1
|
Groden CM, Vetter CJ, Salih ZNI. Parental Experiences of Genetic Testing. Neoreviews 2024; 25:e151-e158. [PMID: 38425197 DOI: 10.1542/neo.25-3-e151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
Genetic testing is increasingly used in clinical practice in the neonatal period, including in NICUs. This testing may have psychological consequences for parents. To best support families, neonatal clinicians should be aware of the various ways in which parents view and respond to genetic testing. In this review, we summarize research on the parental experience of having a newborn infant undergo genetic testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Cecelia J Vetter
- Ruth Lily Medical Library, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Zeynep N I Salih
- Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang X, Sun Y, Zhao JY, Guan XW, Wang YY, Hong DY, Zhang ZL, Li YH, Yang PY, Jiang T, Xu ZF. Utility, benefits, and risks of newborn genetic screening carrier reports for families. J Glob Health 2024; 14:04044. [PMID: 38389402 PMCID: PMC10884785 DOI: 10.7189/jogh.14.04044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Newborn genetic screening (NBGS) based on next-generation sequencing offers enhanced disease detection and better detection rates than traditional newborn screening. However, challenges remain, especially around reporting the NBGS carrier results. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the NBGS carrier parents' views on NBGS and NBGS reports in China. Methods We distributed a survey querying demographic information, knowledge and perceptions of NBGS, the impact of NBGS on a total of 2930 parents, and their decision-making to parents of newborns reported as carriers in NBGS in Nanjing, China in 2022. Results The average age of the survey respondents was 30.7 years (standard deviation = 3.6). Most (68.38%) felt informed about NBGS, especially women, the highly educated, and high earners. Nearly all (98.74%) saw NBGS as crucial for early disease detection, with 73.18% believing it positively impacts their future. However, 19.16% felt it might cause anxiety, especially among the less educated. Concerns included potential discrimination due to exposed genetic data and strained family ties. Many suggested NBGS coverage by medical insurance to ease financial burdens. Conclusions Through our study, we gained insights into parents' perspectives and concerns regarding the NBGS carrier result reporting, thus providing relevant information for further refinement and clinical promotion of the NBGS project.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xin Wang
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Yun Sun
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | | | - Xian-Wei Guan
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Yan-Yun Wang
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Dong-Yang Hong
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Zhi-Lei Zhang
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Ya-Hong Li
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Pei-Ying Yang
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Tao Jiang
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Zheng-Feng Xu
- Genetic Medicine Center, Women’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Women and Children’s Healthcare Hospital, Nanjing, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yu B, Yang Y, Zhou L, Wang Q. Evaluating a Novel Newborn Screening Methodology: Combined Genetic and Biochemical Screenings. Arch Med Res 2024; 55:102959. [PMID: 38295467 DOI: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2024.102959] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2023] [Revised: 11/20/2023] [Accepted: 01/11/2024] [Indexed: 02/02/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Analysis of four newborn screening modes using newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) and traditional biochemical screening (TBS). METHODS Prospective clinical study with a total of 1,012 newborn samples from retrospective TBS. Three independent groups performed the study under strict double-blind conditions according to the screening modes: independent biochemical (IBS), independent NeoSeq (INS), sequential (SS), and combined (CS) screening. Using targeted sequencing, the NeoSeq panel included 154 pathogenic genes covering 86 diseases. RESULTS Of the 1,012 newborns, 120 were diagnosed were diagnosed with genetic diseases Among them, 52 cases were within the scope of TBS and 68 additional cases were identified through nGS. The number of cases detected per screening mode was 50, 113, 56, and 119 for IBS, INS, SS, and CS, respectively. CS was the most satisfactory screening mode, with the detection rate of 99.17%, the specificity and positive predictive value of 100%, and the negative predictive value of 99.89%. In addition, of the 68 cases identified by nGS (96 variants in 31 pathogenic genes), only four participants (5.9%) had clinical manifestations consistent with the disease. The experimental reporting cycles of CS and INS were the shortest. CONCLUSIONS CS was the most satisfactory method for newborn screening, which combined nGS with TBS to improve early diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bin Yu
- Department of Medical Genetics, Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Changzhou Medical Center of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
| | - Yuqi Yang
- Department of Medical Genetics, Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Changzhou Medical Center of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China
| | - Lingna Zhou
- Department of Medical Genetics, Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Changzhou Medical Center of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China
| | - Qiuwei Wang
- Department of Neonatology, Changzhou Children's Hospital of Nantong Medical University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lynch F, Best S, Gaff C, Downie L, Archibald AD, Gyngell C, Goranitis I, Peters R, Savulescu J, Lunke S, Stark Z, Vears DF. Australian Public Perspectives on Genomic Newborn Screening: Risks, Benefits, and Preferences for Implementation. Int J Neonatal Screen 2024; 10:6. [PMID: 38248635 PMCID: PMC10801595 DOI: 10.3390/ijns10010006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2023] [Revised: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 01/02/2024] [Indexed: 01/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Recent dramatic reductions in the timeframe in which genomic sequencing can deliver results means its application in time-sensitive screening programs such as newborn screening (NBS) is becoming a reality. As genomic NBS (gNBS) programs are developed around the world, there is an increasing need to address the ethical and social issues that such initiatives raise. This study therefore aimed to explore the Australian public's perspectives and values regarding key gNBS characteristics and preferences for service delivery. We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age via social media; 75 people aged 23-72 participated in 1 of 15 focus groups. Participants were generally supportive of introducing genomic sequencing into newborn screening, with several stating that the adoption of such revolutionary and beneficial technology was a moral obligation. Participants consistently highlighted receiving an early diagnosis as the leading benefit, which was frequently linked to the potential for early treatment and intervention, or access to other forms of assistance, such as peer support. Informing parents about the test during pregnancy was considered important. This study provides insights into the Australian public's views and preferences to inform the delivery of a gNBS program in the Australian context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona Lynch
- Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (F.L.); (C.G.); (J.S.)
- Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Stephanie Best
- Sir Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia;
- Australian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (I.G.); (Z.S.)
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Clara Gaff
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (C.G.); (L.D.); (A.D.A.)
- Melbourne Genomics, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Lilian Downie
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (C.G.); (L.D.); (A.D.A.)
- Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia;
| | - Alison D. Archibald
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (C.G.); (L.D.); (A.D.A.)
- Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia;
| | - Christopher Gyngell
- Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (F.L.); (C.G.); (J.S.)
- Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Ilias Goranitis
- Australian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (I.G.); (Z.S.)
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia;
| | - Riccarda Peters
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia;
| | - Julian Savulescu
- Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (F.L.); (C.G.); (J.S.)
- Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, Singapore
| | - Sebastian Lunke
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia;
- Department of Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Zornitza Stark
- Australian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia; (I.G.); (Z.S.)
- Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia;
| | - Danya F. Vears
- Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; (F.L.); (C.G.); (J.S.)
- Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
D'Gama AM, Agrawal PB. Genomic medicine in neonatal care: progress and challenges. Eur J Hum Genet 2023; 31:1357-1363. [PMID: 37789085 PMCID: PMC10689757 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01464-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 09/01/2023] [Accepted: 09/13/2023] [Indexed: 10/05/2023] Open
Abstract
During the neonatal period, many genetic disorders present and contribute to neonatal morbidity and mortality. Genomic medicine-the use of genomic information in clinical care- has the potential to significantly reduce morbidity and mortality in the neonatal period and improve outcomes for this population. Diagnostic genomic testing for symptomatic newborns, especially rapid testing, has been shown to be feasible and have diagnostic and clinical utility, particularly in the short-term. Ongoing studies are assessing the feasibility and utility, including personal utility, of implementation in diverse populations. Genomic screening for asymptomatic newborns has also been studied, and the acceptability and feasibility of such an approach remains an active area of investigation. Emerging precision therapies, with examples even at the "n-of-1" level, highlight the promise of precision diagnostics to lead to early intervention and improve outcomes. To sustainably implement genomic medicine in neonatal care in an ethical, effective, and equitable manner, we need to ensure access to genetics and genomics knowledge, access to genomic tests, which is currently limited by payors, feasible processes for ordering these tests, and access to follow up in the clinical and research realms. Future studies will provide further insight into enablers and barriers to optimize implementation strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alissa M D'Gama
- Division of Newborn Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Epilepsy Genetics Program, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Pankaj B Agrawal
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
- The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Holtz Children's Hospital, Jackson Health System, Miami, FL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
Rare diseases are a leading cause of infant mortality and lifelong disability. To improve outcomes, timely diagnosis and effective treatments are needed. Genomic sequencing has transformed the traditional diagnostic process, providing rapid, accurate and cost-effective genetic diagnoses to many. Incorporating genomic sequencing into newborn screening programmes at the population scale holds the promise of substantially expanding the early detection of treatable rare diseases, with stored genomic data potentially benefitting health over a lifetime and supporting further research. As several large-scale newborn genomic screening projects launch internationally, we review the challenges and opportunities presented, particularly the need to generate evidence of benefit and to address the ethical, legal and psychosocial issues that genomic newborn screening raises.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zornitza Stark
- Australian Genomics, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Richard H Scott
- Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, UK
- UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
- Genomics England, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Brennenstuhl H, Schaaf CP. [Genomic newborn screening-research approaches, challenges, and opportunities]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2023; 66:1232-1242. [PMID: 37831095 PMCID: PMC10622372 DOI: 10.1007/s00103-023-03777-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023]
Abstract
The application of high-throughput sequencing methods for population-based genomic newborn screening offers numerous opportunities for improving population health. The use of genome-based sequencing technology holds potential to enable the diagnosis of virtually any genetic disorder at an early stage and offers great flexibility when it comes to selection and expansion of target diseases. National and international efforts are therefore being made to investigate the ethical, legal, social, psychological, and technical aspects of genomic newborn screening. In addition to the many opportunities, there are numerous challenges and questions that remain to be answered: When and how should legal guardians be informed about such screening? Which diseases should be screened for? How should incidental findings or identification of a genetic predisposition be dealt with? Should data be stored long term and if so, how can this be done securely? Provided there is an appropriate regulatory framework and a transparent consent process, genomic newborn screening has the potential to fundamentally change the way in which we screen for congenital diseases. However, there is still much to be done. To achieve understanding and acceptance of genomic newborn screening amongst all stakeholders and thus to maximize its benefits for the population, a public discourse on the possibilities and limitations of genomic newborn screening is of critical importance. This article aims to provide an overview of the innovative technical developments in the field of human genetics, describe national and international approaches, and discuss challenges and opportunities of genomic newborn screening development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heiko Brennenstuhl
- Institut für Humangenetik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg, Deutschland
| | - Christian P Schaaf
