Abstract:Background: Laboratories offering cell-free DNA often reserve the right to share prenatal genetic data for research or even commercial purposes, and obtain this permission on the patient consent form. Although it is known that nonpregnant patients are often reluctant to share their genetic data for research, pregnant patients' knowledge of, and opinions about, genetic data privacy are unknown. Objective: We investigated whether pregnant patients who had already undergone cell-free DNA screening were aware that genetic data derived from cell-free DNA may be shared for research. Furthermore, we examined whether pregnant patients exposed to video education about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act-a federal law that mandates workplace and health insurance protections against genetic discrimination-were more willing to share cell-free DNA-related genetic data for research than pregnant patients who were unexposed. Study design: In this randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04420858), English-speaking patients with singleton pregnancies who underwent cell-free DNA and subsequently presented at 17 0/7 to 23 6/7 weeks of gestation for a detailed anatomy scan were randomized 1:1 to a control or intervention group. Both groups viewed an infographic about cell-free DNA. In addition, the intervention group viewed an educational video about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. The primary outcomes were knowledge about, and willingness to share, prenatal genetic data from cell-free DNA by commercial laboratories for nonclinical purposes, such as research. The secondary outcomes included knowledge about existing genetic privacy laws, knowledge about the potential for reidentification of anonymized genetic data, and acceptability of various use and sharing scenarios for prenatal genetic data. Eighty-one participants per group were required for 80% power to detect an increase in willingness to share data from 60% to 80% (α=0.05). Results: A total of 747 pregnant patients were screened, and 213 patients were deemed eligible and approached for potential study participation. Of these patients, 163 (76.5%) consented and were randomized; one participant discontinued the intervention, and two participants were excluded from analysis after the intervention when it was discovered that they did not fulfill all eligibility criteria. Overall, 160 (75.1%) of those approached were included in the final analysis. Most patients in the control group (72 [90.0%]) and intervention (76 [97.4%]) group were either unsure about or incorrectly thought that cell-free DNA companies could not share prenatal genetic data for research. Participants in the intervention group were more likely to incorrectly believe that their prenatal genetic data would not be shared for nonclinical purposes than participants in the control group (28.8% in the control group vs 46.2% in the intervention; P=.03). However, video education did not increase participant willingness to share genetic data in multiple scenarios. Non-White participants were less willing than White participants to allow sharing of genetic data specifically for academic research (P<.001). Conclusion: Most participants were unaware that their prenatal genetic data may be used for nonclinical purposes. Pregnant patients who were educated about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act were not more willing to share genetic data than those who did not receive this education. Surprisingly, video education about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act led patients to falsely believe that their data would not be shared for research, and participants who identified as racial minorities were less willing to share genetic data. New strategies are needed to improve pregnant patients' understanding of genetic privacy.

"The truth should not be hidden": Experiences and recommendations of individuals making NPE discoveries through genetic genealogy databases

Experiences of individuals receiving "Not Parent Expected" results through direct‐to‐consumer genetic testing

Exploring genetic counselors' experiences with non‐paternity in clinical settings

Negative results from DNA-based population screening for adult-onset diseases: the recipients' experience

IGG in the trenches: results of an in-depth interview study on the practice, politics, and future of investigative genetic genealogy

Professionals' views on providing personalized recurrence risks for de novo mutations: Implications for genetic counseling

Third-Party Genetic Interpretation Tools: A Mixed-Methods Study of Consumer Motivation and Behavior

Searching for secrets, searching for self: Childhood adversity, self‐concept clarity, and the motivation to uncover family secrets through direct‐to‐consumer genetic testing

Prioritizing privacy and presentation of supportable hypothesis testing in forensic genetic genealogy investigations

Video education about genetic privacy and patient perspectives about sharing prenatal genetic data: a randomized trial

Paternity testing under the cloak of recreational genetics

Evolving perspectives on genetic discrimination in health insurance among health care providers

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the news: a descriptive analysis

Adoptees' Pursuit of Genomic Testing to Fill Gaps in Family Health History and Reduce Healthcare Disparity

Analysis of the privacy-performance tradeoff of reference testing in Forensic Investigative Genetic Genealogy

Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening from a Genetic Counseling Prospective: Pre and Post-Genetic Counseling Regarding Rare Chromosomal Abnormalities and Incidental Finding

A qualitative study of the experiences of patients with prostate cancer when receiving negative genetic results: "I still don't have a grasp of what it all means"

Health and Kinship Matter: Learning About Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing User Experiences via Online Discussions

Navigating the Impact of the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule: A National Survey of U.S. Genetic Counselors

Parents' and patients' perspectives, experiences, and preferences for germline genetic or genomic testing of children with cancer: A systematic review

Abstract B043: Feasibility of a traceback approach to facilitate genetic testing in the Genetic Risk Analysis in Ovarian Cancer (GRACE) study