1
|
Martin S, Angolini E, Audi J, Bertini E, Bruno LP, Coulter J, Ferlini A, Fortunato F, Frankova V, Garnier N, Grauman Å, Gross E, Hauber B, Hansson M, Kirschner J, Knieling F, Kyosovksa G, Ottombrino S, Novelli A, Raming R, Sansen S, Saier C, Veldwijk J. Patient preferences in genetic newborn screening for rare diseases: study protocol. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e081835. [PMID: 38643010 PMCID: PMC11056621 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081835] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2023] [Accepted: 03/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/22/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Rare diseases (RDs) collectively impact over 30 million people in Europe. Most individual conditions have a low prevalence which has resulted in a lack of research and expertise in this field, especially regarding genetic newborn screening (gNBS). There is increasing recognition of the importance of incorporating patients' needs and general public perspectives into the shared decision-making process regarding gNBS. This study is part of the Innovative Medicine Initiative project Screen4Care which aims at shortening the diagnostic journey for RDs by accelerating diagnosis for patients living with RDs through gNBS and the use of digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning. Our objective will be to assess expecting parent's perspectives, attitudes and preferences regarding gNBS for RDs in Italy and Germany. METHODS AND ANALYSIS A mixed method approach will assess perspectives, attitudes and preferences of (1) expecting parents seeking genetic consultation and (2) 'healthy' expecting parents from the general population in two countries (Germany and Italy). Focus groups and interviews using the nominal group technique and ranking exercises will be performed (qualitative phase). The results will inform the treatment of attributes to be assessed via a survey and a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The total recruitment sample will be 2084 participants (approximatively 1000 participants in each country for the online survey). A combination of thematic qualitative and logit-based quantitative approaches will be used to analyse the results of the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study has been approved by the Erlangen University Ethics Committee (22-246_1-B), the Freiburg University Ethics Committee (23-1005 S1-AV) and clinical centres in Italy (University of FerraraCE: 357/2023/Oss/AOUFe and Hospedale Bambino Gesu: No.2997 of 2 November 2023, Prot. No. _902) and approved for data storage and handling at the Uppsala University (2022-05806-01). The dissemination of the results will be ensured via scientific journal publication (open access).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvia Martin
- Center for Research and Bioethics, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Emanuele Angolini
- Research Unit of Neuromuscular and Neurodegenerative Disease, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù IRCCS, Roma, Lazio, Italy
| | - Jennifer Audi
- Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG, Opfikon, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Enrico Bertini
- Research Unit of Neuromuscular and Neurodegenerative Disease, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù IRCCS, Roma, Lazio, Italy
| | - Lucia Pia Bruno
- Medical Genetics, University of Siena, Siena, Italy
- Telethon Institute of Genetics and Medicine, Napoli, Campania, Italy
| | | | - Alessandra Ferlini
- Medical Genetics Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
| | - Fernanda Fortunato
- Medical Genetics Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
| | - Vera Frankova
- Institute for Medical Humanities, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | | | - Åsa Grauman
- Center for Research and Bioethics, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | | | - Mats Hansson
- Center for Research and Bioethics, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Janbernd Kirschner
- Department of Neuropediatrics and Muscle Disorders, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Freiburg, Germany
| | | | | | - Silvia Ottombrino
- Research Unit of Neuromuscular and Neurodegenerative Disease, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù IRCCS, Roma, Lazio, Italy
| | - Antonio Novelli
- Research Unit of Neuromuscular and Neurodegenerative Disease, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù IRCCS, Roma, Lazio, Italy
| | - Roman Raming
- Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany
| | | | - Christina Saier
- Department of Neuropediatrics and Muscle Disorders, Faculty of Medicine, Freiburg, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Minten T, Gold NB, Bick S, Adelson S, Gehlenborg N, Amendola LM, Boemer F, Coffey AJ, Encina N, Russell BE, Servais L, Sund KL, Tsipouras P, Bick D, Taft RJ, Green RC. Determining the characteristics of genetic disorders that predict inclusion in newborn genomic sequencing programs. MEDRXIV : THE PREPRINT SERVER FOR HEALTH SCIENCES 2024:2024.03.24.24304797. [PMID: 38585998 PMCID: PMC10996735 DOI: 10.1101/2024.03.24.24304797] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
Over 30 international research studies and commercial laboratories are exploring the use of genomic sequencing to screen apparently healthy newborns for genetic disorders. These programs have individualized processes for determining which genes and genetic disorders are queried and reported in newborns. We compared lists of genes from 26 research and commercial newborn screening programs and found substantial heterogeneity among the genes included. A total of 1,750 genes were included in at least one newborn genome sequencing program, but only 74 genes were included on >80% of gene lists, 16 of which are not associated with conditions on the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel. We used a linear regression model to explore factors related to the inclusion of individual genes across programs, finding that a high evidence base as well as treatment efficacy were two of the most important factors for inclusion. We applied a machine learning model to predict how suitable a gene is for newborn sequencing. As knowledge about and treatments for genetic disorders expand, this model provides a dynamic tool to reassess genes for newborn screening implementation. This study highlights the complex landscape of gene list curation among genomic newborn screening programs and proposes an empirical path forward for determining the genes and disorders of highest priority for newborn screening programs.