- Institut für Humangenetik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg, Deutschland.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dickey L, Gronowski B, Jones K, Rinaldi JB, Emery K, Clemens J, Gordon O, Vartanian K. Participation in genetic screening: testing different outreach methods across a diverse hospital system based patient population. Front Genet 2023; 14:1272931. [PMID: 37900185 PMCID: PMC10602775 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1272931] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 10/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Genomics has the potential to transform medicine by identifying genetic risk factors that predispose people to certain illnesses. Use of genetic screening is rapidly expanding and shifting towards screening all patients regardless of known risk factors, but research is limited on the success of broad population-level outreach for genetic testing and the effectiveness of different outreach methods across diverse populations. In this study, we tested the effectiveness of Digital Only (emailing and texting) and Brochure Plus Digital (mailed brochure, emailing, and texting) outreach to encourage a diverse patient population to participate in a large hospital system's whole genome sequencing program. Methods: Disproportionate stratified sampling was used to create a study population more demographically diverse than the eligible population and response rates were analyzed overall and by demographics to understand the effectiveness of different outreach strategies. Results: 7.5% of all eligible patients enrolled in the program. While approximately 70% of patients invited to complete genetic testing identified in their EHR as being Hispanic, Black or African America, Asian, or another non-White race, these patients generally enrolled at lower rates than the overall population. Other underrepresented groups had higher enrollment rates including people with Medicaid coverage (8.7%) and those residing in rural areas (10.6%). We found no significant difference in enrollment rates between our Digital-Only and our Brochure Plus Digital outreach approaches in the overall population, but enrollment rates were significantly higher for Asian patients and patients who resided in rural areas in the Brochure Plus Digital group. Across both outreach approaches, links provided in emails were most commonly used for enrollment. Discussion: Our study reveals expected enrollment rates for proactive outreach by a hospital system for genetic testing in a diverse population. As more hospital systems are adopting population-scale genetic testing, these findings can inform future outreach efforts to recruit patients for genetic testing including those patients traditionally underrepresented in genomics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay Dickey
- Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Ben Gronowski
- Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Kyle Jones
- Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Portland, OR, United States
| | - J. B. Rinaldi
- Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Kate Emery
- Center for Clinical Genetics and Genomics for Providence Southern California, Burbank, CA, United States
| | - Jon Clemens
- Center for Clinical Genetics and Genomics for Providence Southern California, Burbank, CA, United States
| | - Ora Gordon
- Center for Clinical Genetics and Genomics for Providence Southern California, Burbank, CA, United States
| | - Keri Vartanian
- Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Portland, OR, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
McConkie-Rosell A, Spillmann RC, Schoch K, Sullivan JA, Walley N, McDonald M, Hooper SR, Shashi V. Unraveling non-participation in genomic research: A complex interplay of barriers, facilitators, and sociocultural factors. J Genet Couns 2023; 32:993-1008. [PMID: 37005744 PMCID: PMC10542653 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1707] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2022] [Revised: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 03/19/2023] [Indexed: 04/04/2023]
Abstract
Although genomic research offering next-generation sequencing (NGS) has increased the diagnoses of rare/ultra-rare disorders, populations experiencing health disparities infrequently participate in these studies. The factors underlying non-participation would most reliably be ascertained from individuals who have had the opportunity to participate, but decline. We thus enrolled parents of children and adult probands with undiagnosed disorders who had declined genomic research offering NGS with return of results with undiagnosed disorders (Decliners, n = 21) and compared their data to those who participated (Participants, n = 31). We assessed: (1) practical barriers and facilitators, (2) sociocultural factors-genomic knowledge and distrust, and (3) the value placed upon a diagnosis by those who declined participation. The primary findings were that residence in rural and medically underserved areas (MUA) and higher number of barriers were significantly associated with declining participation in the study. Exploratory analyses revealed multiple co-occurring practical barriers, greater emotional exhaustion and research hesitancy in the parents in the Decliner group compared to the Participants, with both groups identifying a similar number of facilitators. The parents in the Decliner group also had lower genomic knowledge, but distrust of clinical research was not different between the groups. Importantly, despite their non-participation, those in the Decliner group indicated an interest in obtaining a diagnosis and expressed confidence in being able to emotionally manage the ensuing results. Study findings support the concept that some families who decline participation in diagnostic genomic research may be experiencing pile-up with exhaustion of family resources - making participation in the genomic research difficult. This study highlights the complexity of the factors that underlie non-participation in clinically relevant NGS research. Thus, approaches to mitigating barriers to NGS research participation by populations experiencing health disparities need to be multi-pronged and tailored so that they can benefit from state-of -the art genomic technologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allyn McConkie-Rosell
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Rebecca C. Spillmann
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Kelly Schoch
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Jennifer A. Sullivan
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Nicole Walley
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Marie McDonald
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Stephen R. Hooper
- Department of Allied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Vandana Shashi
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Health System, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Liang NSY, Watts-Dickens A, Chitayat D, Babul-Hirji R, Chakraborty P, Hayeems RZ. Parental Preferences for Expanded Newborn Screening: What Are the Limits? CHILDREN (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2023; 10:1362. [PMID: 37628361 PMCID: PMC10453746 DOI: 10.3390/children10081362] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2023] [Revised: 08/02/2023] [Accepted: 08/08/2023] [Indexed: 08/27/2023]
Abstract
The use of next-generation sequencing technologies such as genomic sequencing in newborn screening (NBS) could enable the detection of a broader range of conditions. We explored parental preferences and attitudes towards screening for conditions for which varying types of treatment exist with a cross-sectional survey completed by 100 parents of newborns who received NBS in Ontario, Canada. The survey included four vignettes illustrative of hypothetical screening targets, followed by questions assessing parental attitudes. Chi-square tests were used to compare frequency distributions of preferences. Results show that most parents supported NBS for conditions for which only supportive interventions are available, but to a significantly lesser degree than those with disease-specific treatments (99% vs. 82-87%, p ≤ 0.01). For conditions without an effective treatment, the type of supportive care and age of onset of the condition did not significantly alter parent perceptions of risks and benefits. Parents are interested in expanded NBS for conditions with only supportive interventions in childhood, despite lower levels of perceived benefit for the child and greater anticipated anxiety from screen-positive results. These preferences suggest that the expansion of NBS may require ongoing deliberation of perceived benefits and risks and enhanced approaches to education, consent, and support.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole S. Y. Liang
- Department of Genetic Counselling, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
| | - Abby Watts-Dickens
- Department of Genetic Counselling, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | - David Chitayat
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | - Riyana Babul-Hirji
- Department of Genetic Counselling, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada
| | | | - Robin Z. Hayeems
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada
- Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Richards JL, Knight SJ. Parents' Perspectives on Secondary Genetic Ancestry Findings in Pediatric Genomic Medicine. Clin Ther 2023; 45:719-728. [PMID: 37573223 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2023.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 05/17/2023] [Accepted: 06/02/2023] [Indexed: 08/14/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE With advances in genome sequencing technologies, large-scale genome-wide sequencing has advanced our understanding of disease risk and etiology and contributes to the rapidly expanding genomic health services in pediatric settings. Because it is possible to return ancestry estimates following clinical genomic sequencing, it is important to understand the interest in ancestry results among families who may have the option of receiving these results. METHODS We conducted 26 semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews of parents with children/newborns with likely genetic conditions from two studies of clinical genome sequencing. Using a purposive sampling approach, we selected parents from the SouthSeq cohort, Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER Phase 2) project active in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, or an earlier Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER Phase 1) initiative based in the same region. Our interviews focused on parental knowledge about, attitudes on, interest in, and preferences for receiving genetic ancestry results following clinical genome sequencing in the neonatal intensive care unit or in pediatric clinics. FINDINGS Overall, parents prioritized clinical results or results that would help guide the diagnosis and treatment of their child, but they were also interested in any genetic result, including genetic ancestry, that potentially could enhance the meaning of information on disease risk, prevention and screening guidance, or family planning. While parents thought that ancestry results would help them learn about themselves and their heritage, the had concerns over the privacy, security, and accuracy of genetic ancestry information, although parents indicated that they had greater trust in ancestry findings provided as part of clinical care compared with those offered commercially. Parents also wanted ancestry results to be returned in a timely manner by knowledgeable staff, with kid-friendly materials and online tools available to aid, as needed, in the understanding of their results. IMPLICATIONS Taken together, our results highlight that despite being in high-stress situations, such as having a newborn in the neonatal intensive care unit, parents were interested in receiving genetic ancestry results along with their clinically relevant findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaimie L Richards
- Department of Genetics, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| | - Sara J Knight
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Epidemiology, University of Utah, School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA; Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytical Sciences Center of Innovation, Salt Lake City VA Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Cakici JA, Dimmock D, Caylor S, Gaughran M, Clarke C, Triplett C, Clark MM, Kingsmore SF, Bloss CS. Assessing Diversity in Newborn Genomic Sequencing Research Recruitment: Race/Ethnicity and Primary Spoken Language Variation in Eligibility, Enrollment, and Reasons for Declining. Clin Ther 2023; 45:736-744. [PMID: 37429778 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2023.06.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2023] [Revised: 06/09/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 07/12/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Diagnostic genomic research has the potential to directly benefit participants. This study sought to identify barriers to equitable enrollment of acutely ill newborns into a diagnostic genomic sequencing research study. METHODS We reviewed the 16-month recruitment process of a diagnostic genomic research study enrolling newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit at a regional pediatric hospital that primarily serves English- and Spanish-speaking families. Differences in eligibility, enrollment, and reasons for not enrolling were examined as functions of race/ethnicity and primary spoken language. FINDINGS Of the 1248 newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit, 46% (n = 580) were eligible, and 17% (n = 213) were enrolled. Of the 16 languages represented among the newborns' families, 4 (25%) had translated consent documents. Speaking a language other than English or Spanish increased a newborn's likelihood of being ineligible by 5.9 times (P < 0.001) after controlling for race/ethnicity. The main reason for ineligibility was documented as the clinical team declined having their patient recruited (41% [51 of 125]). This reason significantly affected families who spoke languages other than English or Spanish and was able to be remediated with training of the research staff. Stress (20% [18 of 90]) and the study intervention(s) (20% [18 of 90]) were the main reasons given for not enrolling. IMPLICATIONS This analysis of eligibility, enrollment, and reasons for not enrolling in a diagnostic genomic research study found that recruitment generally did not differ as a function of a newborn's race/ethnicity. However, differences were observed depending on the parent's primary spoken language. Regular monitoring and training can improve equitable enrollment into diagnostic genomic research. There are also opportunities at the federal level to improve access to those with limited English proficiency and thus decrease disparities in representation in research participation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julie A Cakici
- The Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, USA; School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
| | - David Dimmock
- Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Sara Caylor
- Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Mary Gaughran
- Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Christina Clarke
- Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - Michelle M Clark
- Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Stephen F Kingsmore
- Rady Children's Institute for Genomic Medicine, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Cinnamon S Bloss
