Davit Chokoshvili

Responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening

This document of the European Society of Human Genetics contains recommendations regarding responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening. Carrier screening is defined here as the detection of carrier status of recessive diseases in couples or persons who do not have an a priori increased risk of being a carrier based on their or their partners’ personal or family history. Expanded carrier screening offers carrier screening for multiple autosomal and X-linked recessive disorders, facilitated by new genetic testing technologies, and allows testing of individuals regardless of ancestry or geographic origin. Carrier screening aims to identify couples who have an increased risk of having an affected child in order to facilitate informed reproductive decision making. In previous decades, carrier screening was typically performed for one or few relatively common recessive disorders associated with significant morbidity, reduced life-expectancy and often because of a considerable higher carrier frequency in a specific population for certain diseases. New genetic testing technologies enable the expansion of screening to multiple conditions, genes or sequence variants. Expanded carrier screening panels that have been introduced to date have been advertised and offered to health care professionals and the public on a commercial basis. This document discusses the challenges that expanded carrier screening might pose in the context of the lessons learnt from decades of population-based carrier screening and in the context of existing screening criteria. It aims to contribute to the public and professional discussion and to arrive at better clinical and laboratory practice guidelines.

Attitudes of European Geneticists Regarding Expanded Carrier Screening

Objective To explore attitudes of clinical and molecular geneticists about the implementation of multi‐disease or expanded carrier screening (ECS) for monogenic recessive disorders. Design Qualitative; semistructured interviews. Setting In person or via Skype. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Participants European clinical and molecular geneticists with expertise in carrier screening (N = 16). Methods Inductive content analysis was used to identify common content categories in the data. Results Participants recognized important benefits of ECS, but they also identified major challenges, including limited benefit of ECS for most couples in the general population, lack of knowledge on carrier screening among nongenetic health care providers and the general public, potential negative implications of ECS for society, and limited economic resources. Participants favored an evidence‐based approach to the implementation of population‐wide ECS and were reluctant to actively offer ECS in the absence of demonstrable benefits. However, there was a consensus among the participants that ECS should be made available to couples who request the test. In addition, they believed ECS could be routinely offered to all people who use assisted reproduction. Conclusion Although a limited ECS offer is practical, it also raises concerns over equality in access to screening. A comprehensive risk–benefit analysis is needed to determine the desirability of systematic population‐wide ECS.

Designing expanded carrier screening panels: results of a qualitative study with European geneticists

AIM To explore the views of clinical and molecular geneticists on the inclusion of disorders and specific pathogenic mutations into expanded carrier screening (ECS) tests for reproductive purposes. MATERIALS & METHODS In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 16 European geneticists between April and September 2014. RESULTS All participants supported carrier screening for severe, childhood-onset autosomal recessive disorders with known natural history. Some participants were also in favor of screening for late-onset and X-linked disorders. Regarding selection of specific pathogenic mutations, our participants argued that ECS should include highly penetrant pathogenic mutations with known genotype-phenotype associations. CONCLUSION This study highlights main challenges surrounding the development of ECS panels and offers suggestions for future research in this rapidly advancing field.

Participation of Children in Medical Decision-Making: Challenges and Potential Solutions

Participation in healthcare decision-making is considered to be an important right of minors, and is highlighted in both international legislation and public policies. However, despite the legal recognition of children’s rights to participation, and also the benefits that children experience by their involvement, there is evidence that legislation is not always translated into healthcare practice. There are a number of factors that may impact on the ability of the child to be involved in decisions regarding their medical care. Some of these factors relate to the child, including their capacity to be actively involved in these decisions. Others relate to the family situation, sociocultural context, or the underlying beliefs and practices of the healthcare provider involved. In spite of these challenges to including children in decisions regarding their clinical care, we argue that it is an important factor in their treatment. The extent to which children should participate in this process should be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking all of the potential barriers into account.

Growing complexity of (expanded) carrier screening: Direct-to-consumer, physician-mediated, and clinic-based offers

Since the introduction of out-of-hospital health-related genetic tests more than a decade ago, the landscape of genetic testing services has grown in complexity. Although initially most genetic tests for health purposes were offered as direct-to-consumer services, that is, without the mediation of a medical professional, currently many commercial providers require that their tests be ordered by a licensed physician. At the same time, some commercially developed health-related genetic tests are gaining support from the professional medical community and are finding their way into clinical practice. Therefore, we differentiated between three types of genetic testing offers: direct-to-consumer, physician-mediated, and clinic-based genetic testing. Expanded carrier screening tests for recessive disorders are currently available through all the three models of genetic testing. Herein, we review the present landscape of expanded carrier screening offers by highlighting the distinct issues associated with each of the three types of genetic testing.