Collapse
|
3
|
Adi-Wauran E, Clausen M, Shickh S, Gagliardi AR, Denburg A, Oldfield LE, Sam J, Reble E, Krishnapillai S, Regier DA, Baxter NN, Dawson L, Penney LS, Foulkes W, Basik M, Sun S, Schrader KA, Karsan A, Pollett A, Pugh TJ, Kim RH, Bombard Y. "I just wanted more": Hereditary cancer syndromes patients' perspectives on the utility of circulating tumour DNA testing for cancer screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2024; 32:176-181. [PMID: 37821757 PMCID: PMC10853540 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01473-y] [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: 04/18/2023] [Revised: 09/17/2023] [Accepted: 09/21/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Hereditary cancer syndromes (HCS) predispose individuals to a higher risk of developing multiple cancers. However, current screening strategies have limited ability to screen for all cancer risks. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) detects DNA fragments shed by tumour cells in the bloodstream and can potentially detect cancers early. This study aimed to explore patients' perspectives on ctDNA's utility to help inform its clinical adoption and implementation. We conducted a qualitative interpretive description study using semi-structured phone interviews. Participants were purposively sampled adult HCS patients recruited from a Canadian HCS research consortium. Thirty HCS patients were interviewed (n = 19 women, age range 20s-70s, n = 25 were white). Participants were highly concerned about developing cancers, particularly those without reliable screening options for early detection. They "just wanted more" than their current screening strategies. Participants were enthusiastic about ctDNA's potential to be comprehensive (detect multiple cancers), predictive (detect cancers early) and tailored (lead to personalized clinical management). Participants also acknowledged ctDNA's potential limitations, including false positives/negatives risks and experiencing additional anxiety. However, they saw ctDNA's potential benefits outweighing its limitations. In conclusion, participants' belief in ctDNA's potential to improve their care overshadowed its limitations, indicating patients' support for using ctDNA in HCS care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ella Adi-Wauran
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Marc Clausen
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Salma Shickh
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Anna R Gagliardi
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
| | - Avram Denburg
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - Leslie E Oldfield
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
| | - Jordan Sam
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Emma Reble
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Suvetha Krishnapillai
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Dean A Regier
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Nancy N Baxter
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Lesa Dawson
- Memorial University, St. John's, Canada
- Eastern Health Authority, St. John's, Canada
| | | | - William Foulkes
- McGill University, Montréal, Canada
- Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Canada
| | - Mark Basik
- McGill University, Montréal, Canada
- Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Canada
| | - Sophie Sun
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | | | - Aly Karsan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | | | - Trevor J Pugh
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Canada
| | - Raymond H Kim
- Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada.
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
- Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Canada.
| | - Yvonne Bombard
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Prosenc B, Cizek Sajko M, Kavsek G, Herzog M, Peterlin B. Perception of genomic newborn screening among peripartum mothers. Eur J Hum Genet 2024; 32:163-170. [PMID: 38110644 PMCID: PMC10853238 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01497-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2023] [Revised: 10/26/2023] [Accepted: 11/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Advances in genomic technology have generated possibilities for expanding newborn screening from traditional procedures to genomic newborn screening (gNBS). However, before the implementation of gNBS, it is crucial to address various aspects, including parental attitudes, at the national level. With this aim, we analyzed the attitudes and expectations of Slovenian peripartum mothers regarding gNBS and the acceptability of its implementation into the Slovenian health system. A questionnaire-based study was conducted on a convenience sample of 1136 peripartum mothers (a response rate of 84.1%) in a hospital setting in Slovenia. We measured participants' level of general genetic knowledge, motivation to undergo gNBS, attitude toward its benefits and drawbacks, willingness to participate financially, and factors that would influence their decision to undergo gNBS. Most participants exhibited a positive attitude (83.2%) and were motivated to undertake gNBS (63.4%). They were willing to share genetic data and also contribute to the testing costs. Mothers with better genetic literacy and higher education level, and those with the familial genetic testing experiences were more supportive of gNBS. However, several emotional and socio-ethical concerns were raised regarding how the genetic information would influence family and social life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bernarda Prosenc
- Clinical Institute for Genomic Medicine, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Novo mesto, Novo mesto, Slovenia
| | - Mojca Cizek Sajko
- Clinical Institute for Genomic Medicine, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Gorazd Kavsek
- Clinical Department of Perinatology, The Division of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Marusa Herzog
- Clinical Department of Perinatology, The Division of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Borut Peterlin
- Clinical Institute for Genomic Medicine, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Novo mesto, Novo mesto, Slovenia.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
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
|
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
|
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
|
8
|
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
|
9
|
Gold NB, Adelson SM, Shah N, Williams S, Bick SL, Zoltick ES, Gold JI, Strong A, Ganetzky R, Roberts AE, Walker M, Holtz AM, Sankaran VG, Delmonte O, Tan W, Holm IA, Thiagarajah JR, Kamihara J, Comander J, Place E, Wiggs J, Green RC. Perspectives of Rare Disease Experts on Newborn Genome Sequencing. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2312231. [PMID: 37155167 PMCID: PMC10167563 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.12231] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/23/2023] [Indexed: 05/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Newborn genome sequencing (NBSeq) can detect infants at risk for treatable disorders currently undetected by conventional newborn screening. Despite broad stakeholder support for NBSeq, the perspectives of rare disease experts regarding which diseases should be screened have not been ascertained. Objective To query rare disease experts about their perspectives on NBSeq and which gene-disease pairs they consider appropriate to evaluate in apparently healthy newborns. Design, Setting, and Participants This survey study, designed between November 2, 2021, and February 11, 2022, assessed experts' perspectives on 6 statements related to NBSeq. Experts were also asked to indicate whether they would recommend including each of 649 gene-disease pairs associated with potentially treatable conditions in NBSeq. The survey was administered between February 11 and September 23, 2022, to 386 experts, including all 144 directors of accredited medical and laboratory genetics training programs in the US. Exposures Expert perspectives on newborn screening using genome sequencing. Main Outcomes and Measures The proportion of experts indicating agreement or disagreement with each survey statement and those who selected inclusion of each gene-disease pair were tabulated. Exploratory analyses of responses by gender and age were conducted using t and χ2 tests. Results Of 386 experts invited, 238 (61.7%) responded (mean [SD] age, 52.6 [12.8] years [range 27-93 years]; 126 [52.9%] women and 112 [47.1%] men). Among the experts who responded, 161 (87.9%) agreed that NBSeq for monogenic treatable disorders should be made available to all newborns; 107 (58.5%) agreed that NBSeq should include genes associated with treatable disorders, even if those conditions were low penetrance; 68 (37.2%) agreed that actionable adult-onset conditions should be sequenced in newborns to facilitate cascade testing in parents, and 51 (27.9%) agreed that NBSeq should include screening for conditions with no established therapies or management guidelines. The following 25 genes were recommended by 85% or more of the experts: OTC, G6PC, SLC37A4, CYP11B1, ARSB, F8, F9, SLC2A1, CYP17A1, RB1, IDS, GUSB, DMD, GLUD1, CYP11A1, GALNS, CPS1, PLPBP, ALDH7A1, SLC26A3, SLC25A15, SMPD1, GATM, SLC7A7, and NAGS. Including these, 42 gene-disease pairs were endorsed by at least 80% of experts, and 432 genes were endorsed by at least 50% of experts. Conclusions and Relevance In this survey study, rare disease experts broadly supported NBSeq for treatable conditions and demonstrated substantial concordance regarding the inclusion of a specific subset of genes in NBSeq.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nina B. Gold
