Evaluation and classification of severity for 176 genes on an expanded carrier screening panel

Severity in the genomic age: the significance of lived experience to understandings of severity

This article explores the significance of lived experience to understandings of severity in the genomic age. It draws upon data from structured interviews with 21 people living with monogenic conditions in England. The article argues that while lived experiences are subjective, participants consider the severity of disease by the impact a condition has on a person's quality of life and mental health; both of these interplays are influenced by social, economic, and environmental factors. The three factors and considerations to the impact of living with disease on mental health are generally absent from current frameworks designed to assess severity for clinical applications of genomic technologies such as preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). This article describes ways in which such factors impact the quality of life and the mental health of people living with genetic conditions. It also indicates what lived experiences, which illustrate the impact of these factors, have to offer policy-makers when they are assessing the concept of severity or seriousness of genetic conditions for applications of existing and potential genomic technologies in the genomic age.

Coalition for Global Hearing Health Hearing Care Pathways Working Group: Guidelines for Clinical Guidance for Readiness and Development of Evidence-Based Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

Editor's Note: The following article discusses the timely topic Clinical Guidance in the areas of Evidence-Based Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs. This article aims to discuss areas of services needed, guidance to countries/organizations attempting to initiate early hearing detection and intervention systems. Expert consensus and systematic/scoping reviews were combined to produce recommendations for evidence-based clinical practice. In Ear and Hearing, our long-term goal for the Point of View article is to stimulate the field's interest in and to enhance the appreciation of the author's area of expertise. Hearing is an important sense for children to develop cognitive, speech, language, and psychosocial skills. The goal of universal newborn hearing screening is to enable the detection of hearing loss in infants so that timely health and educational/therapeutic intervention can be provided as early as possible to improve outcomes. While many countries have implemented universal newborn hearing screening programs, many others are yet to start. As hearing screening is only the first step to identify children with hearing loss, many follow-up services are needed to help them thrive. However, not all of these services are universally available, even in high-income countries. The purposes of this article are (1) to discuss the areas of services needed in an integrated care system to support children with hearing loss and their families; (2) to provide guidance to countries/organizations attempting to initiate early hearing detection and intervention systems with the goal of meeting measurable benchmarks to assure quality; and (3) to help established programs expand and improve their services to support children with hearing loss to develop their full potential. Multiple databases were interrogated including PubMed, Medline (OVIDSP), Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science and One Search, ERIC, PsychInfo. Expert consensus and systematic/scoping reviews were combined to produce recommendations for evidence-based clinical practice. Eight essential areas were identified to be central to the integrated care: (1) hearing screening, (2) audiologic diagnosis and management, (3) amplification, (4) medical evaluation and management, (5) early intervention services, (6) family-to-family support, (7) D/deaf/hard of hearing leadership, and (8) data management. Checklists are provided to support the assessment of a country/organization's readiness and development in each area as well as to suggest alternative strategies for situations with limited resources. A three-tiered system (i.e., Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced) is proposed to help countries/organizations at all resource levels assess their readiness to provide the needed services and to improve their integrated care system. Future directions and policy implications are also discussed.

Transfer of embryos with positive PGT-M results: Genetic Counselors' perspectives and ethical considerations

Increasing numbers of fertility patients use preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic conditions (PGT-M) during in vitro fertilization (IVF). While PGT-M is primarily used to avoid implanting embryos with a monogenic condition, patients can request to transfer an embryo with the monogenic condition (positive embryo transfer), especially in cases where an IVF cycle results in no unaffected embryos. Transferring embryos with known disease-causing variants raises ethical concerns. There is limited understanding about how stakeholders in the assisted reproductive technology (ART) field approach these issues. In this study, genetic counselors were sent a survey to gather insight into their views about transferring embryos with different monogenic conditions. N = 99 genetic counselors completed the survey, 22 of whom had experience with patients requesting or deciding to transfer an embryo with a monogenic condition (positive embryo transfer experience). Most participants, including those with positive embryo transfer experience, were supportive of positive embryo transfer, regardless of the genetic condition. While participating genetic counselors were largely supportive of all patient decisions, they reported increased moral uneasiness around transferring embryos with life-limiting monogenic conditions, such as Huntington's disease. Further investigation into the experiences of genetic counselors who have experienced positive embryo transfer requests in practice can help delineate the ethical questions that ART providers face in this context and clarify how genetic counselors can contribute to establishing guidelines in the ART field.

