Racial and ethnic differences in uptake of cell-free fetal DNA aneuploidy screening in an urban safety net hospital

Aspiring toward equitable benefits from genomic advances to individuals of ancestrally diverse backgrounds

Advancements in genomic technologies have shown remarkable promise for improving health trajectories. The Human Genome Project has catalyzed the integration of genomic tools into clinical practice, such as disease risk assessment, prenatal testing and reproductive genomics, cancer diagnostics and prognostication, and therapeutic decision making. Despite the promise of genomic technologies, their full potential remains untapped without including individuals of diverse ancestries and integrating social determinants of health (SDOHs). The NHGRI launched the 2020 Strategic Vision with ten bold predictions by 2030, including "individuals from ancestrally diverse backgrounds will benefit equitably from advances in human genomics." Meeting this goal requires a holistic approach that brings together genomic advancements with careful consideration to healthcare access as well as SDOHs to ensure that translation of genetics research is inclusive, affordable, and accessible and ultimately narrows rather than widens health disparities. With this prediction in mind, this review delves into the two paramount applications of genetic testing-reproductive genomics and precision oncology. When discussing these applications of genomic advancements, we evaluate current accessibility limitations, highlight challenges in achieving representativeness, and propose paths forward to realize the ultimate goal of their equitable applications.

Patient experiences with prenatal cell-free DNA screening in a safety net setting

OBJECTIVES

Thirty-five states, including Florida, now cover cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening of fetuses for all pregnant patients enrolled in state public insurance programs. We interviewed Black and Hispanic obstetric patients at a safety net clinic in Florida shortly after the state rolled out cfDNA as a first-tier screening method for publicly insured patients.

METHODS

Black and Hispanic patients receiving prenatal care from a prenatal or maternal fetal medicine clinic at a federally qualified health center in Jacksonville, FL were invited to participate in a qualitative interview in English or Spanish to explore experiences and perceptions of prenatal cfDNA screening. Participants were recruited following their first prenatal visit when cfDNA is typically introduced. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes based on principles of grounded theory.

RESULTS

One hundred Black and Hispanic patients (n = 51 non-Hispanic Black, n = 43 Hispanic, n = 3 Hispanic Black, n = 3 Not Reported/Other) completed an interview. Participants described minimal opportunity for pre-screening counseling and limited health literacy about cfDNA or its uses. Some believed that cfDNA could positively impact pregnancy health. Many were unsure if they had received cfDNA even though they were aware of the information provided by it. Most participants expressed an interest in cfDNA as a means for early detection of fetal sex and as an additional indication of general fetal health.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient experiences indicate limited informed consent and decision-making for cfDNA, discordant with professional guidelines on pre-screen counseling. Our findings suggest that there should be additional investment in implementing cfDNA in safety net settings to ensure that patients and providers receive the support necessary for effective patient counseling and follow-on care for the ethical implementation of cfDNA.

Access to prenatal exome sequencing for fetal malformations: A qualitative landscape analysis in the US

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing evidence supporting the clinical utility of next generation sequencing for identifying fetal genetic disorders. However, there are limited data on the demand for and accessibility of these tests, as well as payer coverage in the prenatal context. We sought to identify clinician perspectives on the utility of prenatal exome sequencing (ES) and on equitable access to genomic technologies for the care of pregnancies complicated by fetal structural anomalies.

METHOD

We conducted two focus group discussions and six interviews with a total of 13 clinicians (11 genetic counselors; 2 Maternal Fetal Medicine/Geneticists) from U.S. academic centers and community clinics.

RESULTS

Participants strongly supported ES for prenatal diagnostic testing in pregnancies with fetal structural anomalies. Participants emphasized the value of prenatal ES as an opportunity for a continuum of care before, during, and after a pregnancy, not solely as informing decisions about abortions. Cost and coverage of the test was the main access barrier, and research was the main pathway to access ES in academic centers.

CONCLUSION

Further integrating the perspectives of additional key stakeholders are important for understanding clinical utility, developing policies and practices to address access barriers, and assuring equitable provision of prenatal diagnostic testing.

Genetic Testing and Other Healthcare Use by Black and White Individuals in a Genomic Sequencing Study

INTRODUCTION

Early adopters play a critical role in the diffusion of medical innovations by spreading awareness, increasing acceptability, and driving demand. Understanding the role of race in the context of other characteristics of potential early adopters can shed light on disparities seen in the early implementation of genomic medicine. We aimed to understand the association between self-identified race and individual experience with genetic testing outside of the research context.

METHODS

We assessed factors associated with the odds of having ever received genetic testing prior to enrollment in a genomic sequencing study among 674 self-identified white and 407 self-identified African, African American, or Afro-Caribbean ("Black") individuals.

RESULTS

Controlling for individual determinants of healthcare use (demographics, personality traits, knowledge and attitudes, and health status), identifying as Black was associated with lower odds of prior genetic testing (OR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.27-0.68], p < 0.001). In contrast, self-identified race was not associated with the use of non-genetic clinical screening tests (e.g., echocardiogram, colonoscopy). Black and white individuals were similar on self-reported personality traits tied to early adoption but differed by sociodemographic and resource facilitators of early adoption.

CONCLUSION

Persistent racial disparities among early adopters may represent especially-entrenched disparities in access to and knowledge of genomic technologies in clinical settings.

Insurance and Geographic Variations in Non-invasive Prenatal Testing

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Evaluating for disparities in prenatal genetic counseling

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend that all pregnant women should be offered prenatal genetic counseling, which includes discussions of aneuploidy and carrier screening. Previous studies have demonstrated racial and ethnic disparities in the completion of prenatal genetic testing, but few studies have evaluated for disparities in the offering of these tests. Prenatal genetic screening is a covered provision of Colorado Medicaid. We hypothesized that in the absence of a financial barrier, disparities in prenatal genetic counseling would be eliminated.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate disparities in prenatal genetic counseling by directly assessing if patients received counseling at the time of their first prenatal visit.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective cross-sectional study included patients presenting for their first prenatal visit at <20 weeks' gestation. Patients who completed prenatal genetic testing were classified as counseled, and the remaining patients' medical records were reviewed. Moreover, patients were divided into 2 groups based on their counseling status (yes or no), separately for aneuploidy and carrier screening.

RESULTS

Of 1103 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 97.2% were counseled for aneuploidy screening, whereas 73.3% were counseled on carrier screening. For aneuploidy, younger age, Black race, a relationship status of single, and presentation at a later gestational age were associated with lack of aneuploidy counseling on univariate analysis. After multivariable analysis, only maternal age (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.19) and gestational age (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.93) were statistically significantly associated with aneuploidy counseling. Treatment by a physician care team, having a comorbidity score of ≥1, and presenting at a later gestational age were associated with not receiving carrier screening counseling (univariate analysis). Multivariable analysis indicated significant associations with gestational age (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.94) and having a comorbidity (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.94).

CONCLUSION

Prenatal genetic counseling was less likely to be provided to women who present for prenatal care at a later gestational age. This finding was of concern because women who are less privileged were more likely to present to prenatal care at a later gestational age. Providing access to early prenatal care and developing specialized care pathways for women entering prenatal care in the second trimester of pregnancy could address disparities in prenatal genetic counseling.