The importance of genetic parenthood for infertile men and women

STUDY QUESTION: Do men and women beginning to attend a fertility clinic prefer genetic over non-genetic parenthood? SUMMARY ANSWER: Nearly, all infertile men and women prefer genetic parenthood. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Clinicians assume that all infertile couples prefer genetic parenthood over non-genetic parenthood and, therefore, consider treatments with donor gametes an option of last resort. Previous studies of the desire for parenthood identified 30 motivations for genetic parenthood, and 51 motivations for which having a genetically related child is not strictly necessary but might be deemed required. The exact strength of the preference of infertile men and women for genetic parenthood remains unclear, as does the importance of the various motivations. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A questionnaire was developed based on a literature review. It was assessed by professionals and pilot tested among patients. The coded paper-pencil questionnaire was disseminated among both partners of 201 heterosexual infertile couples after their first consultation at one of two Belgian fertility clinics between October 2015 and May 2016. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The survey addressed: (i) the preference for genetic parenthood for themselves and for their partner, (ii) the importance of 30 motivations for genetic parenthood and (iii) the importance of 51 other motivations for parenthood and whether these motivations require being the genetic parent of their child to be fulfilled. To simplify presentation of the results, all 81 motivations were grouped into reliable categories of motivations using psychometric analyses. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The survey was completed by 104 women and 91 men (response rate: 49%). Almost all respondents (98%) favored genetic over non-genetic parenthood for both their partner and themselves. One-third of the respondents stated they only wanted to parent their own genetically related child. Achieving genetic parenthood for their partner was considered significantly more important than achieving genetic parenthood for themselves. Within couples, men had a stronger preference for genetic parenthood (P = 0.004), but this was not significant after correction for educational level, which was significantly associated with the preference of both men and women. The 30 motivations for becoming a genetic parent clustered into 11 categories of which 'to experience a natural process' was deemed most important. The 51 motivations for becoming a parent for which having a genetically related child is not strictly necessary clustered into 14 categories of which 'to contribute to a child's well-being' and 'to experience the love of a child' were most important. Respondents deemed they would need to be the genetic parent of their child to fulfill nearly all their motivations for parenthood. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: We included couples that visited the fertility clinic for the first time, and the preference for genetic parenthood might change throughout a fertility treatment trajectory. Moreover, what prospective parents expect to be important for their future well-being might not really define parents' well-being. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The presumed preference of couples for genetic parenthood was confirmed. Resistance against using donor gametes is more likely among lower educated individuals. Researching whether non-genetic parents actually feel they cannot fulfill the 51 motivations for parenthood, could be a basis for developing patient informatio

Principles guiding embryo selection following genome-wide haplotyping of preimplantation embryos.

STUDY QUESTION How to select and prioritize embryos during PGD following genome-wide haplotyping? SUMMARY ANSWER In addition to genetic disease-specific information, the embryo selected for transfer is based on ranking criteria including the existence of mitotic and/or meiotic aneuploidies, but not carriership of mutations causing recessive disorders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Embryo selection for monogenic diseases has been mainly performed using targeted disease-specific assays. Recently, these targeted approaches are being complemented by generic genome-wide genetic analysis methods such as karyomapping or haplarithmisis, which are based on genomic haplotype reconstruction of cell(s) biopsied from embryos. This provides not only information about the inheritance of Mendelian disease alleles but also about numerical and structural chromosome anomalies and haplotypes genome-wide. Reflections on how to use this information in the diagnostic laboratory are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION We present the results of the first 101 PGD cycles (373 embryos) using haplarithmisis, performed in the Centre for Human Genetics, UZ Leuven. The questions raised were addressed by a multidisciplinary team of clinical geneticist, fertility specialists and ethicists. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Sixty-three couples enrolled in the genome-wide haplotyping-based PGD program. Families presented with either inherited genetic variants causing known disorders and/or chromosomal rearrangements that could lead to unbalanced translocations in the offspring. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Embryos were selected based on the absence or presence of the disease allele, a trisomy or other chromosomal abnormality leading to known developmental disorders. In addition, morphologically normal Day 5 embryos were prioritized for transfer based on the presence of other chromosomal imbalances and/or carrier information. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Some of the choices made and principles put forward are specific for cleavage-stage-based genetic testing. The proposed guidelines are subject to continuous update based on the accumulating knowledge from the implementation of genome-wide methods for PGD in many different centers world-wide as well as the results of ongoing scientific research. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our embryo selection principles have a profound impact on the organization of PGD operations and on the information that is transferred among the genetic unit, the fertility clinic and the patients. These principles are also important for the organization of pre- and post-counseling and influence the interpretation and reporting of preimplantation genotyping results. As novel genome-wide approaches for embryo selection are revolutionizing the field of reproductive genetics, national and international discussions to set general guidelines are warranted. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The European Union's Research and Innovation funding programs FP7-PEOPLE-2012-IAPP SARM: 324509 and Horizon 2020 WIDENLIFE: 692065 to J.R.V., T.V., E.D. and M.Z.E. J.R.V., T.V. and M.Z.E. have patents ZL910050-PCT/EP2011/060211-WO/2011/157846 (‘Methods for haplotyping single cells’) with royalties paid and ZL913096-PCT/EP2014/068315-WO/2015/028576 (‘Haplotyping and copy-number typing using polymorphic variant allelic frequencies’) with royalties paid, licensed to Cartagenia (Agilent technologies). J.R.V. also has a patent ZL91 2076-PCT/EP20 one 3/070858 (‘High throughout genotyping by sequencing’) with royalties paid