- The Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Green RC, Shah N, Genetti CA, Yu T, Zettler B, Uveges MK, Ceyhan-Birsoy O, Lebo MS, Pereira S, Agrawal PB, Parad RB, McGuire AL, Christensen KD, Schwartz TS, Rehm HL, Holm IA, Beggs AH. Actionability of unanticipated monogenic disease risks in newborn genomic screening: Findings from the BabySeq Project. Am J Hum Genet 2023; 110:1034-1045. [PMID: 37279760 PMCID: PMC10357495 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2023.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2023] [Revised: 05/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/10/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Newborn genomic sequencing (NBSeq) to screen for medically important genetic information is of considerable interest but data characterizing the actionability of such findings, and the downstream medical efforts in response to discovery of unanticipated genetic risk variants, are lacking. From a clinical trial of comprehensive exome sequencing in 127 apparently healthy infants and 32 infants in intensive care, we previously identified 17 infants (10.7%) with unanticipated monogenic disease risks (uMDRs). In this analysis, we assessed actionability for each of these uMDRs with a modified ClinGen actionability semiquantitative metric (CASQM) and created radar plots representing degrees of penetrance of the condition, severity of the condition, effectiveness of intervention, and tolerability of intervention. In addition, we followed each of these infants for 3-5 years after disclosure and tracked the medical actions prompted by these findings. All 17 uMDR findings were scored as moderately or highly actionable on the CASQM (mean 9, range: 7-11 on a 0-12 scale) and several distinctive visual patterns emerged on the radar plots. In three infants, uMDRs revealed unsuspected genetic etiologies for existing phenotypes, and in the remaining 14 infants, uMDRs provided risk stratification for future medical surveillance. In 13 infants, uMDRs prompted screening for at-risk family members, three of whom underwent cancer-risk-reducing surgeries. Although assessments of clinical utility and cost-effectiveness will require larger datasets, these findings suggest that large-scale comprehensive sequencing of newborns will reveal numerous actionable uMDRs and precipitate substantial, and in some cases lifesaving, downstream medical care in newborns and their family members.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert C Green
- Department of Medicine, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA; Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - Nidhi Shah
- Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Dartmouth Health Children's, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA
| | - Casie A Genetti
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Timothy Yu
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Bethany Zettler
- Department of Medicine, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Melissa K Uveges
- William F. Connell School of Nursing, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467, USA
| | - Ozge Ceyhan-Birsoy
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Matthew S Lebo
- Department of Medicine, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Stacey Pereira
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine; Houston, TX, USA
| | - Pankaj B Agrawal
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Holtz Children's Hospital, Jackson Health System, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Richard B Parad
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Amy L McGuire
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine; Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Talia S Schwartz
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA
| | - Heidi L Rehm
- Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Ingrid A Holm
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Alan H Beggs
- Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Suhrie K, Tillman EM. Pharmacogenetic informed care in early childhood: options for improving access and health equity. Pharmacogenomics 2023; 24:579-582. [PMID: 37466126 DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2023-0119] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/20/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kristen Suhrie
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, & Department of Medical & Molecular Genetics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Emma M Tillman
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Casauria S, Lewis S, Lynch F, Saffery R. Australian parental perceptions of genomic newborn screening for non-communicable diseases. Front Genet 2023; 14:1209762. [PMID: 37434950 PMCID: PMC10330815 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1209762] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 06/15/2023] [Indexed: 07/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) programs have improved neonatal healthcare since the 1960s. Genomic sequencing now offers potential to generate polygenic risk score (PRS) that could be incorporated into NBS programs, shifting the focus from treatment to prevention of future noncommunicable disease (NCD). However, Australian parents' knowledge and attitudes regarding PRS for NBS is currently unknown. Methods: Parents with at least one Australian-born child under 18 years were invited via social media platforms to complete an online questionnaire aimed at examining parents' knowledge of NCDs, PRS, and precision medicine, their opinions on receiving PRS for their child, and considerations of early-intervention strategies to prevent the onset of disease. Results: Of 126 participants, 90.5% had heard the term "non-communicable disease or chronic condition," but only 31.8% and 34.4% were aware of the terms "polygenic risk score" and "precision medicine" respectively. A large proportion of participants said they would consider screening their newborn to receive a PRS for allergies (77.9%), asthma (81.0%), cancer (64.8%), cardiovascular disease (65.7%), mental illness (56.7%), obesity (49.5%), and type 2 diabetes (66.7%). Additionally, participants would primarily consider diet and exercise as interventions for specific NCDs. Discussion: The results from this study will inform future policy for genomic NBS, including expected rate of uptake and interventions that parents would consider employing to prevent the onset of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Casauria
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Australian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Sharon Lewis
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Fiona Lynch
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Richard Saffery
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
White S, Mossfield T, Fleming J, Barlow-Stewart K, Ghedia S, Dickson R, Richards F, Bombard Y, Wiley V. Expanding the Australian Newborn Blood Spot Screening Program using genomic sequencing: do we want it and are we ready? Eur J Hum Genet 2023; 31:703-711. [PMID: 36935418 PMCID: PMC10250371 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01311-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2022] [Revised: 12/12/2022] [Accepted: 01/31/2023] [Indexed: 03/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Since the introduction of genome sequencing in medicine, the factors involved in deciding how to integrate this technology into population screening programs such as Newborn Screening (NBS) have been widely debated. In Australia, participation in NBS is not mandatory, but over 99.9% of parents elect to uptake this screening. Gauging stakeholder attitudes towards potential changes to NBS is vital in maintaining this high participation rate. The current study aimed to determine the knowledge and attitudes of Australian parents and health professionals to the incorporation of genomic sequencing into NBS programs. Participants were surveyed online in 2016 using surveys adapted from previous studies. The majority of parents (90%) self-reported some knowledge of NBS, with 77% expressing an interest in NBS using the new technology. This was significantly lower than those who would utilise NBS using current technologies (99%). Although, many health professionals (62%) felt that new technologies should currently not be used as an adjunct to NBS, 79% foresaw the use of genomic sequencing in NBS by 2026. However, for genomic sequencing to be considered, practical and technical challenges as well as parent information needs were identified including the need for accurate interpretation of data; pre-and post-test counselling; and appropriate parental consent and opt-out process. Therefore, although some support for implementing genomic sequencing into Australian NBS does exist, there is a need for further investigation into the ethical, social, legal and practical implications of introducing this new technology as a replacement to current NBS methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie White
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Northern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Tamara Mossfield
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Northern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Genea, Sydney CBD, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jane Fleming
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Northern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Kristine Barlow-Stewart
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Northern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Sondhya Ghedia
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rebecca Dickson
- Genea, Sydney CBD, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Royal Hospital for Women, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Fiona Richards
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Children's Hospital, Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Yvonne Bombard
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Veronica Wiley
- NSW Newborn Screening Programme, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Ulph F, Bennett R. Psychological and Ethical Challenges of Introducing Whole Genome Sequencing into Routine Newborn Screening: Lessons Learned from Existing Newborn Screening. New Bioeth 2023; 29:52-74. [PMID: 36181705 DOI: 10.1080/20502877.2022.2124582] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/06/2023]
Abstract
As a psychologist and an ethicist, we have explored empirically newborn screening consent and communication processes. In this paper we consider the impact on families if newborn screening uses whole genome sequencing. We frame this within the World Health Organization's definition of health and contend that proposals to use whole genome sequencing in newborn screening take into account the ethical, practical and psychological impact of such screening. We argue that the important psychological processes occurring in the neonatal phase necessitate a clear justification that providing risk information at this stage provides a health benefit. We illustrate how research on current newborn screening can inform whole genome sequencing debates, whilst highlighting important gaps. Obtaining explicit, voluntary, and sufficiently informed consent for newborn screening is challenging, however we stress that such consent is ethically and legally appropriate and psychologically and practically important. We conclude by outling how this might be done.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona Ulph
- Division of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Rebecca Bennett
- Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, Department of Law, School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Vockley J, Aartsma-Rus A, Cohen JL, Cowsert LM, Howell RR, Yu TW, Wasserstein MP, Defay T. Whole-genome sequencing holds the key to the success of gene-targeted therapies. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS. PART C, SEMINARS IN MEDICAL GENETICS 2023; 193:19-29. [PMID: 36453229 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.c.32017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Revised: 10/12/2022] [Accepted: 11/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
Rare genetic disorders affect as many as 3%-5% of all babies born. Approximately 10,000 such disorders have been identified or hypothesized to exist. Treatment is supportive except in a limited number of instances where specific therapies exist. Development of new therapies has been hampered by at least two major factors: difficulty in diagnosing diseases early enough to enable treatment before irreversible damage occurs, and the high cost of developing new drugs and getting them approved by regulatory agencies. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) techniques have become exponentially less expensive and more rapid since the beginning of the human genome project, such that return of clinical data can now be achieved in days rather than years and at a cost that is comparable to other less expansive genetic testing. Thus, it is likely that WGS will ultimately become a mainstream, first-tier NBS technique at least for those disorders without appropriate high-throughput functional tests. However, there are likely to be several steps in the evolution to this end. The clinical implications of these advances are profound but highlight the bottlenecks in drug development that still limit transition to treatments. This article summarizes discussions arising from a recent National Institute of Health conference on nucleic acid therapy, with a focus on the impact of WGS in the identification of diagnosis and treatment of rare genetic disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jerry Vockley
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
- Department of Human Genetics, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | | | - Jennifer L Cohen
- Department of Pediatrics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Lex M Cowsert
- National Phenylketonuria Alliance, Eau Claire, Wisconsin, USA
| | - R Rodney Howell
- Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Timothy W Yu
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Melissa P Wasserstein
- Department of Pediatrics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the Children's Hospital at Montefiore, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Thomas Defay