Populational pan-ethnic screening panel enabled by deep whole genome sequencing

Birth defect is a global threat to the public health systems. Mitigating neonatal anomalies is hampered by elusive molecular mechanisms of pathogenic mutations and poor subsequent translation into preventative measures. Applying appropriate strategies in China to promote reproductive health is particularly challenging, as the Chinese population compromises complex genomic diversity due to the inclusion of many ethnic groups with distinct genetic backgrounds. To investigate and evaluate the feasibility of implementing a pan-ethnic screening strategy, and guide future reproductive counselling, high-quality variants associated with autosome recessive (AR) diseases derived from the largest publicly available cohort of the Chinese population were re-analysed using a bottom-up approach. The analyses of gene carrier rates (GCRs) across distinct ethnic groups revealed that substantial heterogeneity existed potentially due to diverse evolutionary selection. The sampling population, sequencing coverage and underlying population structure contributed to the differential variants observed between ChinaMAP and the East Asian group in gnomAD. Beyond characteristics of GCR, potential druggable targets were additionally explored according to genomic features and functional roles of investigated genes, demonstrating that phase separation could be a therapeutic target for autosomal recessive diseases. A further examination of estimated GCR across ethnic groups indicated that most genes shared by at least two populations could be utilised to direct the design of a pan-ethnic screening application once sequencing and interpreting costs become negligible. To this end, a list of autosomal recessive disease genes is proposed based on the prioritised rank of GCR to formulate a tiered screening strategy.

An overview of reproductive carrier screening panels for autosomal recessive and/or X-linked conditions: How much do we know?

BACKGROUND & AIM

Reproductive carrier screening seeks to identify couples at a high risk of having offspring affected by autosomal recessive and X-linked (XL) conditions. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of existing carrier screening panels by examining their gene content and characteristics, identifying the most common genes/conditions included in these panels, and analyzing their listed prices.

METHODS

A comprehensive evaluation of existing carrier screening panels was conducted by searching for web-based content, reviewing information brochures, and establishing direct contact with the providers via email or phone.

RESULTS

Twenty-two panels and their providers were identified with a cumulative total of 2205 unique genes. The number of genes included in these panels varied from 44 to 2054. Only 15 genes (0.7%) were included in all the panels. The carrier frequency of these 15 common genes and their associated conditions varied greatly, but the conditions associated with the genes are "severe". The price of these 22 panels ranged from $349 to $4320 per couple (USD in 2023). The correlation between the listed price and the number of selected genes among these panels was small and not statistically significant (r = 0.1023, p = 0.6959).

CONCLUSION

Considerable discrepancies exist among carrier screening panels. Ongoing research and monitoring are necessary to capture the dynamic nature of the carrier screening landscape, providing up-to-date information for clinical practice and informed decision-making.

Carrier burden of over 300 diseases in Han Chinese identified by expanded carrier testing of 300 couples using assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) has become a common practice for identifying carriers of monogenic diseases. However, existing large gene panels are not well-tailored to Chinese populations. In this study, ECS testing for pathogenic variants of both single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in 330 genes implicated in 342 autosomal recessive (AR) or X-linked diseases was carried out. We assessed the differences in allele frequencies specific to the Chinese population who have used assisted reproductive technology (ART) and the important genes to screen for in this population.

METHODOLOGY

A total of 300 heterosexual couples were screened by our ECS panel using next-generation sequencing. A customed bioinformatic algorithm was used to analyze SNVs and CNVs. Guidelines from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology were adapted for variant interpretation. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) SNVs located in high homology regions/deletions and duplications of one or more exons in length were independently verified with other methods.

RESULTS

64.83% of the patients were identified to be carriers of at least one of 342 hereditary conditions. We identified 622 P/LP variants, 4.18% of which were flagged as CNVs. The rate of at-risk couples was 3%. A total of 149 AR diseases accounted for 64.05% of the cumulative carrier rate, and 48 diseases had a carrier rate above 1/200 in the test.

