770
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Current issues in medically assisted reproduction and genetics in Europe: research, clinical practice, ethics, legal issues and policy : European Society of Human Genetics and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

      other

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In March 2005, a group of experts from the European Society of Human Genetics and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology met to discuss the interface between genetics and assisted reproductive technology (ART), and published an extended background paper, recommendations and two Editorials. Seven years later, in March 2012, a follow-up interdisciplinary workshop was held, involving representatives of both professional societies, including experts from the European Union Eurogentest2 Coordination Action Project. The main goal of this meeting was to discuss developments at the interface between clinical genetics and ARTs. As more genetic causes of reproductive failure are now recognised and an increasing number of patients undergo testing of their genome before conception, either in regular health care or in the context of direct-to-consumer testing, the need for genetic counselling and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) may increase. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) thus far does not have evidence from randomised clinical trials to substantiate that the technique is both effective and efficient. Whole-genome sequencing may create greater challenges both in the technological and interpretational domains, and requires further reflection about the ethics of genetic testing in ART and PGD/PGS. Diagnostic laboratories should be reporting their results according to internationally accepted accreditation standards (International Standards Organisation – ISO 15189). Further studies are needed in order to address issues related to the impact of ART on epigenetic reprogramming of the early embryo. The legal landscape regarding assisted reproduction is evolving but still remains very heterogeneous and often contradictory. The lack of legal harmonisation and uneven access to infertility treatment and PGD/PGS fosters considerable cross-border reproductive care in Europe and beyond. The aim of this paper is to complement previous publications and provide an update of selected topics that have evolved since 2005.

          Related collections

          Most cited references292

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics.

          Semen quality is taken as a surrogate measure of male fecundity in clinical andrology, male fertility, reproductive toxicology, epidemiology and pregnancy risk assessments. Reference intervals for values of semen parameters from a fertile population could provide data from which prognosis of fertility or diagnosis of infertility can be extrapolated. Semen samples from over 4500 men in 14 countries on four continents were obtained from retrospective and prospective analyses on fertile men, men of unknown fertility status and men selected as normozoospermic. Men whose partners had a time-to-pregnancy (TTP) of < or =12 months were chosen as individuals to provide reference distributions for semen parameters. Distributions were also generated for a population assumed to represent the general population. The following one-sided lower reference limits, the fifth centiles (with 95th percent confidence intervals), were generated from men whose partners had TTP < or = 12 months: semen volume, 1.5 ml (1.4-1.7); total sperm number, 39 million per ejaculate (33-46); sperm concentration, 15 million per ml (12-16); vitality, 58% live (55-63); progressive motility, 32% (31-34); total (progressive + non-progressive) motility, 40% (38-42); morphologically normal forms, 4.0% (3.0-4.0). Semen quality of the reference population was superior to that of the men from the general population and normozoospermic men. The data represent sound reference distributions of semen characteristics of fertile men in a number of countries. They provide an appropriate tool in conjunction with clinical data to evaluate a patient's semen quality and prospects for fertility.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Tumour evolution inferred by single-cell sequencing.

            Genomic analysis provides insights into the role of copy number variation in disease, but most methods are not designed to resolve mixed populations of cells. In tumours, where genetic heterogeneity is common, very important information may be lost that would be useful for reconstructing evolutionary history. Here we show that with flow-sorted nuclei, whole genome amplification and next generation sequencing we can accurately quantify genomic copy number within an individual nucleus. We apply single-nucleus sequencing to investigate tumour population structure and evolution in two human breast cancer cases. Analysis of 100 single cells from a polygenomic tumour revealed three distinct clonal subpopulations that probably represent sequential clonal expansions. Additional analysis of 100 single cells from a monogenomic primary tumour and its liver metastasis indicated that a single clonal expansion formed the primary tumour and seeded the metastasis. In both primary tumours, we also identified an unexpectedly abundant subpopulation of genetically diverse 'pseudodiploid' cells that do not travel to the metastatic site. In contrast to gradual models of tumour progression, our data indicate that tumours grow by punctuated clonal expansions with few persistent intermediates. ©2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos.

              Chromosome instability is a hallmark of tumorigenesis. This study establishes that chromosome instability is also common during early human embryogenesis. A new array-based method allowed screening of genome-wide copy number and loss of heterozygosity in single cells. This revealed not only mosaicism for whole-chromosome aneuploidies and uniparental disomies in most cleavage-stage embryos but also frequent segmental deletions, duplications and amplifications that were reciprocal in sister blastomeres, implying the occurrence of breakage-fusion-bridge cycles. This explains the low human fecundity and identifies post-zygotic chromosome instability as a leading cause of constitutional chromosomal disorders.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur J Hum Genet
                Eur. J. Hum. Genet
                European Journal of Human Genetics
                Nature Publishing Group
                1018-4813
                1476-5438
                November 2013
                14 November 2013
                1 November 2013
                : 21
                : Suppl 2
                : S1-S21
                Affiliations
                [1 ]UCL Centre for PG&D, Institute for Womens Health, University College London , London, UK
                [2 ]Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Department of Genetics and Cell Biology, Research Institute GROW, Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven , Leuven, Belgium
                [4 ]Department of Clinical Genetics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [5 ]Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Research Institute GROW, Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [6 ]Reproductive Medicine Unit, S.I.S.Me.R. , Bologna, Italy
                [7 ]School of Biosciences, University of Kent , Canterbury, UK (formally Reprogenetics, Livingston, NJ, USA)
                [8 ]SAGBAL Hospital ‘Dr Shterev', MC ‘Reproductive Health' , Sofia, Bulgaria
                [9 ]National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) , Helsinki, Finland
                [10 ]Center for Medical Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel , Brussels, Belgium
                [11 ]Department of Molecular Diagnostics, Synlab Lausanne , Lausanne, Switzerland
                [12 ]ICBAS—Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar and Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Porto , Porto, Portugal
                [13 ]Department of Embryology and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel , Brussels, Belgium
                [14 ]Reproductive Medicine Unit, Institute for Women's Health, University College London , London, UK
                [15 ]Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, Education and Society, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Plymouth University , Plymouth, UK
                [16 ]Reproductive Medicine Service, Institut Universitari Quiron Dexeus , Barcelona, Spain
                [17 ]Centre for Human Genetics, KU Leuven , Leuven, Belgium
                [18 ]Institute of Genetics and Molecular and Cellular Biology (IGBMC), Centre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) UMR 1704 , Illkirch, France
                [19 ]Second Faculty of Medicine, Department of Biology and Medical Genetics, Charles University and Faculty Hospital Motol , Prague, Czech Republic
                Author notes
                [* ]UCL Centre for PG&D, Institute for Womens Health, University College London , 86-96 Chenies Mews, London WC1E 6HX, UK. Tel: +44 07880 795 791; Fax: +44 020 7383 7429; E-mail: joyce.harper@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                Article
                ejhg2013219
                10.1038/ejhg.2013.219
                3831061
                24225486
                fc07aad8-0671-48b6-8f77-6d6a61e64a72
                Copyright © 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

                History
                Categories
                Policy

                Genetics
                Genetics

                Comments

                Comment on this article