- Alexion AstraZeneca Rare Diseases, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Nathe JM, Oskoui TT, Weiss EM. Parental Views of Facilitators and Barriers to Research Participation: Systematic Review. Pediatrics 2023; 151:e2022058067. [PMID: 36477217 PMCID: PMC9808610 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2022-058067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Low enrollment within pediatric research increases the cost of research, decreases generalizability, and threatens to exacerbate existing health disparities. To assess barriers and facilitators to pediatric research participation and evaluate differences by enrollment status. METHODS Data Sources include PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science. Study selection include peer reviewed articles that contained information related to facilitators and barriers to the parental decision whether to enroll their child in research and included the views of parents who declined. We extracted barriers and facilitators to research, enrollment status, and study characteristics, including study design, quality, and patient population. RESULTS Seventy articles were included for analysis. Facilitators of participation included: benefits, trust, support of research, informational and consent related, and relational issues. Common facilitators within those categories included health benefit to child (N = 39), altruism (N = 30), and the importance of research (N = 26). Barriers to participation included: study-related concerns, burdens of participation, lack of trust, general research concerns, informational and consent related, and relational issues. Common barriers within those categories included risks to child (N = 46), burdens of participation (N = 35), and the stress of the decision (N = 29). We had a limited ability to directly compare by enrollment status and no ability to analyze interactions between facilitators and barriers. We only included studies written in English. CONCLUSIONS This review identified key facilitators and barriers to research participation in pediatrics. The findings from this review may guide researchers aiming to create interventions to improve the parental experience of recruitment for pediatric studies and to optimize enrollment rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia M. Nathe
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Tira T. Oskoui
- David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Elliott Mark Weiss
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children’s Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Cao M, Notini L, Ayres S, Vears DF. Australian healthcare professionals' perspectives on the ethical and practical issues associated with genomic newborn screening. J Genet Couns 2022; 32:376-386. [PMID: 36245433 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2022] [Revised: 09/20/2022] [Accepted: 09/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is a successful public health initiative that seeks to identify serious, treatable medical conditions. The increasing use of genomic sequencing (GS) in a wide range of medical settings has reignited the discussion on whether GS can and should be integrated into NBS. Yet, the perspectives of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Australia on the ethical and practical issues associated with the implementation of genomic newborn screening (GNBS) are underexplored. To address this, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 Australian HCPs with clinical or policy experience in NBS and/or GS to explore their perspectives on the ethical, social, and practical issues raised by integrating GS into NBS. Interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis. When asked whether GS should be incorporated into NBS, HCPs did not feel it was currently appropriate but there was a strong consensus it may be implemented within the next decade. However, HCPs had differing perspectives on what conditions should be included and how to best handle the volume of data generated from GNBS. Our findings have important implications for determining at what point and how genomics can be integrated into NBS. The differing views expressed amongst HCPs suggest that further research is needed to explore the reasons behind this. Importantly, our participants highlighted a potential role for genetic counselors in the implementation of GNBS on a larger scale by developing educational resources to facilitate obtaining informed consent and return of results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle Cao
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Lauren Notini
- Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Melbourne, Australia.,Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Samantha Ayres
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Danya F Vears
- Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Melbourne, Australia.,Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kingsmore SF, Smith LD, Kunard CM, Bainbridge M, Batalov S, Benson W, Blincow E, Caylor S, Chambers C, Del Angel G, Dimmock DP, Ding Y, Ellsworth K, Feigenbaum A, Frise E, Green RC, Guidugli L, Hall KP, Hansen C, Hobbs CA, Kahn SD, Kiel M, Van Der Kraan L, Krilow C, Kwon YH, Madhavrao L, Le J, Lefebvre S, Mardach R, Mowrey WR, Oh D, Owen MJ, Powley G, Scharer G, Shelnutt S, Tokita M, Mehtalia SS, Oriol A, Papadopoulos S, Perry J, Rosales E, Sanford E, Schwartz S, Tran D, Reese MG, Wright M, Veeraraghavan N, Wigby K, Willis MJ, Wolen AR, Defay. T. A genome sequencing system for universal newborn screening, diagnosis, and precision medicine for severe genetic diseases. Am J Hum Genet 2022; 109:1605-1619. [PMID: 36007526 PMCID: PMC9502059 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2022.08.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) dramatically improves outcomes in severe childhood disorders by treatment before symptom onset. In many genetic diseases, however, outcomes remain poor because NBS has lagged behind drug development. Rapid whole-genome sequencing (rWGS) is attractive for comprehensive NBS because it concomitantly examines almost all genetic diseases and is gaining acceptance for genetic disease diagnosis in ill newborns. We describe prototypic methods for scalable, parentally consented, feedback-informed NBS and diagnosis of genetic diseases by rWGS and virtual, acute management guidance (NBS-rWGS). Using established criteria and the Delphi method, we reviewed 457 genetic diseases for NBS-rWGS, retaining 388 (85%) with effective treatments. Simulated NBS-rWGS in 454,707 UK Biobank subjects with 29,865 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with 388 disorders had a true negative rate (specificity) of 99.7% following root cause analysis. In 2,208 critically ill children with suspected genetic disorders and 2,168 of their parents, simulated NBS-rWGS for 388 disorders identified 104 (87%) of 119 diagnoses previously made by rWGS and 15 findings not previously reported (NBS-rWGS negative predictive value 99.6%, true positive rate [sensitivity] 88.8%). Retrospective NBS-rWGS diagnosed 15 children with disorders that had been undetected by conventional NBS. In 43 of the 104 children, had NBS-rWGS-based interventions been started on day of life 5, the Delphi consensus was that symptoms could have been avoided completely in seven critically ill children, mostly in 21, and partially in 13. We invite groups worldwide to refine these NBS-rWGS conditions and join us to prospectively examine clinical utility and cost effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen F. Kingsmore
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Keck Graduate Institute, Claremont, CA 91711, USA,Corresponding author
| | - Laurie D. Smith
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Matthew Bainbridge
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Sergey Batalov
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Wendy Benson
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Eric Blincow
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Sara Caylor
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Christina Chambers
- Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | | | - David P. Dimmock
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Yan Ding
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Katarzyna Ellsworth
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Annette Feigenbaum
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Erwin Frise
- Fabric Genomics, Inc., Oakland, CA 94612, USA
| | - Robert C. Green
- Mass General Brigham, Broad Institute, Ariadne Labs and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Lucia Guidugli
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Christian Hansen
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Charlotte A. Hobbs
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Mark Kiel
- Genomenon Inc., Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USA
| | - Lucita Van Der Kraan
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Yong H. Kwon
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Lakshminarasimha Madhavrao
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Jennie Le
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Rebecca Mardach
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | | | - Danny Oh
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Mallory J. Owen
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Gunter Scharer
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Mari Tokita
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Albert Oriol
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - James Perry
- Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Edwin Rosales
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Erica Sanford
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Duke Tran
- Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA 92122, USA
| | | | - Meredith Wright
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Narayanan Veeraraghavan
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | - Kristen Wigby
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, CA 92123, USA,Department of Pediatrics, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Mary J. Willis
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92123, USA
| | | | - Thomas Defay.
- Alexion, Astra Zeneca Rare Disease, Boston, MA 02210, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Rahimzadeh V, Friedman JM, de Wert G, Knoppers BM. Exome/Genome-Wide Testing in Newborn Screening: A Proportionate Path Forward. Front Genet 2022; 13:865400. [PMID: 35860465 PMCID: PMC9289115 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.865400] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Accepted: 05/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vasiliki Rahimzadeh
- Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
- *Correspondence: Vasiliki Rahimzadeh,
| | - Jan M. Friedman
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Guido de Wert
- Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Precision medicine via the integration of phenotype-genotype information in neonatal genome project. FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fmre.2022.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
|
24
|
Chung WK, Berg JS, Botkin JR, Brenner SE, Brosco JP, Brothers KB, Currier RJ, Gaviglio A, Kowtoniuk WE, Olson C, Lloyd-Puryear M, Saarinen A, Sahin M, Shen Y, Sherr EH, Watson MS, Hu Z. Newborn screening for neurodevelopmental diseases: Are we there yet? AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS. PART C, SEMINARS IN MEDICAL GENETICS 2022; 190:222-230. [PMID: 35838066 PMCID: PMC9796120 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31988] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Revised: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 06/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
In the US, newborn screening (NBS) is a unique health program that supports health equity and screens virtually every baby after birth, and has brought timely treatments to babies since the 1960's. With the decreasing cost of sequencing and the improving methods to interpret genetic data, there is an opportunity to add DNA sequencing as a screening method to facilitate the identification of babies with treatable conditions that cannot be identified in any other scalable way, including highly penetrant genetic neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). However, the lack of effective dietary or drug-based treatments has made it nearly impossible to consider NDDs in the current NBS framework, yet it is anticipated that any treatment will be maximally effective if started early. Hence there is a critical need for large scale pilot studies to assess if and how NDDs can be effectively screened at birth, if parents desire that information, and what impact early diagnosis may have. Here we attempt to provide an overview of the recent advances in NDD treatments, explore the possible framework of setting up a pilot study to genetically screen for NDDs, highlight key technical, practical, and ethical considerations and challenges, and examine the policy and health system implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wendy K Chung
- Department of Pediatrics and Medicine, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Jonathan S Berg
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Jeffrey R Botkin
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Steven E Brenner
- Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA
| | - Jeffrey P Brosco
- Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Kyle B Brothers
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
| | - Robert J Currier
- School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Amy Gaviglio
- Connetics Consulting, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | | | - Colleen Olson
- Steinhardt Graduate School of Education, New York University, New York, New York, USA
| | | | | | - Mustafa Sahin
- Rosamund Stone Zander Translational Neuroscience Center, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Yufeng Shen
- Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.,Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Elliott H Sherr
- Department of Neurology, Weill Institute of Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Michael S Watson
- Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Washington University (Adjunct), St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Zhanzhi Hu
- Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.,Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Dikow N, Ditzen B, Kölker S, Hoffmann GF, Schaaf CP. From newborn screening to genomic medicine: challenges and suggestions on how to incorporate genomic newborn screening in public health programs. MED GENET-BERLIN 2022; 34:13-20. [PMID: 38836020 PMCID: PMC11006367 DOI: 10.1515/medgen-2022-2113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) programs are considered among the most effective and efficient measures of secondary prevention in medicine. In individuals with medical conditions, genomic sequencing has become available in routine healthcare, and results from exome or genome sequencing may help to guide treatment decisions. Genomic sequencing in healthy or asymptomatic newborns (gNBS) is feasible and reveals clinically relevant disorders that are not detectable by biochemical analyses alone. However, the implementation of genomic sequencing in population-based screening programs comes with technological, clinical, ethical, and psychological issues, as well as economic and legal topics. Here, we address and discuss the most important questions to be considered when implementing gNBS, such as "which categories of results should be reported" or "which is the best time to return results". We also offer ideas on how to balance expected benefits against possible harms to children and their families.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola Dikow
- Institute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Beate Ditzen
- Institute of Medical Psychology, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Kölker
- University Hospital Heidelberg, Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Clinic I, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Georg F Hoffmann
- University Hospital Heidelberg, Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Clinic I, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christian P Schaaf
- Institute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
