Assisted Reproduction Add-Ons and Adjuncts

Promises and pitfalls of preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disorders: a narrative review

Roura-Monllor JA, Walker Z, Reynolds JM, Rivera-Cruz G, Hershlag A, Altarescu G, Klipstein S, Pereira S, Lázaro-Muñoz G, Carmi S, Lencz T, Lathi RB

Published June 2025 F S Rev
DOI 10.1016/j.xfnr.2024.100085 PMID 40213363 PMC PMC11981603

RRM Academy Synopsis

Polygenic embryo testing should stay in research, authors conclude

Polygenic embryo testing should stay in research settings for now, the authors conclude. The 2025 narrative review draws on 20 studies. If current predictions hold, absolute risk reductions run from about 0.02% to 10.1%. Depending on the condition and embryo numbers, 10 to 5,000 IVF patients would need testing to prevent one affected child. Long-term outcome data are lacking.

Key Findings

  • The PubMed search, run through May 2024, first returned 140 articles. The review kept 20 original research articles.
  • Predicted absolute risk reductions spanned 0.02% to 10.1%, and relative risk reductions spanned 2.5% to 60.8%, varying by condition and by study.
  • If current predictions hold, one affected birth is prevented for every 10 to 5,000 IVF patients tested. The figure varies with the condition and with how many embryos each patient has.
  • A US survey of 1,435 members of the public found 78% accepted the testing for medical conditions if it proved clinically accurate. Only 30% of the sample approved it for non-medical traits.
  • Cited live birth rates after one euploid embryo transfer run 49% to 55%. From that, the authors expect about half of patients would have no live birth from the lowest-risk embryo.

Interpretation

The paper is a narrative review that summarizes studies without pooling them statistically. The authors took part in a 2023 conference on polygenic embryo screening, and the advice to limit the testing to research reflects their judgment. The risk figures come from models and sibling-pair data. The scores were built mainly on cohorts of European ancestry. Studies of adult outcomes do not exist and would take decades. The authors write that any clinical benefit would reach only patients with several usable embryos.

RRM Context

Polygenic embryo testing is offered only inside IVF cycles. The authors warn it may draw fertile patients into IVF and its risks when IVF is not needed for a live birth. They note IVF may raise the rate of congenital anomalies and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Restorative reproductive medicine works on the health of both partners before an embryo exists.

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disorders (PGT-P) has been commercially available since 2019. PGT-P makes use of polygenic risk scores for conditions which are multifactorial and are significantly influenced by environmental and lifestyle factors. If current predictions are accurate, then absolute risk reductions range from about 0.02% to 10.1%, meaning that between 10 and 5,000 in vitro fertilization patients would need to be tested with PGT-P to prevent one offspring from becoming affected in the future, depending on the condition and the number of embryos available. Survey and interview data reveal that patients and the public have largely favorable views regarding the use of PGT-P for disease prevention; however, clinicians and professional organizations have many reservations. The use of PGT-P raises multiple social and ethical concerns including the need for adequate counseling, the setting of realistic expectations, the application of distributive justice, the impact of environmental and social determinants of health, and the potential exacerbation of health inequities. Clinicians expressed significant concerns relating to the cost of PGT-P, the potential time-consuming counseling for reproductive endocrinologists and genetic counselors, the intentional creation of supernumerary embryos, and patients' unrealistic expectations regarding "healthiest disease-free" embryos. Furthermore, current evidence lacks long-term outcome data and generalizability. Prior to offering PGT-P to patients, additional clinical validation studies are needed. Also, ethical and social considerations raised by PGT-P should be carefully delineated. Systemic practices to increase equitable access to unbiased genetic counseling and reproductive services would be desirable prior to the ethical implementation of PGT-P.

Topics

By this author

Related research

Assisted Reproduction › Add-Ons and Adjuncts › Preimplantation Genetic Testing · Ethics and Policy › Reproductive Ethics › Genetic Testing of Embryos · Cost and Access › Cost of Care › Cost Effectiveness
Jaime A Roura-Monllor, Zachary Walker, Joel M Reynolds, Greysha Rivera-Cruz, Avner Hershlag, Gheona Altarescu, Sigal Klipstein, Stacey Pereira, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, Shai Carmi, Todd Lencz, Ruth Bunker Lathi
J Roura-Monllor, Z Walker, J Reynolds, G Rivera-Cruz, A Hershlag, G Altarescu, S Klipstein, S Pereira, G Lázaro-Muñoz, S Carmi, T Lencz, R Lathi
PMID 40213363 40213363 DOI 10.1016/j.xfnr.2024.100085 10.1016/j.xfnr.2024.100085 Roura-Monllor et al. 2025, Roura-Monllor 2025