Top

Published in:

01-12-2014 | Original Research

Demographic and Experiential Correlates of Public Attitudes Towards Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening

Authors: Lauren C. Sayres, Megan Allyse, Taylor A. Goodspeed, Mildred K. Cho

Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Issue 6/2014

Abstract

This study seeks to inform clinical application of cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) screening as a novel method for prenatal trisomy detection by investigating public attitudes towards this technology and demographic and experiential characteristics related to these attitudes. Two versions of a 25-item survey assessing interest in cffDNA and existing first-trimester combined screening for either trisomy 13 and 18 or trisomy 21 were distributed among 3,164 members of the United States public. Logistic regression was performed to determine variables predictive of interest in screening options. Approximately 47 % of respondents expressed an interest in cffDNA screening for trisomy 13, 18, and 21, with a majority interested in cffDNA screening as a stand-alone technique. A significantly greater percent would consider termination of pregnancy following a diagnosis of trisomy 13 or 18 (52 %) over one of trisomy 21 (44 %). Willingness to consider abortion of an affected pregnancy was the strongest correlate to interest in both cffDNA and first-trimester combined screening, although markedly more respondents expressed an interest in some form of screening (69 % and 71 %, respectively) than would consider termination. Greater educational attainment, higher income, and insurance coverage predicted interest in cffDNA screening; stronger religious identification also corresponded to decreased interest. Prior experience with disability and genetic testing was associated with increased interest in cffDNA screening. Several of these factors, in addition to advanced age and Asian race, were, in turn, predictive of respondents’ increased willingness to consider post-diagnosis termination of pregnancy. In conclusion, divergent attitudes towards cffDNA screening—and prenatal options more generally – appear correlated with individual socioeconomic and religious backgrounds and experiences with disability and genetic testing. Clinical implementation and counseling for novel prenatal technologies should take these diverse stakeholder values into consideration.

Allyse, M, Sayres, LC, Goodspeed, TA, & Cho, MK. (2013). Attitudes towards non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy among United States adults of reproductive age. Journal of Perinatology. doi:10.1038/jp.2014.30.

Benn, P. A., & Chapman, A. R. (2009). Practical and ethical considerations of noninvasive prenatal diagnosis. JAMA, 301(20), 2154–2156. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.707.PubMedCrossRef

Benn, P. A., & Chapman, A. R. (2010). Ethical challenges in providing noninvasive prenatal diagnosis. Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 22(2), 128–134. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283372352.CrossRef

Benn, P., Borrell, A., Cuckle, H., Dugoff, L., Gross, S., Johnson, J., et al. (2011). 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. from http://www.ispdhome.org/public/news/2011/ISPD_RapidResponse_MPS_24Oct11.pdf

Bianchi, D. W., Sehnert, A. J., & Rava, R. P. (2012). Genome-wide fetal aneuploidy detection by maternal plasma DNA sequencing. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 119(6), 1270–1271. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e318258c419.CrossRef

Case, A. P., Ramadhani, T. A., Canfield, M. A., & Wicklund, C. A. (2007). Awareness and attitudes regarding prenatal testing among Texas women of childbearing age. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16(5), 655–661. doi:10.1007/s10897-007-9103-6.PubMedCrossRef

Chetty, S., Garabedian, M. J., & Norton, M. E. (2013). Uptake of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in women following positive aneuploidy screening. Prenatal Diagnosis, 33(6), 542–546. doi:10.1002/pd.4125.PubMedCrossRef

Choi, H., Van Riper, M., & Thoyre, S. (2012). Decision making following a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: an integrative review. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 57(2), 156–164. doi:10.1111/j.1542-2011.2011.00109.x.CrossRef

Committee opinion number 545: Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy. (2012). Obstetrics and gynecology, 120(6), 1532–1534. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000423819.85283.f4

Devers, P. L., Cronister, A., Ormond, K. E., Facio, F., Brasington, C. K., & Flodman, P. (2012). Noninvasive prenatal testing/noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: The position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. from http://www.nsgc.org/Portals/0/Advocacy/NSGC%20Noninvasive%20Prenatal%20Testing%204-17-2012.pdf.