- Jan and Dan Duncan Neurological Research Institute, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Wu X, Yang Y, Zhou L, Long W, Yu B. Are We Ready for Newborn Genetic Screening? A Cross-Sectional Survey of Healthcare Professionals in Southeast China. Front Pediatr 2022; 10:875229. [PMID: 35601442 PMCID: PMC9120836 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2022.875229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To understand the knowledge, attitude, willingness, and ability of healthcare professionals working in newborn screening (NBS) centers regarding newborn genetic screening (nGS). METHODS The questionnaire consisted of four sections with 27 questions and the data were collected by the WJX platform. All participants accessed the questionnaire by scanning a specific QR code with their mobile phones. Two researchers independently completed the summary and analysis. RESULTS A total of 258 valid questionnaires were collected from 43 NBS centers in six provinces of southeast China. In total, 209 (81.01%) participants were interested in nGS, and almost all participants (97.67%) thought that nGS was necessary in China. About 89.53% of participants thought that it could be used to effectively expand the diseases that could be screened, but 72.87% also worried about the inability to provide genetic counseling. About 55.34% suggested that nGS and tandem mass spectrometry (TMS) screening could be applied in a unite screening mode. The higher the institution and personal education levels, the higher the interest healthcare professionals displayed toward nGS. However, they also showed greater concern about the inability to provide genetic counseling and ethical issues. If a center had engaged in TMS screening, its staff would have been more likely to believe that nGS had great advantages. In addition, most participants had ethical concerns, such as "the psychological burden caused by carrying information regarding adult morbidity risk." CONCLUSION Most participants were interested and considered nGS necessary. The inability to provide genetic counseling may be the primary impediment to clinical practice. Three important influencing factors were level of education, institution level, and engagement in TMS screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xian Wu
- Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Changzhou, China
| | - Yuqi Yang
- Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Changzhou, China
| | - Lingna Zhou
- Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Changzhou, China
| | - Wei Long
- Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Changzhou, China
| | - Bin Yu
- Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Changzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Combined genetic screening and traditional biochemical screening to optimize newborn screening systems. Clin Chim Acta 2022; 528:44-51. [DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2022.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/01/2022] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
28
|
Slotkowski RA, Delair SF, Neemann KA. Cross-sectional survey of parental barriers to participation in pediatric participant research registries. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0268553. [PMID: 35584152 PMCID: PMC9116665 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2021] [Accepted: 05/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Research registries are a powerful tool for boosting recruitment into clinical trials. However, little is known about how parents approach the decision to enroll their child in a pediatric participant research registry (PPRR). We conducted in-person, written, or telephone surveys with parents/guardians of children hospitalized at Children's Hospital of Omaha, Nebraska to identify attitudes towards and barriers to enrollment in PPRRs. Overall, our population (N = 36) had positive attitudes toward PPRRs, with 77.8% (CI: 61.6, 88.4) of participants stating they were "somewhat" or "very" likely to enroll their child. Likelihood to enroll differed between various recruitment and enrollment methods, with participants stating they would be more likely to enroll their child in a PPRR if they were recruited by their child's primary care provider or a nurse in clinic (p = 0.02) and less likely to enroll if they were recruited through social media (p<0.001). Additionally, over 90% of participants who were likely to enroll their child in a PPRR (N = 28) were also willing to provide demographic, medical, and lifestyle information. However, these participants remained concerned about inappropriate sharing of their information with insurance or for-profit companies (53.6%, CI: 35.8, 70.4) and about receiving unwanted telephone calls from the registry (78.6%, CI: 60.0, 90.0). Parents are generally willing to enroll their child in a PPRR. However, to optimize enrollment, investigators must understand parental preferences for and concerns surrounding enrollment in a PPRR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca A. Slotkowski
- College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United States of America
| | - Shirley F. Delair
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Infectious Disease, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United States of America
| | - Kari A. Neemann
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Infectious Disease, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Weiss EM, Guttmann KF, Olszewski AE, Magnus BE, Li S, Kim SYH, Shah AR, Juul SE, Wu YW, Ahmad KA, Bendel-Stenzel E, Isaza NA, Lampland AL, Mathur AM, Rao R, Riley D, Russell DG, Salih ZNI, Torr CB, Weitkamp JH, Anani UE, Chang T, Dudley J, Flibotte J, Havrilla EM, O’Kane AC, Perez K, Stanley BJ, Shah SK, Wilfond BS. Parental Enrollment Decision-Making for a Neonatal Clinical Trial. J Pediatr 2021; 239:143-149.e3. [PMID: 34400207 PMCID: PMC8610170 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2021] [Revised: 07/28/2021] [Accepted: 08/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe the parental experience of recruitment and assess differences between parents who participated and those who declined to enroll in a neonatal clinical trial. STUDY DESIGN This was a survey conducted at 12 US neonatal intensive care units of parents of infants who enrolled in the High-dose Erythropoietin for Asphyxia and encephaLopathy (HEAL) trial or who were eligible but declined enrollment. Questions assessed 6 factors of the parental experience of recruitment: (1) interactions with research staff; (2) the consent experience; (3) perceptions of the study; (4) decisional conflict; (5) reasons for/against participation; and (6) timing of making the enrollment decision. RESULTS In total, 269 of 387 eligible parents, including 183 of 242 (75.6%) of those who enrolled their children in HEAL and 86 of 145 (59.3%) parents who declined to enroll their children in HEAL, were included in analysis. Parents who declined to enroll more preferred to be approached by clinical team members rather than by research team members (72.9% vs 49.2%, P = .005). Enrolled parents more frequently reported positive initial impressions (54.9% vs 10.5%, P < .001). Many parents in both groups made their decision early in the recruitment process. Considerations of reasons for/against participation differed by enrollment status. CONCLUSIONS Understanding how parents experience recruitment, and how this differs by enrollment status, may help researchers improve recruitment processes for families and increase enrollment. The parental experience of recruitment varied by enrollment status. These findings can guide future work aiming to inform optimal recruitment strategies for neonatal clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elliott Mark Weiss
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
| | - Katherine F Guttmann
- Department of Pediatrics, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Aleksandra E Olszewski
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children’s Research Institute, Seattle, Washington,Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Brooke E Magnus
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
| | - Sijia Li
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington
| | - Scott YH Kim
- Department of Bioethics, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda Maryland
| | - Anita R Shah
- Division of Neonatology, Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, California
| | - Sandra E Juul
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Yvonne W Wu
- Departments of Neurology and Pediatrics, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California
| | - Kaashif A Ahmad
- Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, San Antonio, Texas
| | | | - Natalia A Isaza
- Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s National Hospital, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia
| | - Andrea L Lampland
- Department of Neonatology, Children’s Minnesota Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Amit M Mathur
- Department of Pediatrics, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Rakesh Rao
- Department of Pediatrics, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - David Riley
- Department of Pediatrics, Cook Children’s Medical Center, Texas Christian University and University of North Texas Health Science Center School of Medicine, Fort Worth, Texas
| | - David G Russell
- Division of Neonatology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Zeynep N I Salih
- Department of Pediatrics, Riley Hospital for Children, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Carrie B Torr
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | | | - Uchenna E Anani
- Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Taeun Chang
- Department of Neurology, Children’s National Hospital, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia
| | - Juanita Dudley
- Division of Neonatology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - John Flibotte
- Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Erin M Havrilla
- Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Alexandra C O’Kane
- Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, District of Columbia
| | - Krystle Perez
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | | | - Seema K Shah
- Department of Pediatrics, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Benjamin S Wilfond
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children’s Research Institute, Seattle, Washington,Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Affiliation(s)
- Beth A Tarini
- Center for Translational Research, Children's National Research Institute, Children's National Hospital, Washington, DC.,Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, DC
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Pereira S, Smith HS, Frankel LA, Christensen KD, Islam R, Robinson JO, Genetti CA, Blout Zawatsky CL, Zettler B, Parad RB, Waisbren SE, Beggs AH, Green RC, Holm IA, McGuire AL. Psychosocial Effect of Newborn Genomic Sequencing on Families in the BabySeq Project: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatr 2021; 175:1132-1141. [PMID: 34424265 PMCID: PMC8383160 DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.2829] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) may provide health benefits throughout the life span, but there are concerns that it could also have an unfavorable (ie, negative) psychosocial effect on families. OBJECTIVE To assess the psychosocial effect of nGS on families from the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of nGS on the clinical care of newborns from well-baby nurseries and intensive care units. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this randomized clinical trial conducted from May 14, 2015, to May 21, 2019, at well-baby nurseries and intensive care units at 3 Boston, Massachusetts, area hospitals, 519 parents of 325 infants completed surveys at enrollment, immediately after disclosure of nGS results, and 3 and 10 months after results disclosure. Statistical analysis was performed on a per-protocol basis from January 16, 2019, to December 1, 2019. INTERVENTION Newborns were randomized to receive either standard newborn screening and a family history report (control group) or the same plus an nGS report of childhood-onset conditions and highly actionable adult-onset conditions (nGS group). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Mean responses were compared between groups and, within the nGS group, between parents of children who received a monogenic disease risk finding and those who did not in 3 domains of psychosocial impact: parent-child relationship (Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale), parents' relationship (Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale), and parents' psychological distress (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale). RESULTS A total of 519 parents (275 women [53.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.1 [4.5] years) were included in this study. Although mean scores differed for some outcomes at singular time points, generalized estimating equations models did not show meaningful differences in parent-child relationship (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale scores: postdisclosure, 0.04 [0.15]; 3 months, -0.18 [0.18]; 10 months, -0.07 [0.20]; joint P = .57) or parents' psychological distress (between-group ratio of adjusted mean [SE] Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale scores: postdisclosure, 1.04 [0.08]; 3 months, 1.07 [0.11]; joint P = .80) response patterns between study groups over time for any measures analyzed in these 2 domains. Response patterns on one parents' relationship measure differed between groups over time (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale scores: postdisclosure, -0.19 [0.07]; 3 months, -0.04 [0.07]; and 10 months, -0.01 [0.08]; joint P = .02), but the effect decreased over time and no difference was observed on the conflict measure responses over time. We found no evidence of persistent negative psychosocial effect in any domain. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this randomized clinical trial of nGS, there was no persistent negative psychosocial effect on families among those who received nGS nor among those who received a monogenic disease risk finding for their infant. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02422511.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stacey Pereira
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Hadley Stevens Smith
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Leslie A. Frankel
- Department of Psychological, Health, and Learning Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas
| | - Kurt D. Christensen
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts,Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Rubaiya Islam
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Jill Oliver Robinson
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Casie A. Genetti
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Carrie L. Blout Zawatsky
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Bethany Zettler
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Richard B. Parad
- Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Susan E. Waisbren
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alan H. Beggs
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Robert C. Green