CONCLUSION

An expanded screening of inherited diseases by incorporating different variant types, especially CNVs, has the potential to reduce the occurrence of severe monogenic diseases in the offspring of patients using ART in China.

Attitudes of professional stakeholders towards implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening: a systematic review

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) for hundreds of different genetic conditions is technically available for prospective parents, but these tests have not been integrated in a public health policy except for specific sub-groups. We aimed to provide an overview of the perspectives of multiple professional stakeholder groups in order to enhance a responsible implementation of population-based reproductive genetic carrier screening. We conducted a systematic literature search using eight online databases focussing on studies that were published from January 2009 to January 2021. We selected articles dealing with attitudes and opinions from different professional stakeholders, in particular healthcare professionals and policymakers, on how to implement a policy about carrier screening for a reproductive purpose. We identified 18 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Based on our inductive analysis, we identified ten themes categorized in both clinical and program management challenges: ensuring availability of RGCS to all couples who request the test, embedding RGCS as a test offer before pregnancy, providing clear and reliable information, ensuring voluntary participation, developing genetic counselling pre- and post-testing (after positive or negative result), avoiding psychological harm, ensuring equal access, avoiding social pressure, educating and involving a broad spectrum of non-genetic health care professionals, and promoting an independent non-commercial organisational structure. We highlight one major stumbling block on how to responsibly inform couples about hundreds different genetic conditions within constraints regarding time and ability of non-genetic professionals. We promote further research to tackle the issues brought up by this systematic review through pilot studies. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO 2021 # CRD42021233762; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=233762 .

Expanded carrier screening for reproductive risk assessment: An evidence-based practice guideline from the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) intends to broadly screen healthy individuals to determine their reproductive chance for autosomal recessive (AR) and X-linked (XL) conditions with infantile or early-childhood onset, which may impact reproductive management (Committee Opinion 690, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2017, 129, e35). Compared to ethnicity-based screening, which requires accurate knowledge of ancestry for optimal test selection and appropriate risk assessment, ECS panels consist of tens to hundreds of AR and XL conditions that may be individually rare in various ancestries but offer a comprehensive approach to inherited disease screening. As such, the term "equitable carrier screening" may be preferable. This practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for ECS using the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework (Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 995; Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 924). We used evidence from a recent systematic evidence review (Ramdaney et al., Genetics in Medicine, 2022, 20, 374) and compiled data from peer-reviewed literature, scientific meetings, and clinical experience. We defined and prioritized the outcomes of informed consent, change in reproductive plans, yield in identification of at-risk carrier pairs/pregnancies, perceived barriers to ECS, amount of provider time spent, healthcare costs, frequency of severely/profoundly affected offspring, incidental findings, uncertain findings, patient satisfaction, and provider attitudes. Despite the recognized barriers to implementation and change in management strategies, this analysis supported implementation of ECS for these outcomes. Based upon the current level of evidence, we recommend ECS be made available for all individuals considering reproduction and all pregnant reproductive pairs, as ECS presents an ethnicity-based carrier screening alternative which does not rely on race-based medicine. The final decision to pursue carrier screening should be directed by shared decision-making, which takes into account specific features of patients as well as their preferences and values. As a periconceptional reproductive risk assessment tool, ECS is superior compared to ethnicity-based carrier screening in that it both identifies more carriers of AR and XL conditions as well as eliminates a single race-based medical practice. ECS should be offered to all who are currently pregnant, considering pregnancy, or might otherwise biologically contribute to pregnancy. Barriers to the broad implementation of and access to ECS should be identified and addressed so that test performance for carrier screening will not depend on social constructs such as race.

