Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Polygenetic Conditions: A Legal, Ethical, and Scientific Challenge.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Seminars in reproductive medicine Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-22 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1782618
Perrine Ginod, Michael H Dahan
{"title":"Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Polygenetic Conditions: A Legal, Ethical, and Scientific Challenge.","authors":"Perrine Ginod, Michael H Dahan","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1782618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The recent commercialization of the Embryo Health Score (EHS), determined through preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic conditions, offers the potential to select embryos with lower disease risk, thus potentially enhancing offspring longevity and health. Lately, Orchid Health company increased testing from less than 20 diseases to more than 900+ conditions for birth defects. However, the \"geneticization\" of phenotype estimates to a health state erases the environmental part, including the in vitro fertilization potential risks, questioning its scientific usefulness. EHS is utilized in countries with minimal regulatory oversight and will likely expand, while it remains illegal in other countries due to ethical and legal dilemmas it raises about reproductive autonomy, discrimination, impacts on family dynamics, and genetic diversity. The shift toward commercialized polygenic embryo screening (PES) redefines healthcare relationships, turning prospective parents into consumers and altering the physician's role. Moreover, PES could increase social inequalities, stigmatize those not born following PES, and encourage \"desirable\" phenotypic or behavioral traits selection, leading to ethical drift. Addressing these issues is essential before further implementation and requires a collaborative approach involving political, governmental, and public health, alongside geneticists, ethicists, and fertility specialists, focusing on the societal implications and acceptability of testing for polygenic traits for embryo selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":21661,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in reproductive medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1782618","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The recent commercialization of the Embryo Health Score (EHS), determined through preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic conditions, offers the potential to select embryos with lower disease risk, thus potentially enhancing offspring longevity and health. Lately, Orchid Health company increased testing from less than 20 diseases to more than 900+ conditions for birth defects. However, the "geneticization" of phenotype estimates to a health state erases the environmental part, including the in vitro fertilization potential risks, questioning its scientific usefulness. EHS is utilized in countries with minimal regulatory oversight and will likely expand, while it remains illegal in other countries due to ethical and legal dilemmas it raises about reproductive autonomy, discrimination, impacts on family dynamics, and genetic diversity. The shift toward commercialized polygenic embryo screening (PES) redefines healthcare relationships, turning prospective parents into consumers and altering the physician's role. Moreover, PES could increase social inequalities, stigmatize those not born following PES, and encourage "desirable" phenotypic or behavioral traits selection, leading to ethical drift. Addressing these issues is essential before further implementation and requires a collaborative approach involving political, governmental, and public health, alongside geneticists, ethicists, and fertility specialists, focusing on the societal implications and acceptability of testing for polygenic traits for embryo selection.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针对多基因遗传病的植入前基因检测:法律、伦理和科学方面的挑战。
胚胎健康评分(EHS)是通过胚胎植入前多基因检测确定的,它最近实现了商业化,为选择疾病风险较低的胚胎提供了可能,从而有可能提高后代的寿命和健康水平。最近,Orchid Health 公司增加了对出生缺陷的检测,从不到 20 种疾病增加到 900 多种疾病。然而,将表型估计 "遗传 "到健康状态,抹去了环境部分,包括体外受精的潜在风险,使其科学实用性受到质疑。EHS 在监管极少的国家得到利用,并有可能扩大,而在其他国家,由于它在生殖自主权、歧视、对家庭动态的影响和遗传多样性等方面引起的伦理和法律困境,它仍然是非法的。向商业化多基因胚胎筛查(PES)的转变重新定义了医疗保健关系,将未来的父母变成了消费者,并改变了医生的角色。此外,多基因胚胎筛查可能会加剧社会不平等,玷污那些没有经过多基因胚胎筛查出生的人,并鼓励选择 "理想的 "表型或行为特征,从而导致伦理偏差。在进一步实施之前,解决这些问题至关重要,需要政治、政府、公共卫生、遗传学家、伦理学家和生育专家的通力合作,重点关注用于胚胎选择的多基因性状检测的社会影响和可接受性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in reproductive medicine
Seminars in reproductive medicine 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Seminars in Reproductive Medicine is a bi-monthly topic driven review journal that provides in-depth coverage of important advances in the understanding of normal and disordered human reproductive function, as well as new diagnostic and interventional techniques. Seminars in Reproductive Medicine offers an informed perspective on issues like male and female infertility, reproductive physiology, pharmacological hormonal manipulation, and state-of-the-art assisted reproductive technologies.
期刊最新文献
Current Ovulation and Luteal Phase Tracking Methods and Technologies for Fertility and Family Planning: A Review. Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Online Oocyte Cryopreservation Calculators. Role of Anti-Müllerian Hormone in the Central Regulation of Fertility Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Polygenetic Conditions: A Legal, Ethical, and Scientific Challenge. Utility of Serum Anti-Müllerian Hormone Measurement as Part of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Diagnosis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1