- Division of Medical Genetics and Metabolism, Massachusetts General Hospital for Children, Boston
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sophia M. Adelson
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Nidhi Shah
- Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire
- Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, New Hampshire
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Shardae Williams
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sarah L. Bick
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Emilie S. Zoltick
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Center for Healthcare Research in Pediatrics, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jessica I. Gold
- Division of Human Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Alanna Strong
- Division of Human Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
| | - Rebecca Ganetzky
- Division of Human Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
| | - Amy E. Roberts
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Cardiology and Division of Genetics and Genomics, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Melissa Walker
- Division of Pediatric Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital for Children, Boston
- Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alexander M. Holtz
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Vijay G. Sankaran
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ottavia Delmonte
- Laboratory of Clinical Immunology and Microbiology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Weizhen Tan
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Massachusetts General Hospital for Children, Boston
| | - Ingrid A. Holm
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Manton Center for Orphan Diseases Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jay R. Thiagarajah
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Junne Kamihara
- Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jason Comander
- Department of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston
- Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Emily Place
- Department of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston
- Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Janey Wiggs
- Department of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston
- Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Robert C. Green
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Broad Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
How does the genomic naive public perceive whole genomic testing for health purposes? A scoping review. Eur J Hum Genet 2023; 31:35-47. [PMID: 36257982 PMCID: PMC9822972 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01208-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2021] [Revised: 09/25/2022] [Accepted: 09/29/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
The benefits of genomic testing are primarily reported in rare disease, cancer diagnosis and disease management. However, as research into its application in common, more complex conditions grows, as well as the increased prevalence of carrier screening programs, the genomic naive public is more likely to be offered testing in future. To promote social acceptability and ethical application of this technology, it is essential that public perceptions of genomics are considered. Previous studies, however, have primarily focussed on the views of those with genetic conditions or those undergoing genetic testing. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate the genomic naive public's perceptions of clinical genomics and clinical genomic testing. Embase, MEDLINE and PubMed databases were searched, with a total of 3460 articles identified. Data analysis was organised according to the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework. Sixteen full-text articles were included in the final analysis. Most of the studies used questionnaires to determine attitudes of the public toward clinical genomics (n = 12). Public perceptions were found to underpin technology (Domain 2), value proposition (Domain 3), the adopter system (Domain 4) and the wider context (Domain 6) of the NASSS framework, highlighting its importance when considering implementation of an innovative technology such as genomic testing. Our study shows public perceptions are diverse, and highlights the need for more studies on the views of underrepresented groups and the impact of cultural contexts on perceptions.
Collapse
|
11
|
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
|
12
|
Wang H, Page R, Lopez D, Arkatkar S, Young C, Martinez D, Robbins-Furman P, Montalvo-Liendo N, Chen LS. Pregnant Latinas' views of adopting exome sequencing into newborn screening: A qualitative study. Genet Med 2022; 24:1644-1652. [PMID: 35579624 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2021] [Revised: 04/05/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE There are, currently, conflicting opinions about the adoption of exome sequencing (ES) into the standard newborn screening program. This study aimed to explore the views of pregnant Latinas, a hard-to-reach, underserved, and understudied population, about pursuing ES for their newborns. METHODS We conducted semistructured interviews with 32 pregnant Latinas who predominately lived in rural areas and had low levels of income and education. An emergent coding approach was used to analyze the qualitative data collected. RESULTS Our entire sample believed that ES should be offered as a part of newborn screening, which could empower pregnant Latinas to better understand their children's health and take early treatment actions. Although some participants were concerned about potentially bad ES results and had questions about the accuracy of ES results, nearly all interviewees reported that they would be willing to have their newborns undergo ES. The main reasons given were to be informed of diseases that the baby may have, and the perception that ES is a procedure that involves minimal risk. CONCLUSION Pregnant Latinas in this study had favorable attitudes toward newborn ES. Their perspectives should be considered when decisions are made about incorporating ES into newborn screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Haocen Wang
- Department of Health and Kinesiology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
| | - Robin Page
- College of Nursing, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
| | - Daniela Lopez
- Department of Nutrition, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
| | | | - Christine Young
- Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
| | - Denise Martinez
- School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
| | | | | | - Lei-Shih Chen