Dormandy, E., Michie, S., Hooper, R., & Marteau, T. M. (2005). Low uptake of prenatal screening for Down syndrome in minority ethnic groups and socially deprived groups: a reflection of women’s attitudes or a failure to facilitate informed choices? International Journal of Epidemiology, 34(2), 346–352. doi:10.1093/ije/dyi021.PubMedCrossRef

Drugan, A., Greb, A., Johnson, M. P., Krivchenia, E. L., Uhlmann, W. R., Moghissi, K. S., et al. (1990). Determinants of parental decisions to abort for chromosome abnormalities. Prenatal Diagnosis, 10(8), 483–490.PubMedCrossRef

Garcia, E., Timmermans, D. R., & van Leeuwen, E. (2008a). The impact of ethical beliefs on decisions about prenatal screening tests: searching for justification. Social Science and Medicine, 66(3), 753–764. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.10.010.PubMedCrossRef

Garcia, E., Timmermans, D. R., & van Leeuwen, E. (2008b). Rethinking autonomy in the context of prenatal screening decision-making. Prenatal Diagnosis, 28(2), 115–120. doi:10.1002/pd.1920.PubMedCrossRef

Greely, H. T. (2011). Get ready for the flood of fetal gene screening. Nature, 469(7330), 289–291. doi:10.1038/469289a.PubMedCrossRef

Heger, M. (2012). Sequenom sees steady growth of MaterniT21 test despite competition, GenomeWeb. Retrieved from http://www.genomeweb.com/sequencing/sequenom-sees-steady-growth-maternit21-test-despite-competition.

Heger, M. (2013). Facing increased competition, sequenom sees continued growth of MaterniT21 test in Q4 2012, GenomeWeb. Retrieved from http://www.genomeweb.com/sequencing/facing-increased-competition-sequenom-sees-continued-growth-maternit21-test-q4-2.

Kaback, M. M. (2000). Population-based genetic screening for reproductive counseling: the Tay-Sachs disease model. European Journal of Pediatrics, 159(Suppl 3), S192–S195.PubMedCrossRef

Kelly, S. E., & Farrimond, H. R. (2012). Non-invasive prenatal genetic testing: a study of public attitudes. Public Health Genomics, 15(2), 73–81. doi:10.1159/000331254.PubMedCrossRef

Kent, A. (2008). Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis: public and patient perceptions. Seminars in Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 13(2), 109–112. doi:10.1016/j.siny.2007.12.009.CrossRef

Kitzman, J. O., Snyder, M. W., Ventura, M., Lewis, A. P., Qiu, R., Simmons, L. E., et al. (2012). Noninvasive whole-genome sequencing of a human fetus. Science Translational Medicine, 4(137), 137–176. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3004323.CrossRef

Kooij, L., Tymstra, T., & Berg, P. (2009). The attitude of women toward current and future possibilities of diagnostic testing in maternal blood using fetal DNA. Prenatal Diagnosis, 29(2), 164–168. doi:10.1002/pd.2205.PubMedCrossRef

Kramer, R. L., Jarve, R. K., Yaron, Y., Johnson, M. P., Lampinen, J., Kasperski, S. B., et al. (1998). Determinants of parental decisions after the prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 79(3), 172–174.PubMedCrossRef

Kuppermann, M., Gates, E., & Washington, A. E. (1996). Racial-ethnic differences in prenatal diagnostic test use and outcomes: preferences, socioeconomics, or patient knowledge? Obstetrics and Gynecology, 87(5 Pt 1), 675–682.PubMedCrossRef

Kuppermann, M., Nakagawa, S., Cohen, S. R., Dominguez-Pareto, I., Shaffer, B. L., & Holloway, S. D. (2011). Attitudes toward prenatal testing and pregnancy termination among a diverse population of parents of children with intellectual disabilities. Prenatal Diagnosis, 31(13), 1251–1258. doi:10.1002/pd.2880.PubMedCrossRef

Lewis, C., Hill, M., Skirton, H., & Chitty, L. S. (2012). Fetal sex determination using cell-free fetal DNA: service users’ experiences of and preferences for service delivery. Prenatal diagnosis, 1–7. doi: 10.1002/pd.3893

Lewis, C., Silcock, C., & Chitty, L. S. (2013). Non-invasive prenatal testing for Down’s syndrome: pregnant women’s views and likely uptake. Public Health Genomics, 16(5), 223–232. doi:10.1159/000353523.PubMedCrossRef

Lo, Y. M., & Chiu, R. W. (2012). Genomic analysis of fetal nucleic acids in maternal blood. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 13, 285–306. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-090711-163806.PubMedCrossRef

Malone, F. D., Canick, J. A., Ball, R. H., Nyberg, D. A., Comstock, C. H., & Bukowski, R. (2005). First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down’s syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 353(19), 2001–2011. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043693.PubMedCrossRef

Markens, S., Browner, C. H., & Press, N. (1999). ‘Because of the risks’: how US pregnant women account for refusing prenatal screening. Social Science & Medicine, 49(3), 359–369.CrossRef

Natoli, J. L., Ackerman, D. L., McDermott, S., & Edwards, J. G. (2012). Prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: a systematic review of termination rates (1995–2011). Prenatal Diagnosis, 32(2), 142–153. doi:10.1002/pd.2910.PubMedCrossRef

Olney, R. S., Moore, C. A., Khoury, M. J., Erickson, J. D., Edmonds, L. D., Botto, L. D., et al. (1995). Chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: recommendations for prenatal counseling. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Recommendations and Reports, 44(RR-9), 1–12.

