Psychosocial Distress and Knowledge Deficiencies in Parents of Children in Ireland Who Carry an Altered Cystic Fibrosis Gene

Diagnostic and Communication Challenges in Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening

As of December 2009, cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening (NBS) is performed in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. Widespread implementation of CF newborn screening (CFNBS) in the US and internationally has brought about new and varied challenges. Immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT) remains the first, albeit imperfect, biomarker used universally in the screening process. Advances in genetic testing have provided an opportunity for newborn screening programs to add CFTR sequencing tiers to their algorithms. This in turn will enable earlier identification of babies with CF and improve longer-term outcomes through prompt treatment and intervention. CFTR sequencing has led to the ability to identify infants with CF from diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds more equitably while also identifying an increasing proportion of infants with inconclusive diagnoses. Using the evolution of the New York State CF newborn screening program as a guide, this review outlines the basic steps in a universal CF newborn screening program, considers how to reduce bias, highlights challenges, offers guidance to address these challenges and provides recommendations for future consideration.

Psychosocial Issues Related to Newborn Screening: A Systematic Review and Synthesis

Genomic advances have contributed to a proliferation of newborn screening (NBS) programs. Psychosocial consequences of NBS have been identified as risks to these public health initiatives. Following PRISMA guidelines, this systematic review synthesizes findings from 92 evidence-based, peer-reviewed research reports published from 2000 through 2020 regarding psychosocial issues associated with NBS. Results describe parents' knowledge of and attitudes towards NBS, reactions to and understanding of positive NBS results, experiences of communication with health providers, decisions about carrier testing, and future pregnancies. Findings also explain the impact of positive NBS results on parent-child relationships, child development, informing children about carrier status, family burden, quality of life, and disparities. In conclusion, psychosocial consequences of receiving unexpected neonatal screening results and unsolicited genetic information remain significant risks to expansion of NBS. Findings suggest that risks may be mitigated by improved parent NBS education, effective communication, individualized genetic counseling, and anticipatory developmental guidance. Clinicians need to take extra measures to ensure equitable service delivery to marginalized subpopulations. Future investigations should be more inclusive of culturally and socioeconomically diverse families and conducted in low-resource countries. Providing these countries with adequate resources to develop NBS programs is an essential step towards achieving international health equity.

Preconception risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease

BACKGROUND

Globally, about 6% of children are born with a serious birth defect of genetic or partially genetic origin. Carrier screening or testing is one way to identify couples at increased risk of having a child with an autosomal recessive condition. The most common autosomal recessive conditions are thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease, with higher carrier rates in high-risk populations of specific ancestral backgrounds. Identifying and counselling couples at genetic risk of the conditions before pregnancy enables them to make fully informed reproductive decisions, with some of these choices not being available if testing is only offered in an antenatal setting. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of systematic preconception genetic risk assessment to enable autonomous reproductive choice and to improve reproductive outcomes  in women and their partners who are both identified as carriers of thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease in healthcare settings when compared to usual care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Trials Registers. Date of latest search of the registers: 04 August 2021. In addition, we searched for all relevant trials from 1970 (or the date at which the database was first available if after 1970) to date using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO), clinical trial databases (National Institutes of Health, Clinical Trials Search portal of the World Health Organization, metaRegister of controlled clinical trials), and hand searching of key journals and conference abstract books from 1998 to date (European Journal of Human Genetics, Genetics in Medicine, Journal of Community Genetics). We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and guidelines and also contacted subject experts in the field to request any unpublished or other published trials. Date of latest search of all these sources: 25 June 2021.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs (published or unpublished) comparing reproductive outcomes of systematic preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease when compared to usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We identified 37 papers, describing 22 unique trials which were potentially eligible for inclusion in the review. However, after assessment, we found no RCTs of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease.

MAIN RESULTS

No RCTs of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease are included. A trial identified earlier has published its results and has subsequently been listed as excluded in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As there are no RCTs of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis, or Tay-Sachs disease included in either the earlier or current versions of this review, we recommend considering potential non-RCTs studies (for example prospective cohorts or before-and-after studies) for future reviews. While RCTs are desirable to inform evidence-based practice and robust recommendations, the ethical, legal and social implications associated with using this trial design to evaluate the implementation of preconception genetic risk assessment involving carrier testing and reproductive autonomy must also be considered.  In addition, rather than focusing on single gene-by-gene carrier testing for specific autosomal-recessive conditions as the intervention being evaluated, preconception expanded genetic screening should also be included in future searches as this has received much attention in recent years as a more pragmatic strategy. The research evidence for current international policy recommendations is limited to non-randomised studies.

Practice variation of genetic counselor engagement in the cystic fibrosis newborn screen-positive diagnostic resolution process

Families of infants with a positive newborn screen for cystic fibrosis (CFNBS+) have well-characterized genetic counseling needs, including understanding the implications of diagnostic categorization. However, degree of involvement of genetic counselors (GCs) in the CFNBS+ diagnostic resolution process varies. This project explored GC engagement with US CF care centers in the diagnostic resolution process for CFNBS+ infants. Surveys were emailed to 713 Cystic Fibrosis Foundation-accredited CF center directors and clinic coordinators and 4,517 GCs. Respondents from institutions providing CFNBS+ diagnostic resolution were categorized by level of engagement between the CF center and GC: GC is part of or embedded in CF center (GC-engaged); GC is independent of CF center but receives CFNBS+ referrals (GC-referral); GC is uninvolved (non-engaged)] in CF center or CFNBS+ diagnostic resolution process. Responses from 125 CF center directors and clinic coordinators (17.5%) and 174 GCs (3.8%) were received. Analysis targeted responses from 84 center directors and clinic coordinators and 52 GCs, estimated to represent 24%-48% and 29% of 175 pediatric CF care centers, respectively. Nearly 40% of CF center directors or clinic coordinators never refer CFNBS+ infants to GCs. Respondents from GC-engaged CF centers reported that GCs provide unique and valuable services, understand CF at a high level, improve efficiency of the CFNBS+ diagnostic resolution process, and should be part of the CF care team; respondents from non-engaged CF centers reported negative views of GCs' value and knowledge (all p < .05). GCs engaged with CF centers were more likely to report that their services were valued by and accessible to CF centers (both p < .05). At all levels of engagement with CF centers, GCs were comfortable discussing CF genotype-phenotype correlation, variants of unknown significance, quality of life, and therapies. These results highlight a need to address practice variation in CFNBS+ genetic counseling and improve access to GCs' services.