- Department of Health and Kinesiology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Armstrong B, Christensen KD, Genetti CA, Parad RB, Robinson JO, Blout Zawatsky CL, Zettler B, Beggs AH, Holm IA, Green RC, McGuire AL, Smith HS, Pereira S. Parental Attitudes Toward Standard Newborn Screening and Newborn Genomic Sequencing: Findings From the BabySeq Study. Front Genet 2022; 13:867371. [PMID: 35571041 PMCID: PMC9091188 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.867371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/31/2022] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: With increasing utility and decreasing cost of genomic sequencing, augmentation of standard newborn screening (NBS) programs with newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) has been proposed. Before nGS can be integrated into newborn screening, parents' perspectives must be better understood. Objective: Using data from surveys administered to parents of healthy newborns who were enrolled in the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial of nGS alongside NBS, this paper reports parents' attitudes regarding population-based NBS and nGS assessed 3 months after results disclosure. Methods: Parental attitudes regarding whether all newborns should receive, and whether informed consent should be required for, NBS and nGS, as well as whether nGS should be mandated were assessed using 5-point scales from strongly disagree (=1) to strongly agree (=5). Parents' interest in receiving types of results from nGS was assessed on a 5-point scale from not at all interested (=1) to very interested (=5). Survey responses were analyzed using Fisher's exact tests, paired t-tests, and repeated measures ANOVA. Results: At 3 months post-disclosure, 248 parents of 174 healthy newborns submitted a survey. Support for every newborn receiving standard NBS (mean 4.67) was higher than that for every newborn receiving nGS (mean 3.60; p < 0.001). Support for required informed consent for NBS (mean 3.44) was lower than that for nGS (mean 4.27, p < 0.001). Parents' attitudes toward NBS and nGS were not significantly associated with self-reported political orientation. If hypothetically receiving nGS outside of the BabySeq Project, most parents reported being very interested in receiving information on their baby's risk of developing a disease in childhood that can be prevented, treated, or cured (86.8%) and their risk of developing a disease during adulthood that can be prevented, treated, or cured (84.6%). Discussion: Parents' opinions are crucial to inform design and delivery of public health programs, as the success of the program hinges on parents' trust and participation. To accommodate parents' preferences without affecting the current high participation rates in NBS, an optional add-on consent to nGS in addition to NBS may be a feasible approach. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02422511.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brittan Armstrong
- Center for Medical Ethics and Heath Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Kurt D. Christensen
- PRecisiOn Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, United States
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Casie A. Genetti
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Richard B. Parad
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jill Oliver Robinson
- Center for Medical Ethics and Heath Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Carrie L. Blout Zawatsky
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
- Medical and Population Genetics, The Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA, United States
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA, United States
- The MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Bethany Zettler
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Alan H. Beggs
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
- The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Ingrid A. Holm
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Division of Genetics and Genomics, The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
- The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Robert C. Green
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA, United States
- The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Amy L. McGuire
- Center for Medical Ethics and Heath Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Hadley Stevens Smith
- Center for Medical Ethics and Heath Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Stacey Pereira
- Center for Medical Ethics and Heath Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Genomics and Newborn Screening: Perspectives of Public Health Programs. Int J Neonatal Screen 2022; 8:ijns8010011. [PMID: 35225933 PMCID: PMC8883997 DOI: 10.3390/ijns8010011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2021] [Revised: 01/18/2022] [Accepted: 01/19/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
This study assesses the benefits and challenges of using genomics in Newborn Screening Programs (NBS) from the perspectives of State program officials. This project aims to help programs develop policies that will aid in the integration of genomic technology. Discussion groups were conducted with the NBS Program and Laboratory Directors in the seven HRSA Regional Genomics Collaboratives (August 2014-March 2016). The discussion groups addressed expected uses of genomics, potential benefits, and challenges of integrating genomic technology, and educational needs for parents and other NBS stakeholders: Twelve focus groups were conducted, which included participants from over 40 state programs. Benefits of incorporating genomics included improving screening modalities, supporting diagnostic procedures, and screening for a wider spectrum of disorders. Challenges included the costs of genomics, the ability to educate parents and health care providers about results, and the potential negative psychosocial impact of genomic information. Attempts to address the challenges of integrating genomics must focus on preserving the child welfare goals of NBS programs. Health departments will need to explore how genomics could be used to enhance programs while maintaining universal access to screening.
Collapse
|
15
|
Taher J, Mighton C, Chowdhary S, Casalino S, Frangione E, Arnoldo S, Bearss E, Binnie A, Bombard Y, Borgundvaag B, Chertkow H, Clausen M, Devine L, Faghfoury H, Friedman SM, Gingras AC, Khan Z, Mazzulli T, McGeer A, McLeod SL, Pugh TJ, Richardson D, Simpson J, Stern S, Strug L, Taher A, Lerner-Ellis J. Implementation of serological and molecular tools to inform COVID-19 patient management: protocol for the GENCOV prospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e052842. [PMID: 34593505 PMCID: PMC8487020 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There is considerable variability in symptoms and severity of COVID-19 among patients infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Linking host and virus genome sequence information to antibody response and biological information may identify patient or viral characteristics associated with poor and favourable outcomes. This study aims to (1) identify characteristics of the antibody response that result in maintained immune response and better outcomes, (2) determine the impact of genetic differences on infection severity and immune response, (3) determine the impact of viral lineage on antibody response and patient outcomes and (4) evaluate patient-reported outcomes of receiving host genome, antibody and viral lineage results. METHODS AND ANALYSIS A prospective, observational cohort study is being conducted among adult patients with COVID-19 in the Greater Toronto Area. Blood samples are collected at baseline (during infection) and 1, 6 and 12 months after diagnosis. Serial antibody titres, isotype, antigen target and viral neutralisation will be assessed. Clinical data will be collected from chart reviews and patient surveys. Host genomes and T-cell and B-cell receptors will be sequenced. Viral genomes will be sequenced to identify viral lineage. Regression models will be used to test associations between antibody response, physiological response, genetic markers and patient outcomes. Pathogenic genomic variants related to disease severity, or negative outcomes will be identified and genome wide association will be conducted. Immune repertoire diversity during infection will be correlated with severity of COVID-19 symptoms and human leucocyte antigen-type associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants can learn their genome sequencing, antibody and viral sequencing results; patient-reported outcomes of receiving this information will be assessed through surveys and qualitative interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study was approved by Clinical Trials Ontario Streamlined Ethics Review System (CTO Project ID: 3302) and the research ethics boards at participating hospitals. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and end-users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Taher
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Chloe Mighton
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sunakshi Chowdhary
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Selina Casalino
