Literature DB >> 11973620

Predictive DNA-testing for Huntington's disease and reproductive decision making: a European collaborative study.

Gerry Evers-Kiebooms1, Kurt Nys, Peter Harper, Moniek Zoeteweij, Alexandra Dürr, Gioia Jacopini, Christos Yapijakis, Sheila Simpson.   

Abstract

This European collaborative study addresses the question whether a predictive test result for Huntington's disease (HD) has an effect on subsequent reproduction by comparing carriers and non-carriers of the Huntington mutation. A unique characteristic of this study is that this evaluation is done in persons at reproductive age who had a predictive test after the identification of the Huntington gene and who were counselled in one of the participating centres. Data were collected for 180 carriers and 271 non-carriers who received a predictive test result in the period 1993-1998 in Aberdeen, Athens, Cardiff, Leiden, Leuven, Paris or Rome. The mean age of the total study group was 31.5 years and for about half of the group the follow-up interval was 3 years or more, with a maximum of 7 years. The collaborative study clearly revealed an overall impact of the predictive test result on subsequent reproduction: 14% of the carriers had one or more subsequent pregnancies vs 28% of the non-carriers. In the total carrier group a prenatal test was carried out in about two thirds of the pregnancies and one child was born after preimplantation genetic diagnosis; artificial insemination by donor, egg cell donation or adoption were not reported. A more refined analysis was performed in the subgroup with a follow-up interval of at least 3 years and who reported 'family planning' as a motive to apply for predictive testing in the pretest period. The complexity of this motive is discussed. In this subgroup with a desire for children in the pretest period the effect of the predictive test result was more pronounced: 69% of the non-carriers had subsequent pregnancies while only 39% of the carriers who mentioned 'family planning' as one of the major reasons to apply for predictive testing had a subsequent pregnancy. Of the carriers with one or more subsequent pregnancies the percentage using prenatal diagnosis was slightly higher than the percentage not using it, although there were clear differences from one centre to another. The latter group's decisions may seem more intriguing but may be partially understood based on stage theories of health behaviour. Last, but not least, whatever option is chosen by a couple at increased risk of transmitting the Huntington mutation, it is of the utmost importance that professionals fully respect this decision and support the couple.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11973620     DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200781

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  16 in total

1.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for Huntington's disease: the experience of three European centres.

Authors:  Maartje C Van Rij; Marjan De Rademaeker; Céline Moutou; Jos C F M Dreesen; Martine De Rycke; Inge Liebaers; Joep P M Geraedts; Christine E M De Die-Smulders; Stéphane Viville
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  What were you thinking?: individuals at risk for Huntington Disease talk about having children.

Authors:  Kimberly A Quaid; Melinda M Swenson; Sharon L Sims; Joan M Harrison; Carol Moskowitz; Nonna Stepanov; Gregory W Suter; Beryl J Westphal
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-08-24       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  (Mis)alignments in counseling for Huntington's Disease predictive testing: clients' responses to reflective frames.

Authors:  Srikant Sarangi; Kristina Bennert; Lucy Howell; Angus Clarke; Peter Harper; Jonathon Gray
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  What do we tell the children? Contrasting the disclosure choices of two HD families regarding risk status and predictive genetic testing.

Authors:  Kathryn Holt
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in a patient with a family history of huntington disease: genetic counseling challenges.

Authors:  Andrea L Smith; James W Teener; Brian C Callaghan; Jack Harrington; Wendy R Uhlmann
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Impact of Huntington Disease Gene-Positive Status on Pre-Symptomatic Young Adults and Recommendations for Genetic Counselors.

Authors:  Ping Gong; Joanna H Fanos; Lauren Korty; Carly E Siskind; Andrea K Hanson-Kahn
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Reproductive Decision Making and Genetic Predisposition to Sudden Cardiac Death.

Authors:  Dorit Barlevy; David Wasserman; Marina Stolerman; Kathleen E Erskine; Siobhan M Dolan
Journal:  AJOB Prim Res       Date:  2012-06-19

Review 8.  Preimplantation genetics and other reproductive options in Huntington disease.

Authors:  Jan K Blancato; Erin M Wolfe; Preston C Sacks
Journal:  Handb Clin Neurol       Date:  2017

9.  Couples at risk for spinocerebellar ataxia type 2: the Cuban prenatal diagnosis experience.

Authors:  Tania Cruz-Mariño; Luis Velázquez-Pérez; Yanetza González-Zaldivar; Raúl Aguilera-Rodríguez; Miguel Velázquez-Santos; Yaimé Vázquez-Mojena; Annelié Estupiñán-Rodríguez; Rubén Reynaldo-Armiñán; Luis Enrique Almaguer-Mederos; José Miguel Laffita-Mesa; Victor Tamayo-Chiang; Milena Paneque
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-05-15

10.  Two decades of Huntington disease testing: patient's demographics and reproductive choices.

Authors:  Rebekah C Krukenberg; Daniel L Koller; David D Weaver; Jennifer N Dickerson; Kimberly A Quaid
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-05-25       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.