The International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD) has issued a new position statement on prenatal testing for Down syndrome. I have reported on what the statement says in the past several posts. Now, we turn a critical eye to the statement to provide an ethical assessment of it. What is most glaring is what is not stated in the new statement. I wonder if the ISPD has it's own version of Voldemort. Continue Reading
April 10, 2013
The ACMG steps out from the crowd with NIPS policy statement
Along with the ISPD, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) issued its own policy statement on the newest form of prenatal testing for Down syndrome. The ACMG statement says some of the same things as the other professional medical organization positions, but it sets itself apart on several key points. Continue Reading
April 9, 2013
The ISPD has a serious concern about new prenatal testing for Down syndrome
The International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD) issued a policy statement that sets forth its position on prenatal testing for Down syndrome. The policy statement was prompted by the new prenatal testing for Down syndrome called Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening (NIPS), where a mother's risk assessment is recalculated based on testing cell free DNA in her blood stream. ISPD has a "serious concern" about NIPS. Read on to find out why. Continue Reading
April 8, 2013
What is the optimal prenatal testing protocol for Down syndrome?
Last week, both the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD) issued position statements on the latest developments in prenatal testing for Down syndrome. I selected highlights here. In this post, I cover what the ISPD statement claims is "optimal" for prenatal testing for Down syndrome. Continue Reading
April 5, 2013
A new age of prenatal testing for Down syndrome: a new name, new policy statements, and recognized resources for patients
On the same day, two major medical professional organizations announced their respective position statements concerning the newest form of prenatal testing for Down syndrome. There is A LOT to analyze, but here are some instant highlights from both. Continue Reading
March 28, 2013
The nonmaleficent role of NIPT
At last week's ACMG Annual Clinical Meeting, I presented a poster titled "The Ethics of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing." It turns out that the logic of my argument could very well be reflected in practice guidelines that are soon-to-be-released. I doubt the force of my abstract submitted last winter is to account for the change. But, it is a bit ironic that because NIPT will cause a test with risk to potentially have greater risk, NIPT has justified itself being inserted as a step before the test Continue Reading
March 26, 2013
When cell free fetal DNA isn’t
For years, I’ve been presenting at conferences on prenatal testing for Down syndrome, explaining how the new tests are based on cell free fetal DNA or “cffDNA.” Turns out I was wrong. Here’s why. Continue Reading
March 12, 2013
So many choices: what does each do & how much do they cost?
Next week, I travel to Phoenix to give a poster presentation at the 2013 Annual Meeting for the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG). I receive a daily invitations in my inbox to visit the booth for one of the manufacturers for the new Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT). But what does each test test for, and how much do they cost? Continue Reading
January 17, 2013
A Dream of a Brighter Future
Monday is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. It seems fitting to observe on this holiday honoring the great civil rights leader what many have called the next civil rights movement. The new wave of prenatal testing advances has brought into focus what we mean by America's creed that all are created equal. Continue Reading
Recent Comments