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Erika Frangione
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Saranya Arnoldo
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- William Osler Health System, Brampton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Erin Bearss
- Mount Sinai Academic Family Health Team, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Yvonne Bombard
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bjug Borgundvaag
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Marc Clausen
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Luke Devine
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Hanna Faghfoury
- Fred A Litwin and Family Centre in Genetic Medicine, University Health Network & Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Steven Marc Friedman
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Emergency Medicine, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anne-Claude Gingras
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zeeshan Khan
- Mackenzie Health, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
| | - Tony Mazzulli
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Allison McGeer
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Shelley L McLeod
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Schwartz/Reisman Emergency Medicine Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Trevor J Pugh
- Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Jared Simpson
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Seth Stern
- Mackenzie Health, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lisa Strug
- The Centre for Applied Genomics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ahmed Taher
- Emergency Medicine, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Mackenzie Health, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jordan Lerner-Ellis
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
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
|
17
|
Peckham A, Wright JG, Marani H, Abdelhalim R, Laxer D, Allin S, Alam N, Marchildon G. Putting the Patient First: A Scoping Review of Patient Desires in Canada. Healthc Policy 2021; 16:46-69. [PMID: 34129478 PMCID: PMC8200834 DOI: 10.12927/hcpol.2021.26499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Patient-centred care is a key priority for governments, providers and stakeholders, yet little is known about the care preferences of patient groups. We completed a scoping review that yielded 193 articles for analysis. Five health states were used to account for the diversity of possible preferences based on health needs. Five broad themes were identified and expressed differently across the health states, including personalized care, navigation, choice, holistic care and care continuity. Patients' perspectives must be considered to meet the diverse needs of targeted patient groups, which can inform health system planning, quality improvement initiatives and targeting of investments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allie Peckham
- Assistant Professor, Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ; North American Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - James G Wright
- Chief, Economics, Policy and Research, Ontario Medical Association, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public HealthUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - Husayn Marani
- Research Assistant, North American Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public HealthUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - Reham Abdelhalim
- Research Assistant, North American Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public HealthUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - Dara Laxer
- Executive Director, Health Policy and Promotion, Ontario Medical Association, Toronto, ON
| | - Sara Allin
- Director of Operations, North American Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; Assistant Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - Nadia Alam
- Past President, Ontario Medical Association, Toronto, ON
| | - Greg Marchildon
- Director, North American Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Scheitle CP. Does the public’s confidence in the scientific community affect its willingness to participate in social science research? A test examining the demeanor of survey respondents. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS 2019. [DOI: 10.1177/2059799119884280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Research examining the consequences of the public’s confidence in the scientific community has primarily focused on the natural or medical sciences. It is not clear whether the public’s confidence in the scientific community has implications for research and practice in the social sciences. To begin examining this question, this study assesses whether survey respondents’ confidence in the scientific community is associated with their demeanor during the survey interview. This is consequential because respondent demeanor itself has been associated with survey refusal and nonresponse to items within surveys. Analysis of the 2004–2016 General Social Survey finds that individuals expressing more confidence in the scientific community are rated as having more positive demeanors by interviewers. Respondents’ confidence in other types of institutions does not show the same association, suggesting that confidence in the scientific community is uniquely associated with respondents’ demeanor during the interview. These findings suggest that the public’s confidence in science could have implications for at least survey-based social science research.
Collapse
|
19
|
Nisselle A, Bishop M, Charles T, Morrissy S, King E, Metcalfe S, Gaff C. Lessons learnt from implementing change in newborn bloodspot screening processes over more than a decade: Midwives, genetics and education. Midwifery 2019; 79:102542. [PMID: 31569029 DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2019.102542] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2019] [Revised: 08/09/2019] [Accepted: 09/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore midwives' roles and education requirements in newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) for genetic conditions, as programs and supporting education evolve over time. BACKGROUND NBS processes are evolving and will continue to evolve with new genetic and genomic technologies. Midwives have a critical role in facilitating NBS, as they are the primary healthcare professional to interact with parents at the time of collecting the bloodspot. As new consent processes and genomic technologies are incorporated into NBS, midwives need to stay up-to-date with these changes, so that parents can make an informed decision about having the test and future use of the DNA sample. RESEARCH DESIGN/SETTING We used a cross-sectional approach to analyse midwives' knowledge and behaviour in 2005/6 and 2016, with changes in NBS processes and education introduced in 2011. FINDINGS We found midwives' NBS knowledge improved in 8/18 areas after a 10-year period, mostly related to process changes, but there was also an increase in misconceptions regarding which conditions are screened. Areas of significant improvement were not consistently explained by participation in continuing professional development (CPD). We found midwives used official brochures and NBS collection cards to guide discussions with families. Changes to the NBS collection cards, together with the content of CPD materials, aligned with the significant improvements and deficits we observed. When considering potential changes to future maternity care that incorporates emerging genomic technologies, midwives indicated the main barrier was their lack of knowledge; the majority (60.3%) reported supervision support to attend genomics CPD. KEY CONCLUSIONS Changes in NBS practice should be implemented through multifaceted programs that include education sessions and procedural prompts. The NBS collection card should be seen not just as a legal consent document but also as an educational tool. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE As NBS programs evolve through the addition of conditions screened for or changes to technology or consent processes, multiple strategies should be applied to upskill midwives to ensure they can best support parents to make informed choices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy Nisselle
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
| | - Michelle Bishop
- Genomics Education Program, Health Education England, Hagley Road, Birmingham B16 9RG, United Kingdom.