Views of healthcare professionals on the inclusion of genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss in reproductive genetic carrier screening

Genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL) are frequently included in panels for reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS), despite a lack of consensus on whether NSHL is a condition appropriate for inclusion in RGCS. We conducted a national online survey using a questionnaire to explore the views of clinicians who facilitate RGCS or provide care to deaf individuals in Australia and New Zealand regarding the inclusion of such genes in RGCS. Results were analysed descriptively, and free-text responses were analysed thematically. The questionnaire was completed by 386 respondents including genetic healthcare providers, obstetricians, ear nose and throat specialists, and general practitioners. The majority of respondents agreed that genes associated with NSHL should be included in RGCS, but there were differences between the groups. 74% of clinicians working in a hearing clinic agreed these genes should be included compared to 67% of genetic healthcare providers, 54% of reproductive care healthcare providers, and 44% of general practitioners. A majority of respondents agreed that moderate to profound deafness is a serious disability, although genetic healthcare providers were less likely to agree than other groups. Overall, respondents agreed that including NSHL in RGCS upholds prospective parents' right to information. However, they also identified major challenges, including concern that screening may express a discriminatory attitude towards those living with deafness. They also identified the complexity of defining the severity of deafness.

Incidental molecular diagnoses and heterozygous risk alleles in a carrier screening cohort

PURPOSE

Expanded pan-ethnic carrier screening is an effective tool for the management of reproductive risk. However, growth in the number of conditions screened, in combination with increasingly more comprehensive test methodologies, can lead to the detection of genetic findings that may affect the health of the tested individual. The objective of this study was to investigate the frequency of pathogenic genotypes in a presumed healthy carrier screening cohort to facilitate broader discussions regarding disclosure of genetic information from carrier screening.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 73,755 targeted carrier screens was performed to identify individuals with pathogenic genotypes and heterozygous risk alleles.

RESULTS

In this study, we identified 79 individuals (0.11%) with pathogenic genotypes associated with moderate to profound autosomal recessive or X-linked conditions. In addition, 10 cases had chromosome X dosage abnormalities suggestive of a sex chromosome abnormality. Heterozygote risk alleles represented the majority of ancillary findings in this cohort, including 280 female carriers of FMR1 premutation alleles, 15 heterozygous females with pathogenic DMD variants, and 174 heterozygotes with pathogenic variants in genes that may confer increased risk for somatic malignancies in the heterozygous state.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that nearly 1% of individuals undergoing carrier screening will have a finding that may require clinical evaluation or surveillance.

Expanded carrier screening: What conditions should we screen for?

Carrier screening tests reproductive couples for their risk of having children affected by serious monogenic conditions. Carrier screening has historically been offered for certain conditions in high-risk populations. However, more recent evidence has shown that offering carrier screening to all patients, regardless of their ethnicity, more effectively and equitably identifies at-risk couples. Coupled with technology that enables screening for a nearly unlimited number of conditions, this expanded carrier screening (ECS) approach is now supported by professional society guidelines. Despite recent recommendations by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics to screen all patients who are pregnant or considering pregnancy for 113 conditions, questions remain about what conditions should be included on a core ECS panel. Here, we briefly review the history of carrier screening and guidelines on criteria for panel design. We then suggest which of these criteria are most critical, as well as thresholds to identify which conditions meet these criteria. Based on these interpretations, we recommend a core panel of 64 conditions that would identify the vast majority of at-risk couples. Widespread adoption of a core panel such as this would result in a marked improvement in the number of patients currently receiving comprehensive carrier screening.

Views of reproductive genetic carrier screening participants regarding screening for genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) panels often include genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL) despite a lack of evidence of acceptability. Although some couples take steps to avoid having a child who is deaf, there are effective interventions for children who are deaf. There is no consensus whether deafness is considered a disabling condition.

METHOD

This study explored views of people who had RGCS, without genes for NSHL, about this topic. Online surveys were sent to 2186 people who had a low chance RGCS result and 655 completed the survey (participation rate 30%).

RESULTS

Sixty-three percent (N = 412) think deafness is a serious health condition. The majority agreed (60%, N = 391) that with support (i.e. hearing aids/cochlear implants) deafness is a minor condition in children. Most (84%, N = 545) agreed genes for NSHL should be included in RGCS. Thirty-five percent (N = 231) indicated they would make different reproductive decisions if they had an increased chance of having a child born deaf; 31% would not change their reproductive plans and 34% were unsure what they would do.