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts,Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,Precision Population Health Initiative, Ariadne Labs, Boston, Massachusetts,Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ingrid A. Holm
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts,Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Amy L. McGuire
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Gal DB, Deuitch N, Lee SSJ, Simon RT, Char DS. Parental Attitudes Toward Clinical Genomic Sequencing in Children With Critical Cardiac Disease. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2021; 22:e419-e426. [PMID: 33591072 PMCID: PMC8357848 DOI: 10.1097/pcc.0000000000002669] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Through improving diagnostics and prognostics genomic sequencing promises to significantly impact clinical decisions for children with critical cardiac disease. Little is known about how families of children with critical cardiac disease perceive the impact of genomic sequencing on clinical care choices. DESIGN Qualitative interview study. SETTING A high-volume, tertiary pediatric heart center. SUBJECTS Families of children with critical cardiac disease. INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Thematic analysis of interview response content. Thirty-five families were interviewed. Three themes emerged: 1) benefits versus challenges of having genomic sequencing results, and 2) fears of clinical applications of genomic sequencing, and 3) nonclinical fears related to genomic sequencing. Participants struggled with perceived uses of genomic sequencing-derived knowledge. They described comfort in foreknowledge of their child's likely disease course but articulated significant apprehension around participating in care decisions with limited knowledge of genomic sequencing, genomic sequencing uses to inform clinical resource rationing decisions, and genomic sequencing uses by third parties impacting financial pressures families experience caring for a child with critical cardiac disease. CONCLUSIONS Families' perceptions of genomic sequencing uses in critical cardiac disease appear to strain their overall trust in the health system. Erosion of trust is concerning because the potential of genomic sequencing in critical cardiac disease will be unrealized if families are unwilling to undergo genomic sequencing, let alone to participate in the ongoing research needed to link genomic sequencing variants to clinical outcomes. Our findings may have implications for genomic sequencing use in children with other critical, high-acuity diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dana B Gal
- Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
- Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford, Palo Alto, CA
| | - Natalie Deuitch
- Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
| | - Sandra Soo Jin Lee
- Division of Ethics, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY
| | | | - Danton S Char
- Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Genomic newborn screening (gNBS) may optimize the health and well-being of children and families. Screening programs are required to be evidence based, acceptable, and beneficial. OBJECTIVES To identify what has been discovered following the reporting of the first gNBS pilot projects and to provide a summary of key points for the design of gNBS. EVIDENCE REVIEW A systematic literature review was performed on April 14, 2021, identifying 36 articles that addressed the following questions: (1) what is the interest in and what would be the uptake of gNBS? (2) what diseases and genes should be included? (3) what is the validity and utility of gNBS? and (4) what are the ethical, legal, and social implications? Articles were only included if they generated new evidence; all opinion pieces were excluded. FINDINGS In the 36 articles included, there was high concordance, except for gene disease inclusion, which was highly variable. Key findings were the need for equitable access, appropriate educational materials, and informed and flexible consent. The process for selecting genes for testing should be transparent and reflect that parents value the certainty of prediction over actionability. Data should be analyzed in a way that minimizes uncertainty and incidental findings. The expansion of traditional newborn screening (tNBS) to identify more life-threatening and treatable diseases needs to be balanced against the complexity of consenting parents of newborns for genomic testing as well as the risk that overall uptake of tNBS may decline. The literature reflected that the right of a child to self-determination should be valued more than the possibility of the whole family benefiting from a newborn genomic test. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings of this systematic review suggest that implementing gNBS will require a nuanced approach. There are gaps in our knowledge, such as the views of diverse populations, the capabilities of health systems, and health economic implications. It will be essential to rigorously evaluate outcomes and ensure programs can evolve to maximize benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lilian Downie
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jane Halliday
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Sharon Lewis
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - David J. Amor
- Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Dimmock D, Caylor S, Waldman B, Benson W, Ashburner C, Carmichael JL, Carroll J, Cham E, Chowdhury S, Cleary J, D’Harlingue A, Doshi A, Ellsworth K, Galarreta CI, Hobbs C, Houtchens K, Hunt J, Joe P, Joseph M, Kaplan RH, Kingsmore SF, Knight J, Kochhar A, Kronick RG, Limon J, Martin M, Rauen KA, Schwarz A, Shankar SP, Spicer R, Rojas MA, Vargas-Shiraishi O, Wigby K, Zadeh N, Farnaes L. Project Baby Bear: Rapid precision care incorporating rWGS in 5 California children's hospitals demonstrates improved clinical outcomes and reduced costs of care. Am J Hum Genet 2021; 108:1231-1238. [PMID: 34089648 PMCID: PMC8322922 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 118] [Impact Index Per Article: 39.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2021] [Accepted: 05/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Genetic disorders are a leading contributor to mortality in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units (ICUs). Rapid whole-genome sequencing (rWGS)-based rapid precision medicine (RPM) is an intervention that has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes and reduced costs of care. However, the feasibility of broad clinical deployment has not been established. The objective of this study was to implement RPM based on rWGS and evaluate the clinical and economic impact of this implementation as a first line diagnostic test in the California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program. Project Baby Bear was a payor funded, prospective, real-world quality improvement project in the regional ICUs of five tertiary care children's hospitals. Participation was limited to acutely ill Medi-Cal beneficiaries who were admitted November 2018 to May 2020, were <1 year old and within one week of hospitalization, or had just developed an abnormal response to therapy. The whole cohort received RPM. There were two prespecified primary outcomes-changes in medical care reported by physicians and changes in the cost of care. The majority of infants were from underserved populations. Of 184 infants enrolled, 74 (40%) received a diagnosis by rWGS that explained their admission in a median time of 3 days. In 58 (32%) affected individuals, rWGS led to changes in medical care. Testing and precision medicine cost $1.7 million and led to $2.2-2.9 million cost savings. rWGS-based RPM had clinical utility and reduced net health care expenditures for infants in regional ICUs. rWGS should be considered early in ICU admission when the underlying etiology is unclear.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Dimmock
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA,Corresponding author
| | - Sara Caylor
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA
| | - Bryce Waldman
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA
| | - Wendy Benson
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA
| | | | | | - Jeanne Carroll
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA,University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Elaine Cham
- University of California, San Francisco, Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland, Oakland, CA 94609, USA
| | - Shimul Chowdhury
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA
| | - John Cleary
- Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA 92868, USA
| | - Arthur D’Harlingue
- University of California, San Francisco, Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland, Oakland, CA 94609, USA
| | - A. Doshi
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA,University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | | | | | - Charlotte Hobbs
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA
| | - Kathleen Houtchens
- University of California, San Francisco, Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland, Oakland, CA 94609, USA
| | - Juliette Hunt
- Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA 92868, USA
| | - Priscilla Joe
- University of California, San Francisco, Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland, Oakland, CA 94609, USA
| | | | | | | | - Jason Knight
- Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA 92868, USA
| | | | - Richard G. Kronick
- Torrey Pines Health Group, Inc., San Diego, CA 92037, USA,Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Jolie Limon
- Valley Children’s Hospital, Madera, CA 93636, USA
| | - Madelena Martin
- University of California, Davis and Davis Children’s Hospital, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA
| | - Katherine A. Rauen
- University of California, Davis and Davis Children’s Hospital, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA
| | - Adam Schwarz
- Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA 92868, USA
| | - Suma P. Shankar
- University of California, Davis and Davis Children’s Hospital, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA
| | | | | | | | - Kristen Wigby
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA,University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
| | - Neda Zadeh
- Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA 92868, USA
| | - Lauge Farnaes
- Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine, San Diego, CA 92130, USA
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Tutty E, Amor DJ, Jarmolowicz A, Paton K, Downie L. Personal utility of genomic sequencing for infants with congenital deafness. Am J Med Genet A 2021; 185:3634-3643. [PMID: 34184819 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.62411] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2020] [Revised: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 06/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Decisions about genetic testing have traditionally been based on clinical utility and cost, but personal utility is increasingly recognized when assessing the value of testing. Whole exome sequencing (WES) was offered to a population cohort of 106 infants diagnosed with congenital hearing loss. Parents could choose to receive results relating to hearing loss only or also learn additional information about childhood-onset conditions (medically nonactionable and/or actionable). This study aimed to quantify the personal utility of WES for parents after a diagnosis of hearing loss in their child. Parents completed surveys pretest (63/106), after hearing loss results (52/106) and after receiving additional information (47/72). Open-ended responses from all three surveys (N = 67) were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Answers to questions regarding the value of sequencing to parents were analyzed and collated. Parents placed high value on diagnostic WES for hearing loss but had different perspectives on the personal utility of additional information. Diagnostic results provided certainty while the choice to learn additional information about childhood-onset disorders was associated with empowerment. WES also represented an opportunity to promote their child's best interests. Results provide insights into the utility of WES for the indication of congenital deafness and for genomic newborn screening broadly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erin Tutty
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - David J Amor
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.,Victorian Clinical Genetics Service, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Anna Jarmolowicz
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Kate Paton
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Lilian Downie
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Porter KM, Weiss EM, Kraft SA. Promoting Disclosure and Understanding in Informed Consent: Optimizing the Impact of the Common Rule "Key Information" Requirement. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2021; 21:70-72. [PMID: 33945415 PMCID: PMC8600969 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2021.1906996] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Elliott M Weiss
- Seattle Children's Research Institute
- University of Washington School of Medicine
| | - Stephanie A Kraft
- Seattle Children's Research Institute
- University of Washington School of Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Lewis ACF, Green RC. Polygenic risk scores in the clinic: new perspectives needed on familiar ethical issues. Genome Med 2021; 13:14. [PMID: 33509269 PMCID: PMC7844961 DOI: 10.1186/s13073-021-00829-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2020] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Clinical use of polygenic risk scores (PRS) will look very different to the more familiar monogenic testing. Here we argue that despite these differences, most of the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) raised in the monogenic setting, such as the relevance of results to family members, the approach to secondary and incidental findings, and the role of expert mediators, continue to be relevant in the polygenic context, albeit in modified form. In addition, PRS will reanimate other old debates. Their use has been proposed both in the practice of clinical medicine and of public health, two contexts with differing norms. In each of these domains, it is unclear what endpoints clinical use of PRS should aim to maximize and under what constraints. Reducing health disparities is a key value for public health, but clinical use of PRS could exacerbate race-based health disparities owing to differences in predictive power across ancestry groups. Finally, PRS will force a reckoning with pre-existing questions concerning biomarkers, namely the relevance of self-reported race, ethnicity and ancestry, and the relationship of risk factors to disease diagnoses. In this Opinion, we argue that despite the parallels to the monogenic setting, new work is urgently needed to gather data, consider normative implications, and develop best practices around this emerging branch of genomics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna C F Lewis
- E J Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University, 124 Mount Auburn, Street, Cambridge, 02138, USA.