| | - Taryn Charles
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
| | - Sally Morrissy
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
| | - Emily King
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
| | - Sylvia Metcalfe
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
| | - Clara Gaff
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia; Walter & Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Royal Parade, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
|
21
|
Iskrov G, Ivanov S, Wrenn S, Stefanov R. Whole-Genome Sequencing in Newborn Screening-Attitudes and Opinions of Bulgarian Pediatricians and Geneticists. Front Public Health 2017; 5:308. [PMID: 29250518 PMCID: PMC5715396 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00308] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2017] [Accepted: 11/03/2017] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective The aim of this study was to assess the attitudes and opinions on the potential use of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) in conjunction with the traditional newborn screening (NBS). We conducted an online survey among pediatricians and geneticists from Bulgaria. The study was based on the concept of non-selective WGS for all newborns and analysis of all genes. Results/conclusion In total, 120 out of 299 invited participants completed the survey, with an overall response rate of 40.1%. While half of the pediatricians surveyed supported population-based non-selective WGS in NBS, 65.2% of the geneticists expressed concerns. Most participants underlined that ethical issues were as important as medical ones and called for a stricter protection of affected individuals against any abuse of their personal data. Extensive genetic counseling and psychological support to families were mentioned as key elements in this potential activity. Nevertheless, both pediatricians and geneticists considered that NBS in Bulgaria could be further developed, with selective WGS being suggested as a potential option. While non-selective WGS for all newborns is not currently perceived as feasible, pediatricians and geneticists do believe that selective WGS could strengthen current NBS programs. Cross-border project collaborations may set the stage for generating experience and evidence on these complex issues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgi Iskrov
- Department of Social Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.,Institute for Rare Diseases, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Stefan Ivanov
- Department of Social Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Stephen Wrenn
- Department of Social Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | - Rumen Stefanov
- Department of Social Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.,Institute for Rare Diseases, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Jansen ME, Lister KJ, van Kranen HJ, Cornel MC. Policy Making in Newborn Screening Needs a Structured and Transparent Approach. Front Public Health 2017; 5:53. [PMID: 28377917 PMCID: PMC5359248 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2016] [Accepted: 03/01/2017] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) programs have expanded significantly in the past years and are expected to expand further with the emergence of genetic technologies. Historically, NBS expansion has often occurred following ad hoc consideration of conditions, instead of a structured and transparent approach. In this review, we explore issues pertinent to NBS policy making, through the lens of the policy cycle: (a) agenda setting, (b) policy advice, (c) policy decision, (d) implementation, and (e) evaluation. METHODS A literature search was conducted to gather information on the elements specific to NBS and its policy making process. RESULTS The review highlighted two approaches to nominate a condition: a structured approach through horizon scanning; and an ad hoc process. For assessment of a condition, there was unanimous support for a robust process based on criteria. While the need to assess harms and benefits was a repeated theme in the articles, there is no agreed-upon threshold for benefit in decision-making. Furthermore, the literature was consistent in its recommendation for an overarching, independent, multidisciplinary group providing recommendations to government. An implementation plan focusing on the different levels on which NBS operates and the information needed on each level is essential for successful implementation. Continuously monitoring, and improving a program is vital, particularly following the implementation of screening for a new condition. An advisory committee could advise on implementation, development, review, modification, and cessation of (parts of) NBS. CONCLUSION The results highlight that there are a wave of issues facing NBS programs that policy makers must take into account when developing policy processes. What conditions to screen, and the technologies used in NBS, are both up for debate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marleen E Jansen
- Section Community Genetics, Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Institute for Public Health Genomics, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Karla J Lister
- Screening Policy Section, Office of Population Health Genomics, Department of Health, Government of Western Australia , Perth, WA , Australia
| | - Henk J van Kranen
- Institute for Public Health Genomics, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands; Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands
| | - Martina C Cornel
- Section Community Genetics, Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute , Amsterdam , Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Friedman JM, Cornel MC, Goldenberg AJ, Lister KJ, Sénécal K, Vears DF. Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations. BMC Med Genomics 2017; 10:9. [PMID: 28222731 PMCID: PMC5320805 DOI: 10.1186/s12920-017-0247-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2016] [Accepted: 02/14/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of genome-wide (whole genome or exome) sequencing for population-based newborn screening presents an opportunity to detect and treat or prevent many more serious early-onset health conditions than is possible today. METHODS The Paediatric Task Team of the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health's Regulatory and Ethics Working Group reviewed current understanding and concerns regarding the use of genomic technologies for population-based newborn screening and developed, by consensus, eight recommendations for clinicians, clinical laboratory scientists, and policy makers. RESULTS Before genome-wide sequencing can be implemented in newborn screening programs, its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness must be demonstrated, and the ability to distinguish disease-causing and benign variants of all genes screened must be established. In addition, each jurisdiction needs to resolve ethical and policy issues regarding the disclosure of incidental or secondary findings to families and ownership, appropriate storage and sharing of genomic data. CONCLUSION The best interests of children should be the basis for all decisions regarding the implementation of genomic newborn screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan M. Friedman
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
- Child & Family Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Martina C. Cornel
- Section Clinical Genetics, Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Holland
- EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Holland
| | - Aaron J. Goldenberg
- The Center for Genetic Research Ethics and Law, Department of Bioethics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH USA
| | - Karla J. Lister
- Office of Population Health Genomics, Public Health Division, Department of Health, Government of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
| | - Karine Sénécal
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Danya F. Vears
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
International differences in the evaluation of conditions for newborn bloodspot screening: a review of scientific literature and policy documents. Eur J Hum Genet 2016; 25:10-16. [PMID: 27848945 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2016.126] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2016] [Revised: 08/16/2016] [Accepted: 08/24/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite international adoption of newborn bloodspot screening (DBS), no two countries' screening programs are the same. This article aims to understand what factors influence DBS decision-making criteria and how conditions are assessed against them. In doing so, it offers unique insights into the international landscape of DBS. A systematic review on DBS criteria in scientific literature was first undertaken. Through this, five topics were identified for consideration when analyzing DBS decision-making. Using these five topics as a template, a side-by-side comparison was conducted on DBS in policy documents of eight countries. Programs are using different approaches to explore the same policy issues, including: the beneficiary of DBS, definition of criteria, the way conditions are assessed, level of evidence required, and recommendations after assessment. These differences have the potential to result in increased disparity across DBS internationally. Ultimately, governments need to decide on their role and develop an approach to DBS decision-making in line with this role. The analyses presented in this article highlight that despite programs' commonalities, no one 'DBS decision-making solution' exists. Understanding the different approaches to decision-making within the literature and policy settings, provides an objective starting point for structured decision-making approaches for DBS programs.
