To evaluate associations between prenatal trio exome sequencing (trio-ES) and psychological outcomes among women with an anomalous pregnancy.
Trio-ES study enrolling patients with major fetal anomaly and normal microarray. Women completed self-reported measures and free response interviews at two timepoints: pre- (1) and post- (2) sequencing. Pre-sequencing responses were compared with post-sequencing responses; post-sequencing responses were stratified by women who received trio-ES results that may explain fetal findings, secondary findings (medically actionable or couples with heterozygous variants for the same recessive disorder), or negative results.
One hundred fifteen trios were enrolled. Of those, 41/115 (35.7%) received results from trio-ES, including 36 (31.3%) who received results that may explain the fetal phenotype. These women had greater post-sequencing distress compared with women who received negative results, including generalized distress (p = 0.03) and test-related distress (p = 0.2); they also had worse psychological adaptation to results (p = 0.001). Genomic knowledge did not change from pre- to post-sequencing (p = 0.51).
Women show more distress after receiving trio-ES results compared with those who do not, suggesting that women receiving results may need additional support or counseling to inform current and future reproductive decisions.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $41.58 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
Osterman, M., Kochanek, K., MacDorman, M., Strobino, D. & Guye, B. Annual summary of vital statistics: 2012-2013. Pediatrics 135, 1115–1125 (2015).
Wou, K. et al. Parental perceptions of prenatal whole exome sequencing (PPPWES) study. Prenat. Diagn. 38, 801–811 (2018).
Vora, N. L. & Hui, L. Next-generation sequencing and prenatal’omics: advanced diagnostics and new insights into human development. Genet. Med 20, 791–799 (2018).
Lord, J. et al. Prenatal exome sequencing analysis in fetal structural anomalies detected by ultrasonography (PAGE): a cohort study. Lancet 393, 747–757 (2019).
Petrovski, S. et al. Whole-exome sequencing in the evaluation of fetal structural anomalies: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 393, 758–767 (2019).
Harris, S., Gilmore, K., Hardisty, E., Lyerly, A. D. & Vora, N. L. Ethical and counseling challenges in prenatal exome sequencing. Prenat. Diagn 38, 897–903 (2018).
Kaphingst, K. A. et al. Preferences for return of incidental findings from genome sequencing among women diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age. Clin. Genet 89, 378–384 (2015).
Biesecker, B. B. et al. How do research participants perceive “uncertainty” in genome sequencing? Genet. Med 16, 977–980 (2014).
Case, A. P., Ramadhani, T. A. & Canfield, M. A. W. C. Awareness and attitudes regarding prenatal testing among Texas women of childbearing age. J. Genet. Couns. 16, 655–661 (2007).
Kuppermann, M. & Gates, E. W. A. Racial-ethnic differences in prenatal diagnostic test use and outcomes: preferences, socioeconomics, or patient knowledge? Obstet. Gynecol. 87, 675–682 (1996).
Norton, M., Nakagawa, S. & Kuppermann, M. Women’s attitudes regarding prenatal testing for a range of congenital disorders of varying severity. J. Clin. Med. 3, 144–152 (2014).
Willis, A. M. et al. How do prospective parents prefer to receive information about prenatal screening and diagnostic testing? Prenat. Diagn. 35, 100–102 (2015).
Vora, N. L. et al. An approach to integrating exome sequencing for fetal structural anomalies into clinical practice. Genet. Med. 22, 954–961 (2020).
Langer, M. M. et al. Development and validation of a genomic knowledge scale to advance informed decision-making research in genomic sequencing. MDM Policy Pract. 2, 2381468317692582 (2017).
Snaith, R. P. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 1, 6–9 (2003).
Cella, D. et al. A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. Heal. Psychol. 21, 564–572 (2002).
Brehaut, J. C. et al. Validation of a decision regret scale. Med. Decis. Making 23, 281–292 (2003).
Read, C. Y. & Perry, D. J. D. M. Design and psychometric evaluation of the Psychological Adaptation to Genetic Information Scale. J. Nurs. Scholarsh 37, 203–208 (2005).
