The case for screening in early life for 'non-treatable' disorders: ethics, evidence and proportionality. A report from the Health Council of the Netherlands

Newborn Screening by DNA-First: Systematic Evaluation of the Eligibility of Inherited Metabolic Disorders Based on Treatability

The biomarker-based Dutch Newborn Screening (NBS) panel (as of 2024) comprises 19 inherited metabolic disorders (IMDs). With the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) as a first-tier screen, NBS could expand to include IMDs that lack a reliable biochemical footprint in dried blood spots, while also reducing secondary findings. To be eligible for inclusion in NBS, an IMD needs to fulfill the Wilson and Jungner criteria, with treatability being one of the most important criteria. In this study, we aimed to identify IMDs eligible for DNA-first NBS when considering only treatability in the context of NBS as a prerequisite. First, three independent reviewers performed a systematic literature review of the 1459 genotypic IMDs and their causative gene(s), as described in the International Classification of Inherited Metabolic Disorders (dated 1 February 2021), applying 16 criteria to exclude non-treatable disorders. Eligible disorders were then discussed in three online meetings with a project group of clinical laboratory geneticists, medical laboratory specialists specialized in IMD, and pediatricians with expertise in IMDs. Based on treatability, we identified 100 genes, causing 95 IMDs, as eligible for NBS, including 42 causal genes for the IMDs in the current biomarker-based NBS. The other 58 genes are primarily associated with treatable defects in amino acid metabolism and fatty acid oxidation. Other IMDs were excluded, most often because of insufficient literature. As the evaluation of treatability was not straightforward, we recommend the development of standardized treatability scores for the inclusion of IMDs in NBS.

Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023)

Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) began in the early 1960s based on the work of Dr. Robert "Bob" Guthrie in Buffalo, NY, USA. His development of a screening test for phenylketonuria on blood absorbed onto a special filter paper and transported to a remote testing laboratory began it all. Expansion of NBS to large numbers of asymptomatic congenital conditions flourishes in many settings while it has not yet been realized in others. The need for NBS as an efficient and effective public health prevention strategy that contributes to lowered morbidity and mortality wherever it is sustained is well known in the medical field but not necessarily by political policy makers. Acknowledging the value of national NBS reports published in 2007, the authors collaborated to create a worldwide NBS update in 2015. In a continuing attempt to review the progress of NBS globally, and to move towards a more harmonized and equitable screening system, we have updated our 2015 report with information available at the beginning of 2024. Reports on sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean, missing in 2015, have been included. Tables popular in the previous report have been updated with an eye towards harmonized comparisons. To emphasize areas needing attention globally, we have used regional tables containing similar listings of conditions screened, numbers of screening laboratories, and time at which specimen collection is recommended. Discussions are limited to bloodspot screening.

Exome/Genome-Wide Testing in Newborn Screening: A Proportionate Path Forward

Population-based newborn screening (NBS) is among the most effective public health programs ever launched, improving health outcomes for newborns who screen positive worldwide through early detection and clinical intervention for genetic disorders discovered in the earliest hours of life. Key to the success of newborn screening programs has been near universal accessibility and participation. Interest has been building to expand newborn screening programs to also include many rare genetic diseases that can now be identified by exome or genome sequencing (ES/GS). Significant declines in sequencing costs as well as improvements to sequencing technologies have enabled researchers to elucidate novel gene-disease associations that motivate possible expansion of newborn screening programs. In this paper we consider recommendations from professional genetic societies in Europe and North America in light of scientific advances in ES/GS and our current understanding of the limitations of ES/GS approaches in the NBS context. We invoke the principle of proportionality-that benefits clearly outweigh associated risks-and the human right to benefit from science to argue that rigorous evidence is still needed for ES/GS that demonstrates clinical utility, accurate genomic variant interpretation, cost effectiveness and universal accessibility of testing and necessary follow-up care and treatment. Confirmatory or second-tier testing using ES/GS may be appropriate as an adjunct to conventional newborn screening in some circumstances. Such cases could serve as important testbeds from which to gather data on relevant programmatic barriers and facilitators to wider ES/GS implementation.