Collapse
|
25
|
Etchegary H, Nicholls SG, Tessier L, Simmonds C, Potter BK, Brehaut JC, Pullman D, Hayeems R, Zelenietz S, Lamoureux M, Milburn J, Turner L, Chakraborty P, Wilson B. Consent for newborn screening: parents' and health-care professionals' experiences of consent in practice. Eur J Hum Genet 2016; 24:1530-1534. [PMID: 27302842 PMCID: PMC5110054 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2016.55] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2016] [Revised: 04/21/2016] [Accepted: 05/05/2016] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Consent processes for newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) are variable, with a lack of descriptive research that depicts how the offer of NBS is made to parents. We explored the experience, in practice, of consent for NBS. Semistructured interviews in two Canadian provinces were held with: (1) parents of children offered NBS (n=32); and (2) health-care professionals involved in the NBS process (n=19). Data on recollections of NBS, including consent processes, were utilized to identify emerging themes using the method of constant comparison. Three themes were relevant to NBS consent: (1) The 'offer' of NBS; (2) content and timing of information provision; and (3) the importance of parental experiences for consent decisions. Recollections of consent for NBS were similar between jurisdictions. Excepting midwives and their patients, NBS was viewed as a routine part of giving birth, with little evidence of an informed consent process. Although most parents were satisfied, all respondents suggested information about NBS be provided long before the birth. Accounts of parents who declined screening highlight the influence of parental experiences with the heel prick process in screening decisions. Findings further our understanding of consent in practice and highlight areas for improvement in parent-provider interactions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Holly Etchegary
- Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Stuart G Nicholls
- School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Laure Tessier
- Newborn Screening Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Charlene Simmonds
- Health Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Beth K Potter
- School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Daryl Pullman
- Community Health and Humanities, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Robyn Hayeems
- Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto; Program in Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Sari Zelenietz
- Newborn Screening Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Monica Lamoureux
- Newborn Screening Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jennifer Milburn
- Newborn Screening Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lesley Turner
- Provincial Medical Genetics Program, Eastern Health, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
| | - Pranesh Chakraborty
- Newborn Screening Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Brenda Wilson
- School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Abstract
AIM To characterize the views of young adults toward integrating whole-genome sequencing (WGS) into standard pediatric care, particularly when used as a supplement to newborn screening. MATERIALS & METHODS This mixed methods descriptive study assessed the perspectives of a diverse group of 18- and 19-year olds (n = 145) in the USA using an informational video and online survey. RESULTS Young adults typically recommended disclosing WGS results to both parents and children during childhood. In the qualitative analysis, most participants emphasized the anticipated health benefits of pediatric WGS, while a minority discussed possible negative emotional and developmental impacts. CONCLUSION Differing preferences for pediatric WGS emphasize the importance that clinicians adopt responsive approaches when providing WGS and disclosing results to families.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher H Wade
- School of Nursing & Health Studies, University of Washington Bothell, Bothell, WA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Berg JS, Powell CM. Potential Uses and Inherent Challenges of Using Genome-Scale Sequencing to Augment Current Newborn Screening. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2015; 5:cshperspect.a023150. [PMID: 26438605 DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a023150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
Since newborn screening (NBS) began in the 1960s, technological advances have enabled its expansion to include an increasing number of disorders. Recent developments now make it possible to sequence an infant's genome relatively quickly and economically. Clinical application of whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing is expanding at a rapid pace but presents many challenges. Its utility in NBS has yet to be demonstrated and its application in the pediatric population requires examination, not only for potential clinical benefits, but also for the unique ethical challenges it presents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan S Berg
- Department of Genetics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7264
| | - Cynthia M Powell
- Departments of Pediatrics and Genetics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7264
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Roche MI, Berg JS. Incidental Findings with Genomic Testing: Implications for Genetic Counseling Practice. CURRENT GENETIC MEDICINE REPORTS 2015; 3:166-176. [PMID: 26566463 PMCID: PMC4633435 DOI: 10.1007/s40142-015-0075-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
This paper summarizes the current controversies surrounding the identification and disclosure of "incidental" or "secondary" findings from genomic sequencing and the implications for genetic counseling practice. The rapid expansion of clinical sequencing has influenced the ascertainment and return of incidental findings, while empiric data to inform best practices are still being generated. Using the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next Generation Exome Sequencing (NCGENES) research project as an example, we discuss the implications of different models of consent and their impact on patient decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Myra I. Roche
- />Department of Pediatrics and Genetics, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 326A MacNider, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7240 USA
| | - Jonathan S. Berg
- />Department of Genetics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 120 Mason Farm Road, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7264 USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Miller FA, Hayeems RZ, Bombard Y, Cressman C, Barg CJ, Carroll JC, Wilson BJ, Little J, Allanson J, Chakraborty P, Giguère Y, Regier DA. Public Perceptions of the Benefits and Risks of Newborn Screening. Pediatrics 2015; 136:e413-23. [PMID: 26169426 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2015-0518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/06/2015] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Growing technological capacity and parent and professional advocacy highlight the need to understand public expectations of newborn population screening. METHODS We administered a bilingual (French, English) Internet survey to a demographically proportional sample of Canadians in 2013 to assess preferences for the types of diseases to be screened for in newborns by using a discrete choice experiment. Attributes were: clinical benefits of improved health, earlier time to diagnosis, reproductive risk information, false-positive (FP) results, and overdiagnosed infants. Survey data were analyzed with a mixed logit model to assess preferences and trade-offs among attributes, interaction between attributes, and preference heterogeneity. RESULTS On average, respondents were favorable toward screening. Clinical benefits were the most important outcome; reproductive risk information and early diagnosis were also valued, although 8% disvalued early diagnosis, and reproductive risk information was least important. All respondents preferred to avoid FP results and overdiagnosis but were willing to accept these to achieve moderate clinical benefit, accepting higher rates of harms to achieve significant benefit. Several 2-way interactions between attributes were statistically significant: respondents were willing to accept a higher FP rate for significant clinical benefit but preferred a lower rate for moderate benefit; similarly, respondents valued early diagnosis more when associated with significant rather than moderate clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS Members of the public prioritized clinical benefits for affected infants and preferred to minimize harms. These findings suggest support for newborn screening policies prioritizing clinical benefits over solely informational benefits, coupled with concerted efforts to avoid or minimize harms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona A Miller
