Screening embryos for polygenic conditions and traits: ethical considerations for an emerging technology

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    Treff NR, Eccles J, Lello L, et al. Utility and first clinical application of screening embryos for polygenic disease risk reduction. Front Endocrinol. 2019;10:845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Treff NR, Eccles J, Marin D, et al. Preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disease relative risk reduction: evaluation of genomic index performance in 11,883 adult sibling pairs. Genes. 2020;11:648.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Sueoka K. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: an update on current technologies and ethical considerations. Reprod Med Biol. 2016;15:69–75.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Klitzman R. Challenges, dilemmas and factors involved in PGD decision-making: providers’ and patients’ views, experiences and decisions. J Genet Couns. 2018;27:909–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Genoff Garzon MC, Rubin LR, Lobel M, Stelling J, Pastore LM. Review of patient decision-making factors and attitudes regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Clin Genet. 2018;94:22–42.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Ethics Commitee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Use of preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic defects (PGT-M) for adult-onset conditions: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:989–992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    van Rheenen W, Peyrot WJ, Schork AJ, Lee SH, Wray NR. Genetic correlations of polygenic disease traits: from theory to practice. Nat Rev Genet. 2019;20:567–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Kumar A, Ryan A, Kitzman JO, et al. Whole genome prediction for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Genome Med. 2015;7:35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Khera AV, Chaffin M, Aragam KG, et al. Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations. Nat Genet. 2018;50:1219–1224.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Mostafavi H, Harpak A, Agarwal I, Conley D, Pritchard JK, Przeworski M. Variable prediction accuracy of polygenic scores within an ancestry group. eLife. 2020;9.

  11. 11.

    Duncan L, Shen H, Gelaye B, et al. Analysis of polygenic risk score usage and performance in diverse human populations. Nat Commun. 2019;10:3328.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Karavani E, Zuk O, Zeevi D, et al. Screening human embryos for polygenic traits has limited utility. Cell. 2019;179:1424–1435.e8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Schwartz B. The paradox of choice: why more is less. Revised edition. New York: Harper Collins; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Hadar L, Sood S. When knowledge is demotivating: subjective knowledge and choice overload. Psychol Sci. 2014;25:1739–1747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Miller PS, Levine RL. Avoiding genetic genocide: understanding good intentions and eugenics in the complex dialogue between the medical and disability communities. Genet Med. 2013;15:95–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    McCabe LL, McCabe ER. Down syndrome: coercion and eugenics. Genet Med. 2011;13:708–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Lombardo PA. The power of heredity and the relevance of eugenic history. Genet Med. 2018;20:1305–1311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Savulescu J. In defence of procreative beneficence. J Med Ethics. 2007;33:284–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz PhD, JD.

Ethics declarations


The views expressed are those of the authors alone, and do not necessarily reflect views of Baylor College of Medicine, Hebrew University, or Zucker School of Medicine at Hosfstra/Northwell. The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lázaro-Muñoz, G., Pereira, S., Carmi, S. et al. Screening embryos for polygenic conditions and traits: ethical considerations for an emerging technology. Genet Med (2020).

Download citation


Quick links