| | - Robert C Green
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Ariadne Labs, 401 Park Dr 3rd Floor, Boston, MA 02215, USA
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, 415 Main St, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
- Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Aldridge CE, Osiovich H, Hal Siden H, Elliott AM. Rapid genome-wide sequencing in a neonatal intensive care unit: A retrospective qualitative exploration of parental experiences. J Genet Couns 2020; 30:616-629. [PMID: 33131147 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1353] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2020] [Revised: 09/26/2020] [Accepted: 10/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Genome-wide sequencing (GWS) is increasingly being used in neonatal intensive care units. While studies have explored its clinical utility, little is known about parental experiences with this testing post-return of results. We conducted a qualitative study, using an interpretive description framework and thematic analysis, to gain further insight into parents' perceptions of the value and utility of GWS for their infant. We sought to explore whether parents' perceptions differ if their child received a diagnosis or not, and whether their child is living or deceased. Semi-structured, telephone interviews were conducted with parents of infants who had rapid exome sequencing while in the neonatal intensive care unit at BC Women's Hospital in Vancouver, Canada. Interviews addressed perceived benefits and harms of GWS and included an evaluation of decisional regret. Parents of 27 probands were approached and 14 (52%; 13 mothers and 1 father) participated in interviews. On average, 26 months had elapsed from the time of results to the interview. Six themes were identified. Firstly, parents had a positive regard for GWS. The results of GWS helped provide context for their child's admission to the NICU, and all parents experienced relief following receiving the results. A diagnosis by GWS enabled parents to picture the future, form connections with other parents, and coordinate their child's care. Lastly, some parents experienced discomfort with the concept of a genetic diagnosis, and interestingly felt lack of a genomic diagnosis indicated a reduced severity of their infant's condition. Decisional regret post-results was found to be low. Our results highlight how parents cope with the results of GWS and suggest that a genetic counselor can have an important role in helping families understand and adjust to these results in the neonatal intensive care unit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin E Aldridge
- Department of Medical Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Horacio Osiovich
- Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,BC Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Harold Hal Siden
- Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,BC Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | | | - Alison M Elliott
- Department of Medical Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,BC Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Schumann S, Gschmeidler B, Pellegrini G. Knowing, relationships and trust-citizens' perceptions of whole genome sequencing for the Genetics Clinic of the Future. J Community Genet 2020; 12:67-80. [PMID: 32997319 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-020-00486-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2020] [Accepted: 07/10/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The objective of this article is to present various views from different groups of citizens on the topic of whole genome sequencing (WGS). Sixteen focus groups were carried out in Italy and Austria which aimed at reflecting on the question of how to ensure that the implementation of WGS into the clinic is relevant and responsive to the needs of all members of society. In the qualitative analysis of the focus groups, three key themes (knowing, relationships and trust) were investigated. Although the majority of the participants favoured a person-centred care approach, we also found more radical perspectives in the relationship theme. This includes a self-centred orientation in which health care institutions should be prepared to integrate self-interpretation efforts of citizens and develop strategies to deal with them. Different attitudes towards getting to know genetic information (knowing) and varied approaches to decision-making for or against the use of WGS were observed. Personal capacities, in particular those to handle medical information, were emphasized as key factors. This means that it is important not to connect the desire not to know with a rejection of the technology per se but rather to support information and consultancy processes that effectively involve citizens. Concerning the third theme, we have underlined the important role of mistrust in addition to trust because it mostly points to areas or conditions considered problematic. Thus, mistrust is also a way to articulate critique, for example, of the profit-making with patient data, that has to be taken seriously by governance.
Collapse
|
40
|
Esquerda M, Palau F, Lorenzo D, Cambra FJ, Bofarull M, Cusi V, Interdisciplinar En Bioetica G. Ethical questions concerning newborn genetic screening. Clin Genet 2020; 99:93-98. [PMID: 32779199 DOI: 10.1111/cge.13828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2020] [Revised: 08/03/2020] [Accepted: 08/04/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Newborn screening is a public health strategy used to identify certain diseases in the first days of life and, therefore, facilitate early treatment before the onset of symptoms. The decision of which diseases should be included in a screening goes beyond the medical perspective, including reasons for public health and health economics. There are a number of characteristics to include a disease in the screening, such as that the disorder must be a significant health problem, the natural history of the disease must be well known, a feasible and accurate test must be available, there must be a treatment that is most effective when applied before the onset of clinical symptoms and a health system must be in place that is capable of performing the procedure and subsequent monitoring. Currently, newborn screening programs are currently based on the use of biochemical markers that detect metabolites, hormones or proteins, but recently, the availability of new technology has allowed the possibility of a genetic screening. In addition to technical problems, the possibility of neonatal screening also presents a number of ethical problems. We identified and discussed six areas of particular concern: type of illness, overdiagnosis or overtreatment, information management and informed consent, data confidentiality and protection, justice and legal regulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Montserrat Esquerda
- Institut Borja de Bioètica (Universitat Ramon LIuII); Universitat de Lleida - Facultat de Medicina, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Francesc Palau
- Hospital Sant Joan de Deu, Barcelona, Spain.,Fundacion Sant Joan de Deu, Barcelona, Spain
| | - David Lorenzo
- Institut Borja de Bioètica (Universitat Ramon LIuII); Sant Joan de Deu School of Nursing, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Francisco Jose Cambra
- Institut Borja de Bioètica (Universitat Ramon LIuII); Hospital Sant Joan de Deu, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Victoria Cusi
- Institut Borja de Bioètica (Universitat Ramon LIuII), Barcelona, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Moriarty K, Wolf SM, Veach PM, LeRoy B, MacFarlane IM, Zierhut HA. A roadmap for precision medicine research recruitment: empirical assessment of the public's willingness to participate. Per Med 2020; 17:345-359. [PMID: 32804044 DOI: 10.2217/pme-2019-0125] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
Aim: Precision medicine research recruitment poses challenges. To better understand factors impacting recruitment, this study assessed hypothetical willingness, public opinions of and familiarity with precision medicine research. Materials & methods: Adult attendees (n = 942) at the 2017 Minnesota State Fair completed an electronic survey. Results: Few respondents had heard of 'precision medicine' (18%), and familiarity came mostly from media (43%). Fifty-six percent expressed hypothetical willingness to participate in precision medicine research. Significant predictors of willingness were: comfort with unconditional research; perceiving precision medicine research as beneficial, trustworthy and confidential; having a graduate degree; comfort with self- but not family-participation; and familiarity with precision/personalized medicine. Conclusion: This study identified predictors of hypothetical willingness to participate in precision medicine research. Alternative recruitment strategies are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelsey Moriarty
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology & Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
| | - Susan M Wolf
- Law School, Medical School & Consortium on Law & Values in Health, Environment & The Life Sciences, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
| | - Patricia M Veach
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology & Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
| | - Bonnie LeRoy
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology & Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
| | - Ian M MacFarlane
- Department of Psychology, Elizabethtown College, Elizabethtown, PA 17022 USA
| | - Heather A Zierhut
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology & Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Hitchcock EC, Study C, Elliott AM. Shortened consent forms for genome-wide sequencing: Parent and provider perspectives. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2020; 8:e1254. [PMID: 32383361 PMCID: PMC7336726 DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.1254] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2020] [Revised: 03/12/2020] [Accepted: 03/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Consent forms for exome and/or genome sequencing, collectively called genome-wide sequencing (GWS), frequently contain detailed information on complex topics such as sequencing analysis and incidental findings. Considering recent endeavors by the health care community to simplify GWS consent forms, it is important to gain stakeholders' perspectives on the content, length, and use of consent forms. METHODS Thematic analysis was conducted on data obtained from focus groups with two participant cohorts: parents who previously provided consent for trio-based GWS as part of the translational pediatric GWS CAUSES Study, and genetic health care providers (HCP) who provide pre-test counseling for GWS. RESULTS Genetic HCP indicated that consent forms cannot replace pre-test counseling, and as such, a simplified consent form focusing on the implications of GWS would be beneficial to both patients and HCP. Although parents' primary concerns varied when considering GWS, they all highly valued information. Parents also indicated the need for community and support after the return of GWS results. Both participant cohorts recommended that consent forms be available online and include an appendix for supplementary information. CONCLUSION It is important to include both parents and HCP in the design of GWS consent forms, and also, to help connect families who have a shared diagnosis after the post-test counseling session.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma C Hitchcock
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Causes Study
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,BC Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Alison M Elliott
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,BC Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Mackay ZP, Dukhovny D, Phillips KA, Beggs AH, Green RC, Parad RB, Christensen KD. Quantifying Downstream Healthcare Utilization in Studies of Genomic Testing. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2020; 23:559-565. [PMID: 32389220 PMCID: PMC7293136 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.01.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2019] [Revised: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 01/26/2020] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The challenges of understanding how interventions influence follow-up medical care are magnified during genomic testing because few patients have received it to date and because the scope of information it provides is complex and often unexpected. We tested a novel strategy for quantifying downstream healthcare utilization after genomic testing to more comprehensively and efficiently identify related services. We also evaluated the effectiveness of different methods for collecting these data. METHODS We developed a risk-based approach for a trial of newborn genomic sequencing in which we defined primary conditions based on existing diagnoses and family histories of disease and defined secondary conditions based on unexpected findings. We then created patient-specific lists of services associated with managing primary and secondary conditions. Services were quantified based on medical record reviews, surveys, and telephone check-ins with parents. RESULTS By focusing on services that genomic testing would most likely influence in the short-term, we reduced the number of services in our analyses by more than 90% compared with analyses of all observed services. We also identified the same services that were ordered in response to unexpected findings as were identified during expert review and by confirming whether recommendations were completed. Data also showed that quantifying healthcare utilization with surveys and telephone check-ins alone would have missed the majority of attributable services. CONCLUSIONS Our risk-based strategy provides an improved approach for assessing the short-term impact of genomic testing and other interventions on healthcare utilization while conforming as much as possible to existing best-practice recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zoë P Mackay
- Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Dmitry Dukhovny
- Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Kathryn A Phillips
- Center for Translational and Policy Research on Personalized Medicine, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Philip R Lee Institute for Health Policy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Alan H Beggs
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Robert C Green
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Partners Healthcare Personalized Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Richard B Parad