CONCLUSION

While the majority support inclusion of genes associated with NSHL in RGCS, there was uncertainty about the severity of deafness as a health condition and there was no consensus on whether it is a health condition that warrants changing reproductive decisions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Exome Sequencing versus Targeted Gene Panels for Prenatal Diagnosis of Fetal Effusions and Non-Immune Hydrops Fetalis

BACKGROUND

Although exome sequencing has a greater overall diagnostic yield than targeted gene panels in the evaluation of nonimmune hydrops fetalis and fetal effusions, the cost-effectiveness of this approach is not known.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the costs and outcomes of targeted gene panels vs exome sequencing for prenatally diagnosed nonimmune hydrops fetalis and fetal effusions when next-generation sequencing is pursued following nondiagnostic standard nonimmune hydrops fetalis evaluations, including karyotype or chromosomal microarray.

STUDY DESIGN

A decision-analytical model was designed using TreeAge Pro to compare 10 genetic testing strategies, including a single test only (RASopathy, metabolic, or nonimmune hydrops fetalis-targeted gene panel or exome sequencing), sequential testing (RASopathy panel followed by nonimmune hydrops fetalis panel, metabolic panel followed by nonimmune hydrops fetalis panel, RASopathy panel followed by exome sequencing, metabolic panel followed by exome sequencing, and nonimmune hydrops fetalis panel followed by exome sequencing), and no additional genetic testing. Our theoretical cohort included cases with normal karyotype and/or microarray and excluded cases of alloimmunization and congenital viral infections. As nonimmune hydrops fetalis and fetal effusions can present throughout gestation, whereas pregnancy management options vary depending on gestational age, outcomes were calculated for 3 time intervals: 10 to 18, 18 to 22, and >22 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year. Additional outcomes included termination of pregnancy, stillbirth, neonatal death, and neonates born with mild, moderate, and severe or profound disease phenotypes. The cost-effectiveness threshold was $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year.

RESULTS

Among women <18 weeks of gestation, exome sequencing alone was the dominant strategy associated with the lowest costs ($221 million) and the highest quality-adjusted life years (10,288). Strategies with exome sequencing alone or as a sequential test resulted in more terminations but fewer stillbirths, neonatal deaths (NNDs), and affected infants than strategies without exome sequencing. Among women between 18 and 22 weeks of gestation, exome sequencing alone was also associated with the lowest costs ($188 million) and the highest quality-adjusted life years (8734), and similar trends were observed in pregnancy outcomes. Among patients >22 weeks of gestations, when termination was not available, exome sequencing was associated with lower costs ($300 million) and the highest quality-adjusted life years (8492). Exome sequencing was cost-effective up to a cost per test of $50,451 at <18 weeks of gestation, $50,423 at 18 to 22 weeks of gestation, and $9530 at >22 weeks of gestation. Targeted genetic panels and exome sequencing were cost-effective strategies compared with no additional genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

For cases of nonimmune hydrops fetalis and fetal effusions with nondiagnostic karyotype or microarray, next-generation sequencing was cost-effective compared with a strategy without additional genetic testing. For those that undergo next-generation sequencing, exome sequencing was the cost-effective strategy compared with all other testing strategies using targeted gene panels, leading to lower costs and fewer adverse perinatal outcomes. Exome sequencing was cost-effective in a setting without the option for pregnancy termination. These data supported the routine use of exome sequencing when next-generation sequencing is pursued for establishing a genetic diagnosis underlying otherwise unexplained nonimmune hydrops fetalis and fetal effusions.

Carrier screening: An update

Genetic carrier screening (CS) for reproductive decision making was introduced 50 years ago. Technological advances and improvements in knowledge of the human genome makes multi-disease, pan-ethnic CS possible. Such screening will identify most individuals as carriers of at least one autosomal recessive or X-linked recessive disorder. Past experiences and best practices have provided a framework for CS. Although its clinical utilization is increasing, some challenges remain. In this study, several aspects of CS panel implementation have been addressed including how to evaluate the quantitative gene inclusion criteria, how to classify the severity of genetic conditions, how to understand clinical validity at the level of gene-disease association and variant classification, and how to minimize residual risks.

Views of patients and parents of children with genetic disorders on population-based expanded carrier screening

Objective

Faster and cheaper next generation sequencing technologies have enabled expansion of carrier screening for recessive disorders, potentially facilitating population‐based implementation regardless of ancestry or family history. Little is known, however, about the attitudes regarding population‐based carrier screening among families with genetic disorders. This study assessed views among parents and patients with a recessive disorder and parents of children with Down syndrome (DS) on expanded carrier screening (ECS).