Systematic review of studies examining transtibial prosthetic socket pressures with changes in device alignment

Suitable lower-limb prosthetic sockets must provide an adequate distribution of the pressures created from standing and ambulation. A systematic search for articles reporting socket pressure changes in response to device alignment perturbation was carried out, identifying 11 studies. These were then evaluated using the American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists guidelines for a state-of-the-science review. Each study used a design where participants acted as their own controls. Results were available for 52 individuals and 5 forms of alignment perturbation. Four studies were rated as having moderate internal and external validity, the remainder were considered to have low validity. Significant limitations in study design, reporting quality and in representation of results and the suitability of calculations of statistical significance were evident across articles. Despite the high inhomogeneity of study designs, moderate evidence supports repeatable changes in pressure distribution for specific induced changes in component alignment. However, there also appears to be a significant individual component to alignment responses. Future studies should aim to include greater detail in the presentation of results to better support later meta-analyses

Treatment of forefoot problems in older people: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial comparing podiatric treatment to standardised shoe advice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Foot problems in general and forefoot problems in particular can lead to a decrease in mobility and a higher risk of falling. Forefoot problems increase with age and are more common in women than in men. Around 20% of people over 65 suffer from non-traumatic foot problems and 60% of these problems are localised in the forefoot. Little is known about the best way to treat forefoot problems in older people. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of two common modes of treatment in the Netherlands: shoe advice and podiatric treatment. This paper describes the design of this study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study is designed as a pragmatic randomised clinical trial (RCT) with 2 parallel intervention groups. People aged 50 years and over who have visited their general practitioner (GP) with non traumatic pain in the forefoot in the preceding year and those who will visit their GP during the recruitment period with a similar complaint will be recruited for this study. Participants must be able to walk unaided for 7 metres and be able to fill in questionnaires. Exclusion criteria are: rheumatoid arthritis, neuropathy of the foot or pain caused by skin problems (e.g. warts, eczema). Inclusion and exclusion criteria will be assessed by a screening questionnaire and baseline assessment. Those consenting to participation will be randomly assigned to either a group receiving a standardised shoe advice leaflet (n = 100) or a group receiving podiatric treatment (n = 100). Primary outcomes will be the severity of forefoot pain (0-10 on a numerical rating scale) and foot function (Foot Function 5-pts Index and Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index). Treatment adherence, social participation and quality of life will be the secondary outcomes. All outcomes will be obtained through self-administered questionnaires at the start of the study and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Data will be analysed according to the "intention-to-treat" principle using multilevel level analysis.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Strength of this study is the comparison between two common primary care treatments for forefoot problems, ensuring a high external validity of this trial.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): <a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2212">NTR2212</a></p

The importance of genetic parenthood for infertile men and women

Do men and women beginning to attend a fertility clinic prefer genetic over non-genetic parenthood?status: publishe