Pre- and post-testing counseling considerations for the provision of expanded carrier screening : exploration of European geneticists’ views

BackgroundCarrier screening is generally performed with the aim of identifying healthy couples at risk of having a child affected with a monogenic disorder to provide them with reproductive options. Expanded carrier screening (ECS), which provides the opportunity for multiple conditions to be screened in one test, offers a more cost-effective and comprehensive option than screening for single disorders. However, implementation of ECS at a population level would have implications for genetic counseling practice.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with sixteen European clinical and molecular geneticists with expertise in carrier screening to explore their views on the implementation of ECS in the clinical setting.ResultsUsing inductive content analysis, we identified content categories relevant to the pre- and post-test settings. Participants believed ECS would ideally be targeted at couples before pregnancy. There was some disagreement regarding the acceptability of performing ECS in individuals, with several participants actively opposing individual-based screening. In addition, participants discussed the importance of ensuring informed and voluntary participation in ECS, recommending measures to minimize external pressure on prospective parents to undergo testing. A need for adequate counseling to foster informed, autonomous reproductive decision-making and provide support for couples found to be at risk was emphasized.ConclusionsPractical challenges in optimizing pre-test education and post-test counseling should not be underestimated and they should be carefully addressed before implementing ECS in the clinical setting.

A systematic analysis of online marketing materials used by providers of expanded carrier screening

PurposeExpanded carrier screening (ECS) for a large number of recessive disorders is available to prospective parents through commercial providers. This study aimed to analyze the content of marketing materials on ECS providers’ websites.MethodsTo identify providers of ECS tests, we undertook a comprehensive online search, reviewed recent academic literature on commercial carrier screening, and consulted with colleagues familiar with the current ECS landscape. The identified websites were archived in April 2017, and inductive content analysis was performed on website text, brochures and educational materials, and video transcripts.ResultsWe identified 18 ECS providers, including 16 commercial genetic testing companies. Providers typically described ECS as an important family planning tool. The content differed in both the tone used to promote ECS and the accuracy and completeness of the test information provided. We found that most providers offered complimentary genetic counseling to their consumers, although this was often optional, limited to the posttest context, and, in some cases, appeared to be available only to test-positive individuals.ConclusionThe quality of ECS providers’ websites could be improved by offering more complete and accurate information about ECS and their tests. Providers should also ensure that all carrier couples receive posttest genetic counseling to inform their subsequent reproductive decision making.

Do Athletes Have a Right to Access Data in Their Athlete's Biological Passport?

The Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) refers to the collection of data related to an individual athlete. The ABP contains the Haematological Module and the Steroidal Module, which are used for the longitudinal monitoring of variables in blood and urine, respectively. Based on changes in these variables, a statistical model detects outliers which indicate doping use and guide further targeted testing of the athlete. Presently, athletes can access their data of the Haematological Module in the Anti-Doping Administration and Management System (ADAMS). However, granting athletes access to this data has been a matter of debate within the anti-doping community. This article investigates whether an athlete has a right to access the contents of their ABP profile. We approached this discussion by comparing the nature of ABP data with that of forensic and medical data and touched on important concerns with ABP data disclosure to athletes such as potentially allowing for the development of alternative doping techniques to circumvent detection; and making athletes vulnerable to pressure by the media to publicly release their data. Furthermore, given that ABP data may contain medically relevant information that can be used to diagnose disease, athletes may over-interpret its medical significance and wrongly see it as a free health check. We argue that safeguarding the integrity of the ABP system must be seen as the most essential element and thus a departure from immediate data disclosure is necessary. Two different strategies for delayed data disclosure are proposed which diminish the chances of ABP data being misused to refine doping techniques.

Current Ethical Issues Related to the Implementation of Whole-Exome and Whole-Genome Sequencing

We have briefly discussed herein four of the many aspects that raise concerns in the context of implementation of whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing (mainly) in the clinical realm. Namely, we addressed issues surrounding: (1) the duty to hunt for variants known to have a health impact, (2) such “hunting” or opportunistic screening in children, (3) challenges to the consent process, and (4) the commercialization of genetic testing direct to consumer.