologies applied to Prenatal Cytogenetics in the Presence of a Normal Conventional Karyotype: a Review of the Literature. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 1-5.
19. S.C. Hillman. Use of Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray: Prospective Cohort Study and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41: 610-620.
20. J.A. Crolla, R. Wapner & J.M. van Lith. Controversies in Prenatal Diagnosis 3: Should Everyone Undergoing Invasive Testing have a Microarray? Prenat Diagn 2013. DOI: 10.1002/pd.4287.
21. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics & The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Committee Opinion No. 581. The use of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122: 1374-1377.
22. P.D. Brady & J.R. Vermeesch. Genomic Microarrays: a Technology Overview. Prenat Diagn 2012; 32: 336-343.
23. A. Weise et al. Microdeletion and Microduplication Syndromes. J Histochem Cytochem 2012; 60: 346-358.
24. G. McGillivray et al. Genetic Counselling and Ethical Issues with Chromosome Microarray Analysis in Prenatal Testing. Prenat Diagn 2012; 32: 389-395.
25. Y.M. Lo et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Lancet 1997; 350: 485-487.
26. F.M.F. Lun et al. Microfluidics Digital PCR Reveals a Higher than Expected Fraction of Fetal DNA in Maternal Plasma. Clin Chem 2008; 54: 1664-1672.
27. Y.M.D. Zhang et al. Rapid Clearance of Fetal DNA from Maternal Plasma. Am J Hum Genet 1999; 64: 218-224.
28. F.B. Clausen. Report of the First nationally Implemented Clinical Routine Screening for Fetal RHD in D- pregnant Women to Ascertain the Requirement for Antenatal RhD Prophylaxis. Transfusion 2012; 52: 752-758.
29. E.M. Boon & B.H. Faas. Benefits and limitations of whole genome versus targeted approaches for non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidies. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 563-568.
30. D.W. Bianchi et al. DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 799-808.
31. D.W. Bianchi, D. Oepkes & A. Ghidini. Current Controversies in Prenatal Diagnosis 1: Should Noninvasive DNA Testing be the Standard Screening Test for Down Syndrome in All Pregnant Women? Prenat Diagn 2013; 3: 1-6.
32. G. Fairbrother et al. Clinical experience of noninvasive prenatal testing with cell-free DNA for fetal trisomies 21, 18, and 13, in a general screening population. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 580-583.
33. M.M. Gil et al. Analysis of Cell-Free DNA in Maternal Blood in Screening for Aneuploidies: Meta-Analysis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2014; DOI: 10.1002/ uog.12504.
34. T. Futch et al. Initial Clinical Laboratory Experience in Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Fetal Aneuploidy from maternal Plasma DNA Samples. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 569-574.
35. D. Liang et al. Noninvasive Prenatal Testing of Fetal Whole Chromosome Aneuploidy by Massively Parallel Sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 409-415.
36. G.E. Palomaki et al. DNA Sequencing of Maternal Plasma to detect Down Syndrome: An International Clinical Validation Study. Genet Med 2011; 13: 913-20.
37. M.E. Norton et al. Non-Invasive Chromosomal Evaluation (NICE) Study: Results of a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study for Detection of Fetal Trisomy 21 and Trisomy 18. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207: 137.e1-137.e8.
38. D.W. Bianchi & L. Wilkins-Haug. Integration of noninvasive DNA testing for aneuploidy into prenatal care: what has happened since the rubber met the road? Clin Chem 2014; 60: 78-87.
39. R.E. Reiss & A.M. Cherry. AJOG 2013; 209: 160-161.
40. M.T. Mennuti et al. AJOG 2013; 209: 415-419
41. Y. Wang et al. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 1207-1230.
42. M. Alberry et al. Free Fetal DNA in Maternal Plasma in Anembryonic Pregnancies: Confirmation that the Origin is the Trophoblast. Prenat Diagn 2007; 27: 415-418.
43. T.K. Lau et al. Secondary Findings from Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Common Fetal Aneuploidies by Whole Genome Sequencing as a Clinical Service. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 602-608.
44. M. Pan et al. Discordant Results between Fetal Karyotyping and Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing by Maternal Plasma Sequencing in a Case of Uniparental Disomy 21 due to Trisomic Rescue. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 598-601.
45. C.M. Osborne et al. Discordant Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing Results in a Patient Subsequently Diagnosed with Metastatic Disease. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 609-611.
46. P.A. Benn et al. Prenatal Detection of Down Syndrome using Massively parallel Sequencing (MPS): a Rapid Response Statement from a Committee on behalf of the Board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis. Prenat Diagn 2012; 32: 1-2.
47. S. Langlois & J.A. Brock. Genetics Committee. Current Status in Non-Invasive Prenatal Detection of Down Syndrome, Trisomy 18 and Trisomy 13 using Cell-Free DNA in Maternal Plasma. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2013; 35: 177-181.
48. J.M.E. Walsh & J.D. Goldberg. Fetal Aneuploidy Detection by Maternal Plasma DNA Sequencing: a Technology Assessment. Prenat Diagn, 2013; 33: 514- 520.
49. S. Chen et al. A Method for Non-Invasive Detection of Fetal Large Deletions/Duplications by Low Coverage massively Parallel Sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 584-590.
50. A. Srinivasan et al. Non-Invasive Detection of Fetal Sub-Chromosome Abnormalities via Deep Sequencing of Maternal Plasma. Am J Hum Genet 2013; 92: 167-176.
51. J.O. Kitzman et al. Noninvasive Whole-Genome Sequencing of a Human Foetus. Science Transl Med 2012; 4: 137ra76.
52. Y.M. Lo et al. Maternal Plasma DNA Sequencing Reveals the Genome-Wide Genetic and Mutational Profile of the Foetus. Science Transl Med 2010; 2: 61ra91.
53. C. Lewis, C. Silcock & L.S. Chitty. Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Down's Syndrome: Pregnant Women's Views and Likely Uptake. Public Health Genomics 2013; 16: 223-232.
54. A. van den Heuvel et al. Will the Introduction of Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnostic Testing erode Informed Choices? An Experimental Study of Health Care Professionals. Patient Educ Couns 2010; 78: 24-28.
55. R. van Schendel. Attitudes of pregnant women and male partners towards non-invasive prenatal testing and widening the scope of prenatal screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2014; DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.32.
56. M. Hill et al. Women's and Health Professionals' Preferences for Prenatal Tests for Down Syndrome: a Discrete Choice Experiment to Contrast Noninvasive Prenatal Diagnosis with Current Invasive Tests. Genet Med 2012; 14: 905-913.
57. M.A. Allyse et al. Best Ethical Practices for Clinicians and Laboratories in the Provision of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 656-661.
58. H. Skirton & C. Patch. Factors Affecting the Clinical Use of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing: a Mixed Methods Systematic Review. Prenat Diagn 2013; 33: 532-541.
59. A. de Jong et al. Microarrays as a Diagnostic Tool in Prenatal Screening Strategies: Ethical Reflection. Hum Genet 2014; 133: 163-172.
60. D.W. Bianchi. From prenatal genomic diagnosis to fetal personalized medicine: progress and challenges. Nat Med 2012; 18: 1041-1051.