Palomaki, G. E., Knight, G. J., McCarthy, J. E., Haddow, J. E., & Donhowe, J. M. (1997). Maternal serum screening for Down syndrome in the United States: a 1995 survey. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 176(5), 1046–1051.PubMedCrossRef

Parens, E., & Asch, A. (2000). Prenatal testing and disability rights. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Peters, D., Chu, T., Yatsenko, S. A., Hendrix, N., Hogge, W. A., Surti, U., et al. (2011). Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of a fetal microdeletion syndrome. The New England Journal of Medicine, 365(19), 1847–1848. doi:10.1056/NEJMc1106975.PubMedCrossRef

Poon, C., Ng, W., Kou, K., Lau, B., Ma, T., & Leung, K. (2013). Impact of introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing in private on the uptake of prenatal testing for Down syndrome in a public hospital. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 42(s1), 130.

Press, N., & Browner, C. H. (1997). Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis. Social Science & Medicine, 45(7), 979–989.CrossRef

Rapp, R. (1998). Refusing prenatal diagnosis: the meanings of bioscience in a multicultural world. Science, Technology & Human Values, 23(1), 45–70.CrossRef

Rasmussen, S. A., Wong, L. Y., Yang, Q., May, K. M., & Friedman, J. M. (2003). Population-based analyses of mortality in trisomy 13 and trisomy 18. Pediatrics, 111(4 Pt 1), 777–784.PubMedCrossRef

Sayres, L. C., Allyse, M., Norton, M. E., & Cho, M. K. (2011). Cell-free fetal DNA testing: a pilot study of obstetric healthcare provider attitudes toward clinical implementation. Prenatal Diagnosis. doi:10.1002/pd.2835.PubMedCentralPubMed

Suter, S. M. (2002). The routinization of prenatal testing. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 28(2–3), 233–270.PubMed

Tischler, R., Hudgins, L., Blumenfeld, Y. J., Greely, H. T., & Ormond, K. E. (2011). Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: pregnant women’s interest and expected uptake. Prenatal Diagnosis, 31(13), 1292–1299. doi:10.1002/pd.2888.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Yi, H., Hallowell, N., Griffiths, S., & Yeung Leung, T. (2013). Motivations for undertaking DNA sequencing-based non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy: a qualitative study with early adopter patients in Hong Kong. PLoS One, 8(11), e81794. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081794.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Yotsumoto, J., Sekizawa, A., Koide, K., Purwosunu, Y., Ichizuka, K., Matsuoka, R., et al. (2012). Attitudes toward non-invasive prenatal diagnosis among pregnant women and health professionals in Japan. Prenatal diagnosis, 1–6. doi: 10.1002/pd.3886.

Zamerowski, S. T., Lumley, M. A., Arreola, R. A., Dukes, K., & Sullivan, L. (2001). Favorable attitudes toward testing for chromosomal abnormalities via analysis of fetal cells in maternal blood. Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 3(4), 301–309.CrossRef

Title: Demographic and Experiential Correlates of Public Attitudes Towards Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening
Authors: Lauren C. Sayres
Megan Allyse
Taylor A. Goodspeed
Mildred K. Cho
Publication date: 01-12-2014
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Issue 6/2014
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9704-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Demographic and Experiential Correlates of Public Attitudes Towards Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2014

Existing Challenges Associated with Offering Prenatal Genetic Diagnosis in an Arab Society in the Sultanate of Oman

Barriers Impacting the Utilization of Supervision Techniques in Genetic Counseling

Clinical Utility of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis of DNA from Buccal Cells: Detection of Mosaicism in Three Patients

Genetic Counseling for Fanconi Anemia: Crosslinking Disciplines

Provision of Cardiovascular Genetic Counseling Services: Current Practice and Future Directions

Cost Sharing and Hereditary Cancer Risk: Predictors of Willingness-to-Pay for Genetic Testing