Lippman, A. Prenatal genetic testing and geneticization: mother matters for all. Fetal Diagn. Ther. 8, 175–188 (1993).
Sandelowski, M. & Barroso, J. The travesty of choosing after positive prenatal diagnosis. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Neonatal Nurs. 34, 307–318 (2005).
Bernhardt, B. A. et al. Women’s experiences receiving abnormal prenatal chromosomal microarray testing results. Genet. Med. 15, 139–145 (2013).
Kenen, R. H. The at-risk health status and technology: a diagnostic invitation and the “gift” of knowing. Soc. Sci. Med. 42, 1545–1553 (1996).
Marteau, T. M. & Dormandy, E. Facilitating informed choice in prenatal testing: how well are we doing? Am. J. Med. Genet. 106, 185–190 (2001).
Clift, K. E. et al. Patients’ views on incidental findings from clinical exome sequencing. Appl. Transl. Genom. 4, 38–43 (2015).
Halverson, C. M. E., Clift, K. E. & McCormick, J. B. Was it worth it? Patients’ perspectives on the perceived value of genomic-based individualized medicine. J. Community Genet. 7, 145–152 (2016).
Bowen, D. J. et al. Theoretical foundations for interventions designed to promote informed decision making for cancer screening. Ann. Behav. Med. 32, 202–210 (2006).
Rini, C. et al. Genomic knowledge in the context of diagnostic exome sequencing: changes over time, persistent subgroup differenes, and associations with psychological sequencing outcomes. Genet. Med. 22, 60–68 (2020).
Narayanan, S., Blumberg, B., Clayman, M. L., Pan, V. & Wicklund, C. Exploring the issues surrounding clinical exome sequencing in the prenatal setting. J. Genet. Couns. 27, 1228–1237 (2018).
Best, S. et al. Promises, pitfalls and practicalities of prenatal whole exome sequencing. Prenat. Diagn. 38, 10–19 (2018).
Wolf, S. M. & Evans, B. J. Defending the return of results and data. Science 362, 1255–1256 (2018).
Drury, S. et al. Exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with sonographic abnormalities. Prenat. Diagn. 35, 1010–1017 (2015).
Alamillo, C. L. et al. Exome sequencing positively identified relevant alterations in more than half of cases with an indication of prenatal ultrasound anomalies. Prenat. Diagn. 35, 1073–1078 (2015).
We acknowledge the support of University of North Carolina Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine and Division of Reproductive Genetics and institutions that have referred patients to our center for participation in the study.
Conceptualization: A.N.T, K.L.G, E.H, A.D.L, C.R., N.L.V; Data curation: A.N.T, K.L.G, E.H, A.D.L, C.R, N.L.V; Formal Analysis: A.N.T, K.L.G, A.D.L, C.R, N.L.V; Funding Acquisition: K.L.G, C.R., N.L.V; Investigation: A.N.T, K.L.G, E.H, A.D.L, C.R., N.L.V; Methodology: A.N.T, K.L.G, E.H, A.D.L, C.R., N.L.V; Project administration: K.L.G, E.H, N.L.V; Resources: K.L.G, N.L.V; Software: A.N.T Supervision: N.L.V Validation: A.D.L, C.R; Visualization: A.N.T Writing- original draft: A.N.T, K.L.G, E.H, N.L.V; Writing – review & editing: A.N.T, K.L.G, E.H, A.D.L, C.R., N.L.V.
The authors declare no competing interests.
The work was funded by Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) grant award number K23HD088742 (principal investigator N.L.V.). The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill institutional review board (13–4084) provided approval for this study. Informed consent was obtained for each enrolled study participant.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Talati, A.N., Gilmore, K.L., Hardisty, E.E. et al. Impact of prenatal exome sequencing for fetal genetic diagnosis on maternal psychological outcomes and decisional conflict in a prospective cohort. Genet Med (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-01025-5