Method

In total, 85 patients with various recessive disorders, 110 parents of a child with a recessive disorder and 89 parents of a child with DS participated in an online survey in the Netherlands. Severity of recessive disorders was classified as mild/moderate or severe/profound.

Results

The majority of the (parents of) patients with a recessive disorder had a positive attitude towards population‐based ECS, including screening for their own or their child's disorder. DS parents were significantly less positive towards ECS. Subgroup analyses showed that the severity of the disorder, rather than being a patient or parent, influences the attitudes, beliefs and intention to participate in ECS.

Conclusion

Our findings have important implications for future implementation initiatives as they demonstrate the different perspectives from people with experiential knowledge with genetic disorders.

What's already known about this topic?

Carrier screening panels for recessive disorders are rapidly expanding.

Concerns have been raised about the possible impact of expanded carrier screening (ECS) on people affected by genetic disorders.

What does this study add?

The majority of Dutch (parents of) patients with a recessive disorder had a positive attitude towards ECS. Parents of children with Down syndrome are less positive.

Severity of the disorder, rather than being a patient or parent, influenced the attitudes, beliefs and intention to participate in ECS.

Establishing the Medical Actionability of Genomic Variants

Actionability is an important concept in medicine that does not have a well-accepted standard definition, nor is there a general consensus on how to establish it. Medical actionability is often conflated with clinical utility, a related but distinct concept. This lack of clarity contributes to practice variation and inconsistent coverage decisions in genomic medicine, leading to the potential for systematic bias in the use of evidence-based interventions. We clarify how medical actionability and clinical utility are distinct and then discuss the spectrum of actionability, including benefits for the person, the family, and society. We also describe applications across the life course, including prediction, diagnosis, and treatment. Current challenges in assessing the medical actionability of identified genomic variants include gaps in the evidence, limited contexts with practice guidelines, and subjective aspects of medical actionability. A standardized and authoritative assessment of medical actionability is critical to implementing genomic medicine in a fashion that improves population health outcomes and reduces health disparities. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, Volume 23 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Expanded carrier screening in the United States: A systematic evidence review exploring client and provider experiences

The aim of carrier screening is to identify prospective parents at risk of having a pregnancy affected with an autosomal recessive or X-linked disorder. Though minimal guideline-based screening is available, expanded carrier screening (ECS) is quickly becoming a feasible option for the general population due to its growing availability and affordability. However, the impact of ECS on clients and providers remains relatively unexplored. We performed a systematic evidence review to identify publications describing client-, provider-, and test-related outcomes. We searched several biomedical databases for articles published between January 1, 2003 and May 31, 2021. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they described genetic counseling and/or genetic testing for carrier screening (minimal guideline-based or ECS) in a prenatal or preconception setting in the United States. Title and abstract screening were performed using the Raayan web application or customized Google Forms. Full-text review and data extraction of included articles were performed using custom Google Forms. Two researchers performed a multistep selection process independently for validation purposes. Of 5413 unique articles screened, 36 studies were included with several studies contributing to multiple outcomes. Twenty described outcomes relating to patients/clients, 10 described provider-based outcomes, and 16 described test-based outcomes. Findings suggest that client and provider perceptions of ECS and minimal guideline-based carrier screening are multifaceted. Though clients have expressed desire for ECS, clinical uptake and impact on reproductive decision-making varies. Additionally, though genetic counselors seem to be comfortable with ECS, most other reproductive care providers seem to prefer minimal guideline or ancestry-based screening due to perceived barriers, such as time needed for ECS results disclosure and follow-up, as well as the desire to have panels set by professional societies/recommendations. There are limitations within the gathered literature, leading to potential uncertainty in the generalizability of our review. We outline several recommendations for future studies, including the need to examine variant interpretation and use of next-generation sequencing.