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Precision Medicine Translational Research Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Amor DJ, Chitty LS, Van den Veyver IB. Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 2: The 59 genes ACMG recommends reporting as secondary findings when sequencing postnatally should be reported when detected on fetal (and parental) sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2020; 40:1508-1514. [PMID: 32091628 DOI: 10.1002/pd.5670] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2019] [Revised: 12/23/2019] [Accepted: 12/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Genome sequencing is increasingly being used to aid genetic diagnosis in fetuses with structural abnormalities detected on ultrasound examination. However, with clinical exome and genome sequencing, there is potential for the recognition and reporting of incidental or secondary findings unrelated to the indication for ordering the sequencing, but of potential medical value for patient care. In the postnatal setting, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) has clear guidelines that state that when offering sequencing, secondary findings should be reported in 59 genes for which ACMG consider there is a clinical evidence that pathogenic variants may result in disease that might be prevented or treated, with the option to opt out of receiving this information. However, these guidelines specifically exclude prenatal sequencing. Here, we report the debate on whether or not pathogenic findings in these 59 genes should or should not be reported in the prenatal setting. Although more were in favour of reporting before the debate, there was no significant consensus from the audience. After the debate there was a swing toward not reporting, but a slim majority (55%) remained in favour, indicating that this is an area requiring further research and the development of evidence-based guidelines applicable to prenatal proband and trio sequencing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Amor
- Department of Paediatrics, Royal Children's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, USA.,Department of Paediatrics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, USA
| | - Lyn S Chitty
- Great Ormond Street NHS Foundation Trust and UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Ignatia B Van den Veyver
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.,Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Hussain SB, Quittner AL, Brown M, Li-Rosi AM. Understanding access to genomics in an ethnically diverse south Florida population: A comparison of demographics in odyssey and rapid whole genome sequencing programs. J Genet Couns 2020; 29:553-561. [PMID: 32277851 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1281] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2019] [Revised: 02/18/2020] [Accepted: 02/26/2020] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Advances in genomic medicine have evolved to include rapid whole genome sequencing (rWGS) in pediatric intensive care settings. Traditionally, genetic testing was conducted in outpatient clinics, with stepwise genetic testing occurring over several years. This delayed the time to diagnosis, making it more difficult to include underrepresented groups, such as those who identify as Black and Latinx. National genetic sequencing programs have also struggled to engage these participants in their studies, leading to a significant disparity in access to new genetic technologies. The purpose of our study was to compare the demographic characteristics of families enrolled in both an Odyssey Program (N = 46), defined as outpatients in the Genetics Clinic who have had prior genetic testing, and a newly implemented rWGS (N = 52) sequencing program. Despite living in a large, ethnically diverse city, our results indicated that parents in the Odyssey program differed significantly from parents in the rWGS program in level of education, family income, and insurance status. For example, 71.5% of parents in the diagnostic Odyssey program had a college or advanced degree, whereas 42% of parents in the rWGS program had this level of education. Family income and insurance also differed, with 48.6% of families in the Odyssey program earning $100,000 or more versus 28.2% in rWGS; 56% of parents in the Odyssey program had private insurance with 26% on Medicaid whereas only 23% of parents in rWGS had private insurance, with the vast majority of children on Medicaid (69%). Thus, our Odyssey program illustrates some of the common pitfalls in implementing genomic testing in an ethnically diverse community, including lack of referrals, travel to outpatient visits, and a cultural mismatch with providers. The successful enrollment of underrepresented groups in the rWGS program demonstrates that given the opportunity to participate in genetic testing, families are interested and aware of the potential benefits of this testing for their child. As genomic sequencing transitions from outpatient to inpatient settings, an opportunity arises to close the health disparity gap. Recommendations for implementing rWGS in pediatric, intensive care settings that address the common barriers faced by underrepresented families are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saida B Hussain
- Research Institute, Nicklaus Children's Hospital, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - Marilyn Brown
- Research Institute, Nicklaus Children's Hospital, Miami, FL, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
|
47
|
Elliott AM. Genetic Counseling and Genome Sequencing in Pediatric Rare Disease. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2020; 10:cshperspect.a036632. [PMID: 31501267 DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a036632] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Both genome sequencing (GS) and exome sequencing (ES) have proven to be revolutionary in the diagnosis of pediatric rare disease. The diagnostic potential and increasing affordability make GS and ES more accessible as a routine clinical test in some centers. Herein, I review aspects of rare disease in pediatrics associated with the use of genomic technologies with an emphasis on the benefits and limitations of both ES and GS, complexities of variant classification, and the importance of genetic counseling. Indications for testing, the role of genetic counselors in genomic test selection, and the diagnostic potential of ES and GS in various pediatric multisystem disorders are discussed. The neonatal population represents an important cohort in pediatric rare disease. Rapid ES and GS in critically ill neonates can have an immediate impact on medical management and present unique genetic counseling challenges. This work includes reviews of recommendations for genetic counseling for families considering genome-wide sequencing, and issues of access to genetic counseling that affect clinical use and will necessitate implementation of innovative methods such as online decision aids. Finally, this work will also review the challenges of having a child with a rare disease, the impact of results from ES and GS on these families, and the role of various support agencies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison M Elliott
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia Investigator, BC Children's Hospital Research Institute and BC Women's Health Research Institute, and Provincial Medical Genetics Program, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 3N1, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Evans BJ, Javitt G, Hall R, Robertson M, Ossorio P, Wolf SM, Morgan T, Clayton EW. How Can Law and Policy Advance Quality in Genomic Analysis and Interpretation for Clinical Care? THE JOURNAL OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS : A JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS 2020; 48:44-68. [PMID: 32342785 PMCID: PMC7447152 DOI: 10.1177/1073110520916995] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
Delivering high quality genomics-informed care to patients requires accurate test results whose clinical implications are understood. While other actors, including state agencies, professional organizations, and clinicians, are involved, this article focuses on the extent to which the federal agencies that play the most prominent roles - the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services enforcing CLIA and the FDA - effectively ensure that these elements are met and concludes by suggesting possible ways to improve their oversight of genomic testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara J Evans
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Gail Javitt
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Ralph Hall
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Megan Robertson
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Pilar Ossorio
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Susan M Wolf
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Thomas Morgan
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| | - Ellen Wright Clayton
- Barbara J. Evans, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M., is the Mary Ann and Lawrence E. Faust Professor of Law and Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Houston. Gail Javitt, J.D., is a Member of the Firm at Hyman, Phelps, and McNamara, P.C. Ralph Hall, J.D., is a Principal at Leavitt Partners and a Professor of Practice at the University of Minnesota Law School. Megan Robertson, J.D., is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Pilar Ossorio, Ph.D., J.D., is Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School and Ethics Scholar-in-Residence at the Morgridge Institute for Research. Susan M. Wolf, J.D., is McKnight Presidential Professor of Law, Medicine & Public Policy; Faegre Baker Daniels Professor of Law; Professor of Medicine; and Chair of the Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences at the University of Minnesota. Thomas Morgan, M.D., F.A.C.M.G., is Associate Professor of Pediatrics in Medical Genetics at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Ellen W. Clayton, M.D., J.D., is Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Downie L, Halliday J, Lewis S, Lunke S, Lynch E, Martyn M, Gaff C, Jarmolowicz A, Amor DJ. Exome sequencing in newborns with congenital deafness as a model for genomic newborn screening: the Baby Beyond Hearing project. Genet Med 2020; 22:937-944. [PMID: 31974413 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-019-0745-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2019] [Revised: 12/23/2019] [Accepted: 12/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Genomic newborn screening raises practical and ethical issues. Evidence is required to build a framework to introduce this technology safely and effectively. We investigated the choices made by a diverse group of parents with newborns when offered tiered genomic information from exome sequencing. METHODS This population-derived cohort comprised infants with congenital deafness. Parents were offered exome sequencing and choice regarding the scope of analysis. Options were choice A, diagnostic analysis only; choice B, diagnostic analysis plus childhood-onset diseases with medical actionability; or choice C, diagnostic analysis plus childhood-onset diseases with or without medical actionability. RESULTS Of the 106 participants, 72 (68%) consented to receive additional findings with 29 (27.4%) selecting choice B and 43 (40.6%) opting for choice C. Family size, ethnicity, and age of infant at time of recruitment were the significant predictors of choice. Parents who opted to have additional findings analysis demonstrated less anxiety and decisional conflict. CONCLUSIONS These data provide evidence from a culturally diverse population that choice around additional findings is important and the age of the infant when this choice is offered impacts on their decision. We found no evidence that offering different levels of genomic information to parents of newborns has a negative psychological impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lilian Downie
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.,Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jane Halliday
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sharon Lewis
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Sebastian Lunke
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Elly Lynch
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.,Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Melissa Martyn
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.,Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Clara Gaff
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.,Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Anna Jarmolowicz
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia
| | - David J Amor
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia. .,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia. .,Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. .,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess pregnant women's views and preferences on noninvasive prenatal whole genome sequencing. METHODS A survey was offered to 805 pregnant women receiving prenatal care in practices affiliated with a large, tertiary care maternity hospital. Respondents were asked to envision undergoing prenatal whole genome sequencing and discuss their preferences and reasons for receiving different categories of genomic results, organized by actionability, severity, prevalence, and age of onset. The survey also queried respondents on their preferred role for clinicians in prenatal whole genome sequencing decision-making, and on their demographics and genetic literacy. RESULTS From June to August 2017, a total of 553 respondents returned the survey (response rate=68.7%). Respondents were most likely to want information regarding serious treatable childhood-onset conditions (89.7%) and least likely to want to receive information about nonmedical traits from prenatal whole genome sequencing (40%). The most frequently cited reason for wanting medical prenatal whole genome sequencing results was "to prepare financially, medically, or psychologically for a child with special needs." In total, 10.5% of respondents wanted clear recommendations from clinicians about the categories of information that are most appropriate to test for, 44.7% wanted clear recommendations plus all options presented, 26.2% wanted all options presented and joint decision-making, and 13.2% wanted all options presented and independent decision-making. CONCLUSION Respondents generally preferred to receive all categories of genetic results pertaining to medical conditions and wanted the information to prepare. More than half of respondents wanted (at minimum) clear recommendations from clinicians when deciding which prenatal whole genome sequencing results to receive.
Collapse
|