ArticleF&S reports2025
Protocol considerations for multigenerational blinding of preimplantation genetic testing for a monogenic condition for Huntington disease: a case report.
Article in F&S reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To report a unique case of preimplantation genetic testing for a monogenic condition (PGT-M) for Huntington disease (HD) using both exclusion-based testing and direct nondisclosure testing across multiple generations and to highlight the strategies used to protect reproductive autonomy and privacy. Design: Case report. Subjects: A reproductive-aged nulliparous couple with the male partner's family history significant for HD who desired to conceive a child with PGT-M to build a family without the risk of HD inheritance while simultaneously maintaining the anonymity of carrier results to the partner and all living family members. Exposure: Two in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles with exclusion-based PGT-M in the first cycle and direct nondisclosure PGT-M in the second cycle, followed by 2 frozen embryo transfers (FETs). Main Outcome Measures: Number of low-risk euploid blastocysts suitable for embryo transfer. Results: The first IVF cycle using exclusion-based PGT-M resulted in 14 good-quality blastocysts with only 1 blastocyst deemed at low risk of inheriting the at-risk HD haplotype. The first FET was unsuccessful. The male partner's mother was tested and was found to be an HD carrier. The second IVF cycle used direct nondisclosure PGT-M, which resulted in 12 blastocysts suitable for transfer (both euploid and negative for HD). After the second failed FET, the male partner ultimately decided to undergo genetic testing for HD for himself and was negative for HD mutation. The couple then chose to attempt spontaneous conception and had a live birth of a healthy male infant without complications. Conclusion: Multigenerational blinding of PGT-M for trinucleotide repeat disorders has great utility in preserving patient autonomy while limiting the risk of future progeny inheriting a life-limiting genetic condition. Careful, comprehensive counseling and multilevel strategies should be developed to enact these blinding measures to best serve patients and their families whose genetic information is being used for testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.