Literature DB >> 25134982

Pregnant couples at increased risk for common aneuploidies choose maximal information from invasive genetic testing.

S L van der Steen1, K E M Diderich1, S R Riedijk1, J Verhagen-Visser1, L C P Govaerts1, M Joosten1, M F C M Knapen2,3, D Van Opstal1, M I Srebniak1, A Tibben4, R J H Galjaard1.   

Abstract

Genomic array detects more pathogenic chromosome aberrations than conventional karyotyping (CK), including genetic variants associated with a susceptibility for neurodevelopmental disorders; susceptibility loci (SL). Consensus regarding the scope of invasive prenatal diagnosis (PND) pregnant couples should be offered is lacking. This study examined pregnant couples' preferences, doubts and satisfaction regarding the scope of invasive PND. Eighty-two couples choosing prenatal screening (PNS) and 59 couples choosing invasive PND were offered a choice between 5 (comparable to CK) and 0.5 Mb resolution array analysis outcomes, the latter with or without reporting SL. A pre-test self-report questionnaire and post-test telephone interview assessed their choices in-depth. Actual (PND) and hypothetical (PNS) choices differed significantly (p < 0.001). Ninety-five percent of the couples in the PND group chose 0.5 Mb array, vs 69% in the PNS group. Seven percent of the PND group wished not to be informed of SL. Ninety percent was satisfied with their choice and wished to decide about the scope themselves. Pregnant couples wish to make their own choices regarding the scope of invasive PND. It therefore seems justified to offer them a choice in both the resolution of array and disclosure of SL.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  individualised choice; invasive prenatal genetic testing; microarray; prenatal diagnosis; susceptibility loci; whole genome array

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25134982     DOI: 10.1111/cge.12479

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  16 in total

1.  Comparing genetic counselor's and patient's perceptions of needs in prenatal chromosomal microarray testing.

Authors:  Sarah A Walser; Katherine S Kellom; Steven C Palmer; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Is there a Role for Genetic Counselors in Prenatal Paternity Testing? - an Assessment Based on Audit of 13 years of Clinical Experience in South Australia.

Authors:  Kate E Riley; Hayley Salvemini; Eric Haan; Lara Fitzgerald; Kirsty Stallard; Sarah Borrie; Electra Pontikinas; Anne Baxendale
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  TRIDENT-2: National Implementation of Genome-wide Non-invasive Prenatal Testing as a First-Tier Screening Test in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Karuna R M van der Meij; Erik A Sistermans; Merryn V E Macville; Servi J C Stevens; Caroline J Bax; Mireille N Bekker; Caterina M Bilardo; Elles M J Boon; Marjan Boter; Karin E M Diderich; Christine E M de Die-Smulders; Leonie K Duin; Brigitte H W Faas; Ilse Feenstra; Monique C Haak; Mariëtte J V Hoffer; Nicolette S den Hollander; Iris H I M Hollink; Fernanda S Jehee; Maarten F C M Knapen; Angelique J A Kooper; Irene M van Langen; Klaske D Lichtenbelt; Ingeborg H Linskens; Merel C van Maarle; Dick Oepkes; Mijntje J Pieters; G Heleen Schuring-Blom; Esther Sikkel; Birgit Sikkema-Raddatz; Dominique F C M Smeets; Malgorzata I Srebniak; Ron F Suijkerbuijk; Gita M Tan-Sindhunata; A Jeanine E M van der Ven; Shama L van Zelderen-Bhola; Lidewij Henneman; Robert-Jan H Galjaard; Diane Van Opstal; Marjan M Weiss
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Pregnant Genetic Counselors in an Era of Advanced Genomic Tests: What Do the Experts Test Prenatally?

Authors:  Shiri Shkedi-Rafid; Yael Hashiloni-Dolev
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-03-03       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Postpartum women's attitudes to disclosure of adult-onset conditions in pregnancy.

Authors:  Vitalia Libman; Michal Macarov; Yechiel Friedlander; Sidra Goldman-Mellor; Salomon Israel; Drorith Hochner-Celnikier; Yishai Sompolinsky; Uri Pinchas Dior; Michael Osovsky; Lina Basel-Salmon; Arnon Wiznitzer; Yehuda Neumark; Vardiella Meiner; Ayala Frumkin; Shiri Shkedi-Rafid; Hagit Hochner
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 3.242

6.  "Something Extra on Chromosome 5": Parents' Understanding of Positive Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) Results.

Authors:  Sarah A Walser; Allison Werner-Lin; Amita Russell; Ronald J Wapner; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Offering pregnant women different levels of genetic information from prenatal chromosome microarray: a prospective study.

Authors:  Jane L Halliday; Cecile Muller; Taryn Charles; Fiona Norris; Joanne Kennedy; Sharon Lewis; Bettina Meiser; Susan Donath; Zornitza Stark; George McGillivray; Melody Menezes; Sian K Smith; Della Forster; Susan Walker; Mark Pertile; David J Amor
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Is prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis with genomic array indicated in pregnancies at risk for a molecular or metabolic disorder?

Authors:  Malgorzata I Srebniak; Lutgarde C P Govaerts; Karin E M Diderich; Marieke Joosten; Femke A T de Vries; Robert-Jan H Galjaard; Diane Van Opstal
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Chromosomal microarray analysis for pregnancies with abnormal maternal serum screening who undergo invasive prenatal testing.

Authors:  Xiaoqing Wu; Ying Li; Na Lin; Xiaorui Xie; Linjuan Su; Meiying Cai; Yuan Lin; Linshuo Wang; Meiying Wang; Liangpu Xu; Hailong Huang
Journal:  J Cell Mol Med       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 5.310

10.  The Psychological Impact of Prenatal Diagnosis and Disclosure of Susceptibility Loci: First Impressions of Parents' Experiences.

Authors:  S L van der Steen; S R Riedijk; J Verhagen-Visser; L C P Govaerts; M I Srebniak; D Van Opstal; M Joosten; M F C M Knapen; A Tibben; K E M Diderich; R J H Galjaard
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.