Addressing Reproductive Healthcare Disparities through Equitable Carrier Screening: Medical Racism and Genetic Discrimination in United States’ History Highlights the Needs for Change in Obstetrical Genetics Care

Carrier screening, a nearly half-century old practice, aims to provide individuals and couples with information about their risk of having children with serious genetic conditions. Traditionally, the conditions for which individuals were offered screening depended on their self-reported race or ethnicity and which conditions were seen commonly in that population. This process has led to disparities and inequities in care as the multi-racial population in the U.S. has grown exponentially, yet databases used to determine clinical practice guidelines are made up of primarily White cohorts. Technological advancements now allow for pan-ethnic expanded carrier screening (ECS), which screens for many conditions regardless of self-reported race or ethnicity. ECS presents a unique opportunity to promote equitable genetic testing practices in reproductive medicine. However, this goal can only be achieved if we acknowledge and appreciate the innumerable inequities evidenced in reproductive medicine and other socio-legal practices in the United States, and if we intentionally work in concert with healthcare providers, policy makers, advocates, and community health champions to reduce current and future reproductive health disparities. Herein, we provide a brief review of the way that US medical racism and genetic discrimination has shaped the current landscape of carrier screening.

A guidelines-consistent carrier screening panel that supports equity across diverse populations

PURPOSE

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) suggest carrier screening panel design criteria intended to ensure meaningful results. This study used a data-driven approach to interpret the criteria to identify guidelines-consistent panels.

METHODS

Carrier frequencies in >460,000 individuals across 11 races/ethnicities were used to assess carrier frequency. Other criteria were interpreted on the basis of published data. A total of 176 conditions were then evaluated. Stringency thresholds were set as suggested by ACOG and/or ACMG or by evaluating conditions already recommended by ACOG and ACMG.

RESULTS

Forty and 75 conditions had carrier frequencies of ≥1 in 100 and ≥1 in 200, respectively; 175 had a well-defined phenotype; and 165 met at least 1 severity criterion and had an onset early in life. Thirty-seven conditions met conservative thresholds, including a carrier frequency of ≥1 in 100, and 74 conditions met permissive thresholds, including a carrier frequency of ≥1 in 200; thus, both were identified as guidelines-consistent panels.

CONCLUSION

Clear panel design criteria are needed to ensure quality and consistency among carrier screening panels. Evidence-based analyses of criteria resulted in the identification of guidelines-consistent panels of 37 and 74 conditions.

What is a 'serious' genetic condition? The perceptions of people living with genetic conditions

Despite no consensus on the definition of ‘seriousness’, the concept is regularly used in policy and practice contexts to categorise conditions, determine access to genetic technologies and uses of selective pregnancy termination. Whilst attempts have been made to create taxonomies of genetic condition seriousness to inform clinical and policy decision-making, these have often relied on condition appraisals made by health and genetics professionals. The views of people with genetic conditions have been largely under-represented. This study explores the concept of seriousness through the perspectives of people with a range of ‘clinically serious’ conditions (fragile X conditions, spinal muscular atrophy, cystic fibrosis, haemophilia, thalassaemia). Attitudes towards suffering, quality of life (QoL) and selective pregnancy termination were elucidated from 45 in-depth qualitative interviews and 469 postal/online surveys. The majority of participants reported good health/wellbeing, and the capacity for good QoL, despite experiencing suffering with their condition. Notably, participants with later-onset conditions held more negative views of their health and QoL, and were more likely to view their condition as an illness, than those with early-onset conditions. These participants were more likely to see their condition as part of their identity. Whilst most participants supported prenatal screening, there was little support for selective termination. Moreover, social environment emerged as a critical mediator of the experience of the condition. The complex and rich insights of people living with genetic conditions might usefully be incorporated into future genetic taxonomies of ‘seriousness’ to ensure they more accurately reflect the lived reality of those with genetic conditions.

