比利时胚胎植入前基因检测患者对多基因胚胎筛查伦理的看法

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Maria Siermann , Joris R. Vermeesch , Taneli Raivio , Arne Vanhie , Karen Peeraer , Olga Tšuiko , Pascal Borry
{"title":"比利时胚胎植入前基因检测患者对多基因胚胎筛查伦理的看法","authors":"Maria Siermann ,&nbsp;Joris R. Vermeesch ,&nbsp;Taneli Raivio ,&nbsp;Arne Vanhie ,&nbsp;Karen Peeraer ,&nbsp;Olga Tšuiko ,&nbsp;Pascal Borry","doi":"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Research question</h3><p>What are the perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) patients in Belgium on the ethics of PGT for polygenic risk scoring (PGT-P)?</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>In-depth interviews (18 in total, 10 couples, 8 women, <em>n</em> = 28) were performed with patients who had undergone treatment with PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) or chromosomal structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) between 2017 and 2019 in Belgium. Participants were asked about their own experiences with PGT-M/SR and about their viewpoints on PGT-P, including their own interest and their ideas on its desirability, scope and consequences. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the interviews.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Participants stated that their experiences with PGT-M/SR had been physically, psychologically and practically difficult. Most participants stated that, partly because of these difficulties, they did not see the added value of knowing the risk scores of embryos via PGT-P. Many participants worried that PGT-P could lead to additional anxieties, responsibilities and complex choices in reproduction and parenthood. They argued that not everything should be controlled and felt that PGT-P, especially non-medical and broad screening, was going too far. With regards to the clinical implementation of PGT-P, participants in general preferred PGT-P to be limited to people with a serious polygenic family history and wanted embryo selection decisions to be made by healthcare professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study shows that individuals with experience of PGT-M/SR saw PGT-P as different from PGT-M/SR. They had various ethical concerns with regards to PGT-P, especially regarding broadly offering PGT-P. These stakeholder viewpoints need to be considered regarding potential PGT-P implementation and guidelines.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21134,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive biomedicine online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing patients in Belgium on the ethics of polygenic embryo screening\",\"authors\":\"Maria Siermann ,&nbsp;Joris R. Vermeesch ,&nbsp;Taneli Raivio ,&nbsp;Arne Vanhie ,&nbsp;Karen Peeraer ,&nbsp;Olga Tšuiko ,&nbsp;Pascal Borry\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104294\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Research question</h3><p>What are the perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) patients in Belgium on the ethics of PGT for polygenic risk scoring (PGT-P)?</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>In-depth interviews (18 in total, 10 couples, 8 women, <em>n</em> = 28) were performed with patients who had undergone treatment with PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) or chromosomal structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) between 2017 and 2019 in Belgium. Participants were asked about their own experiences with PGT-M/SR and about their viewpoints on PGT-P, including their own interest and their ideas on its desirability, scope and consequences. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the interviews.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Participants stated that their experiences with PGT-M/SR had been physically, psychologically and practically difficult. Most participants stated that, partly because of these difficulties, they did not see the added value of knowing the risk scores of embryos via PGT-P. Many participants worried that PGT-P could lead to additional anxieties, responsibilities and complex choices in reproduction and parenthood. They argued that not everything should be controlled and felt that PGT-P, especially non-medical and broad screening, was going too far. With regards to the clinical implementation of PGT-P, participants in general preferred PGT-P to be limited to people with a serious polygenic family history and wanted embryo selection decisions to be made by healthcare professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study shows that individuals with experience of PGT-M/SR saw PGT-P as different from PGT-M/SR. They had various ethical concerns with regards to PGT-P, especially regarding broadly offering PGT-P. These stakeholder viewpoints need to be considered regarding potential PGT-P implementation and guidelines.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21134,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reproductive biomedicine online\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reproductive biomedicine online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324004838\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive biomedicine online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324004838","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

比利时的胚胎植入前基因检测(PGT)患者如何看待多基因风险评分(PGT-P)的伦理问题?我们对2017年至2019年期间在比利时接受过单基因/单基因缺陷(PGT-M)或染色体结构重排(PGT-SR)PGT治疗的患者进行了深入访谈(共18人,10对夫妇,8名女性,=28人)。研究人员向参与者询问了他们在 PGT-M/SR 方面的亲身经历以及他们对 PGT-P 的观点,包括他们自身的兴趣以及对其可取性、范围和后果的看法。对访谈内容进行了归纳分析。参加者表示,他们参加 PGT-M/SR 的经历在生理上、心理上和实践上都很困难。大多数参与者表示,部分由于这些困难,他们不认为通过 PGT-P 了解胚胎的风险评分有什么附加价值。许多与会者担心,PGT-P 可能会在生育和为人父母方面带来更多的焦虑、责任和复杂的选择。他们认为,并非所有事情都应受到控制,并认为 PGT-P,尤其是非医学和广泛的筛查,走得太远了。关于 PGT-P 的临床实施,参与者普遍希望 PGT-P 仅限于有严重多基因家族史的人,并希望胚胎选择决定由医疗保健专业人员做出。本研究表明,有过 PGT-M/SR 经验的人认为 PGT-P 与 PGT-M/SR 不同。他们对 PGT-P 有各种伦理方面的担忧,尤其是对广泛提供 PGT-P 的担忧。在潜在的 PGT-P 实施和指导方针方面,需要考虑这些利益相关者的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing patients in Belgium on the ethics of polygenic embryo screening

Research question

What are the perspectives of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) patients in Belgium on the ethics of PGT for polygenic risk scoring (PGT-P)?

Design

In-depth interviews (18 in total, 10 couples, 8 women, n = 28) were performed with patients who had undergone treatment with PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) or chromosomal structural rearrangements (PGT-SR) between 2017 and 2019 in Belgium. Participants were asked about their own experiences with PGT-M/SR and about their viewpoints on PGT-P, including their own interest and their ideas on its desirability, scope and consequences. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the interviews.

Results

Participants stated that their experiences with PGT-M/SR had been physically, psychologically and practically difficult. Most participants stated that, partly because of these difficulties, they did not see the added value of knowing the risk scores of embryos via PGT-P. Many participants worried that PGT-P could lead to additional anxieties, responsibilities and complex choices in reproduction and parenthood. They argued that not everything should be controlled and felt that PGT-P, especially non-medical and broad screening, was going too far. With regards to the clinical implementation of PGT-P, participants in general preferred PGT-P to be limited to people with a serious polygenic family history and wanted embryo selection decisions to be made by healthcare professionals.

Conclusions

This study shows that individuals with experience of PGT-M/SR saw PGT-P as different from PGT-M/SR. They had various ethical concerns with regards to PGT-P, especially regarding broadly offering PGT-P. These stakeholder viewpoints need to be considered regarding potential PGT-P implementation and guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Reproductive biomedicine online
Reproductive biomedicine online 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.50%
发文量
391
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Reproductive BioMedicine Online covers the formation, growth and differentiation of the human embryo. It is intended to bring to public attention new research on biological and clinical research on human reproduction and the human embryo including relevant studies on animals. It is published by a group of scientists and clinicians working in these fields of study. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, academics and patients. Context: The period of human embryonic growth covered is between the formation of the primordial germ cells in the fetus until mid-pregnancy. High quality research on lower animals is included if it helps to clarify the human situation. Studies progressing to birth and later are published if they have a direct bearing on events in the earlier stages of pregnancy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信