Public perspectives on the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：William D. Winkelman ; Stacey A. Missmer…
• 关键词：PGD ; IVF ; Public perspectives ; Attitudes
• 刊名：Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：May 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：32
• 期：5
• 页码：665-675
• 全文大小：263 KB
• 参考文献：1.Baruch S, Kaufman D, Hudson KL. Genetic testing of embryos: practices and perspectives of US in vitro fertilization clinics. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(5):1053-058. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-7628552 .
  2.Basille C, Frydman R, El Aly A, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: state of the art. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;145(1):9-3. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-9411132 . Accessed 14 July 2014.
  3.Soini S, Ibarreta D, Anastasiadou V, et al. The interface between assisted reproductive technologies and genetics: technical, social, ethical and legal issues. Eur J Hum Genet. 2006;14(5):588-45. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-6636693 . Accessed 14 July 2014.
  4.Hens K, Dondorp W, Handyside AH, et al. Dynamics and ethics of comprehensive preimplantation genetic testing: a review of the challenges. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19(4):366-5. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-3466750 . Accessed 14 July 2014.
  5.Milner KK, Collins EE, Connors GR, Petty EM. Attitudes of young adults to prenatal screening and genetic correction for human attributes and psychiatric conditions. Am J Med Genet. 1998;76(2):111-. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-511972 .
  6.Hathaway F, Burns E, Ostrer H. Consumers-desire towards current and prospective reproductive genetic testing. J Genet Couns. 2009;18(2):137-46. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-9160030 .
  7.Pergament E. Preimplantation diagnosis: a patient perspective. Prenat Diagn. 1991;11(8):493-00. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-766924 .
  8.Miedzybrodzka Z, Templeton A, Dean J, Haites N, Mollison J, Smith N. Preimplantation diagnosis or chorionic villus biopsy? Women’s attitudes and preferences. Hum Reprod. 1993;8(12):2192-196. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-150923 .
  9.Krones T, Schluter E, Manolopoulos K, et al. Public, expert and patients-opinions on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in Germany. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;10(1):116-23. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-5705307 .
  10.Fortuny D, Balmana J, Grana B, et al. Opinion about reproductive decision making among individuals undergoing BRCA1/2 genetic testing in a multicentre Spanish cohort. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(4):1000-006. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-9112076 .
  11.Michie S, Drake H, Marteau T, Bobrow M. A comparison of public and professionals-attitudes towards genetic developments. Public Underst Sci. 1995;4(3):243-3.View Article
  12.Campbell E, Ross LF. Attitudes of healthcare professionals and parents regarding genetic testing for violent traits in childhood. J Med Ethics. 2004;30(6):580-. Available at: http://?www.?pubmedcentral.?nih.?gov/?articlerender.?fcgi??artid=-733973&?tool=?pmcentrez&?rendertype=?abstract . Accessed 18 July 2014.
  13.Whittaker AM. Reproduction opportunists in the new global sex trade: PGD and non-medical sex selection. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23(5):609-17. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-1975224 .
  14.Hudson K, Scott J. Public awareness and attitudes about genetic technology. Washington DC; 2002.
  15.U.S. Census Bureau. 2012 American Community Survey. Available at: http://?www.?census.?gov/-/span> . Accessed 6 May 2014.
  16.Hui PW, Lam YH, Chen M, et al. Attitude of at-risk subjects towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis of alpha- and beta-thalassaemias in Hong Kong. Prenat Diagn. 2002;22(6):508-1. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-2116317 .
  17.Chamayou S, Guglielmino a, Giambona a, et al. Attitude of potential users in Sicily towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis for beta-thalassaemia and aneuploidies. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(7):1936-4. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-740453 .
  18.Balma?a J, Díez O, Rubio IT, Cardoso F. BRCA in breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol. 2011;22 Suppl 6(Supplement 6):vi31-. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-1908500 . Accessed 7 August 2014.
  19.Meister U, Finck C, St?bel-Richter Y, Schmutzer G, Br?hler E. Knowledge and attitudes towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis in Germany. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(1):231-. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-5471929 . Accessed 16 July 2014.
  20.Lammens C, Bleiker E, Aaronson N, et al. Attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancer. Fam Cancer. 2009;8(4):457-4. Available at: http://?www.?pubmedcentral.?nih.?gov/?articlerender.?fcgi??artid=-771132&?tool=?pmcentrez&?rendertype=?abstract . Accessed 16 July 2014.
  21.Aro AR, Hakonen A, Hietala M, et al. Acceptance of genetic testing in a general population: age, education and gender differences. Patient Educ Couns. 1997;32(1-):41-. Available at: http://?www.?ncbi.?nlm.?nih.?gov/?pubmed/-
• 作者单位：William D. Winkelman (1) (2)
  Stacey A. Missmer (2) (3) (4)
  Dale Myers (2)
  Elizabeth S. Ginsburg (2)
  
  1. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, University of California San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave., M1483, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
  2. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
  3. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
  4. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
  
• 刊物类别：Medicine
• 刊物主题：Medicine & Public Health
  Gynecology
  Developmental Biology
  Human Genetics
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-7330

文摘

Purpose To study the perspectives of the United States population towards the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in various clinical scenarios. Methods Online cross-sectional population based questionnaire of a nationally representative sample according to age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, education and religion. Results A total of 1006 completed the questionnaire with an overall response rate of 94?%. A majority supported PGD for diseases fatal early in life or those causing lifelong disability (72.9 and 66.7?%, respectively); only 48.0?% supported PGD for diseases that manifest late in life. Respondents were more supportive of PGD for genetic diseases if they were aware of PGD prior to the survey (OR--.64; CI--.13-.39). However, a small proportion were in favor of genetically-based trait selection: 21.1?% supported PGD for sex selection, 14.6?% for physical traits and 18.9?% for personality traits. Compared to women, men were nearly two- to three-fold more supportive of PGD for sex selection (OR--.65; CI--.20-.78), physical traits (OR--.38; CI--.60-.48) and personality traits (OR--.31; CI--.64-.26). Compared to Caucasians, Asians (OR--.87; CI--.71-.78) and African Americans (OR--.61; CI--.04-.74) were more supportive of PGD for sex selection. Conclusions In a nationally representative sample, a majority supported PGD to identify early onset diseases. We noted significant variation in opinions by sex, race, and education. There was more support among those with prior knowledge of PGD suggesting that education about PGD may foster favorable opinions. This study identifies public knowledge and attitudes that may be used to shape future research hypotheses and clinical policies.