Ethical considerations in gene selection for reproductive carrier screening

Genetic carrier screening for reproductive purposes has existed for half a century. It was originally offered to particular ethnic groups with a higher prevalence of certain severe recessive or X-linked genetic conditions, or (as carrier testing) to those with a family history of a particular genetic condition. Commercial providers are increasingly offering carrier screening on a user-pays basis. Some countries are also trialing or offering public reproductive genetic carrier screening with whole populations, rather than only to those known to have a higher chance of having a child with an inherited genetic condition. Such programs broaden the ethical and practical challenges that arise in clinical carrier testing. In this paper we consider three aspects of selecting genes for population reproductive genetic carrier screening panels that give rise to important ethical considerations: severity, variable penetrance and expressivity, and scalability; we also draw on three exemplar genes to illustrate the ethical issues raised: CFTR, GALT and SERPINA1. We argue that such issues are important to attend to at the point of gene selection for RGCS. These factors warrant a cautious approach to screening panel design, one that takes into account the likely value of the information generated by screening and the feasibility of implementation in large and diverse populations. Given the highly complex and uncertain nature of some genetic variants, careful consideration needs to be given to the balance between delivering potentially burdensome or harmful information, and providing valuable information to inform reproductive decisions.

Technical factors to consider when developing an Expanded Carrier Screening platform

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Expanded Carrier Screening (ECS) is a genetic test able to detect carriers for a large number of autosomal recessive and X-linked diseases. Its clinical utilization is increasing but some technical aspects for its implementation are still controversial.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the current literature, several aspects of ECS panel implementation have been addressed. One of the most relevant topics involves which genes/pathologies should be included in an optimized ECS panel and which variants should be reported.

SUMMARY

Here, we review the best practice criteria to refine and improve clinical utility and validity of an ECS panel. The criteria for optimal ECS panel implementation include the severity of pathologies, the prevalence of diseases in general population and a definitive or strong gene/disease association. Moreover, we discuss the main complications associated with the reporting of Variant of Uncertain Significance and the need for periodic reassessment.

Evaluating the efficacy of three carrier screening workflows designed to identify at-risk carrier couples

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of three different carrier screening workflows designed to identify couples at risk for having offspring with autosomal recessive conditions.

METHODS

Partner testing compliance, unnecessary testing, turnaround time, and ability to identify at-risk couples (ARCs) were measured across all three screening strategies (sequential, tandem, or tandem reflex).

RESULTS

A total of 314,100 individuals who underwent carrier screening were analyzed. Sequential, tandem, and tandem reflex screening yielded compliance frequencies of 25.8%, 100%, and 95.9%, respectively. Among 14,595 couples tested in tandem, 42.2% of females were screen-negative, resulting in unnecessary testing of the male partner. In contrast, less than 1% of tandem reflex couples included unnecessary male testing. The median turnaround times were 29.2 days (sequential), 8 days (tandem), and 13.3 days (tandem reflex). The proportion of ARCs detected per total number of individual screens were 0.5% for sequential testing and 1.3% for both tandem and tandem reflex testing.

CONCLUSION

The tandem reflex strategy simplifies a potentially complex clinical scenario by providing a mechanism by which providers can maximize partner compliance and the detection of at-risk couples while minimizing workflow burden and unnecessary testing and is more efficacious than both sequential and tandem screening strategies.

Evaluation and classification of severity for 176 genes on an expanded carrier screening panel

Background

Disease severity is important when considering genes for inclusion on reproductive expanded carrier screening (ECS) panels. We applied a validated and previously published algorithm that classifies diseases into four severity categories (mild, moderate, severe, and profound) to 176 genes screened by ECS. Disease traits defining severity categories in the algorithm were then mapped to four severity‐related ECS panel design criteria cited by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).

Methods

Eight genetic counselors (GCs) and four medical geneticists (MDs) applied the severity algorithm to subsets of 176 genes. MDs and GCs then determined by group consensus how each of these disease traits mapped to ACOG severity criteria, enabling determination of the number of ACOG severity criteria met by each gene.

Results

Upon consensus GC and MD application of the severity algorithm, 68 (39%) genes were classified as profound, 71 (40%) as severe, 36 (20%) as moderate, and one (1%) as mild. After mapping of disease traits to ACOG severity criteria, 170 out of 176 genes (96.6%) were found to meet at least one of the four criteria, 129 genes (73.3%) met at least two, 73 genes (41.5%) met at least three, and 17 genes (9.7%) met all four.

Conclusion

This study classified the severity of a large set of Mendelian genes by collaborative clinical expert application of a trait‐based algorithm. Further, it operationalized difficult to interpret ACOG severity criteria via mapping of disease traits, thereby promoting consistency of ACOG criteria interpretation.