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada;
| | - Robin Z Hayeems
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Canada
| | - Yvonne Bombard
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | - Céline Cressman
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Carolyn J Barg
- Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - June C Carroll
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Julian Little
- Departments of Epidemiology and Community Medicine and
| | - Judith Allanson
- Department of Genetics, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Canada; Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Pranesh Chakraborty
- Department of Genetics, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Canada; Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Yves Giguère
- Department of Medical Biology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Quebec, University of Laval, Quebec City, Canada
| | - Dean A Regier
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; and Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Kalynchuk EJ, Althouse A, Parker LS, Saller DN, Rajkovic A. Prenatal whole-exome sequencing: parental attitudes. Prenat Diagn 2015; 35:1030-6. [PMID: 26151551 DOI: 10.1002/pd.4635] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2015] [Revised: 06/09/2015] [Accepted: 06/10/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to survey the opinions of expectant parents regarding prenatal whole-exome sequencing. METHODS The study used a questionnaire that focused on acceptability of prenatal whole-exome sequencing to individuals who pursued first-trimester prenatal screening in a tertiary academic medical center. A total of 186 expectant individuals completed the questionnaire. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. RESULTS Eighty-three percent of the participants answered that prenatal whole-exome sequencing should be offered, 14.8% were neutral, and only 2.2% disagreed. Fifty-four percent of the participants were interested in having prenatal whole-exome sequencing for their fetus, 40.1% were neutral, and 6.6% disagreed. The majority of participants expressed a desire to know about treatable (96.2%) and non-treatable (86.3%) childhood conditions, and most said the same for treatable (76.0%) and non-treatable (74.3%) adult-onset conditions. Over half of the participants (59.7%) indicated a maximum acceptable turnaround time of 3 weeks or less for prenatal whole-exome sequencing. CONCLUSIONS The majority of respondents felt prenatal whole-exome sequencing should be offered. Moreover, the majority wanted to know prenatally about treatable and non-treatable childhood and adult conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eve J Kalynchuk
- Department of Human Genetics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Andrew Althouse
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Lisa S Parker
- Department of Human Genetics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Devereux N Saller
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Aleksandar Rajkovic
- Department of Human Genetics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.,Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Larrandaburu M, Matte U, Noble A, Olivera Z, Sanseverino MTV, Nacul L, Schuler-Faccini L. Ethics, genetics and public policies in Uruguay: newborn and infant screening as a paradigm. J Community Genet 2015; 6:241-9. [PMID: 26021874 PMCID: PMC4524831 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-015-0236-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2015] [Accepted: 05/13/2015] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Uruguay is a middle-income country and the smallest in South America. Its population is under 3.3 million. The demographic and epidemiological characteristics are similar to those of developed countries, with a high burden associated with congenital anomalies. Infant mortality rate (IMR) decreased from 37/1000 live births, in 1980, to 8.8/1000, in 2013. This is largely explained by medical and social policies. IMR related to congenital anomalies, however, remained unchanged for the last 30 years. Therefore, programmes for prevention of congenital disorders were developed, such as the National Newborn Screening Programme. Mandatory, universal, free infant screening was implemented two decades ago. The Ministry of Public Health created the Comprehensive Plan on Birth Defects and Rare Diseases (PIDCER), to develop a strategic public policy tool enabling comprehensive, universal, quality care during their entire lifetime. Recent national legislation created provisions for newborn and infant screening, including for congenital hypothyroidism, phenylketonuria, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, cystic fibrosis and medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase, via blood spot test, otoacoustic emissions, systematic physical examination and hip ultrasound. We discuss how this programme was implemented, the current situation of rare diseases, the institution managing disability in Uruguay and the development of new laws based on the MPH's PIDCER. It illustrates how Uruguay is developing public policies in the genomic era, based both on science and bioethics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mariela Larrandaburu
- />Ministry of Public Health of Uruguay, 18 de Julio 1892, 11200 Montevideo, Uruguay
- />Post-Graduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
- />Born Healthy Program, National Institute of Population Medical Genetics - INAGEMP, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
| | - Ursula Matte
- />Post-Graduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
| | - Ana Noble
- />Ministry of Public Health of Uruguay, 18 de Julio 1892, 11200 Montevideo, Uruguay
| | - Zully Olivera
- />Ministry of Public Health of Uruguay, 18 de Julio 1892, 11200 Montevideo, Uruguay
| | - Maria Teresa V. Sanseverino
- />Post-Graduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
- />Born Healthy Program, National Institute of Population Medical Genetics - INAGEMP, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
| | | | - Lavinia Schuler-Faccini
- />Post-Graduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
- />Born Healthy Program, National Institute of Population Medical Genetics - INAGEMP, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Ross LF. Ethical and policy issues in newborn screening of children for neurologic and developmental disorders. Pediatr Clin North Am 2015; 62:787-98. [PMID: 26022175 DOI: 10.1016/j.pcl.2015.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Genetic testing for neurologic and developmental disorders spans the spectrum from universal newborn screening for conditions like phenylketonuria to diagnostic testing for suspected genetic conditions, to predictive genetic testing for childhood-onset conditions. Given that virtually all children in the United States undergo genetic screening in the newborn period, this article focuses on 3 actual case studies of neurologic and developmental disorders that have been included or proposed for inclusion in newborn screening programs: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (a neuromuscular disorder), Krabbe disease (a neurodegenerative disorder), and fragile X syndrome (a neurodevelopmental disorder).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lainie Friedman Ross
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Therrell BL, Padilla CD, Loeber JG, Kneisser I, Saadallah A, Borrajo GJC, Adams J. Current status of newborn screening worldwide: 2015. Semin Perinatol 2015; 39:171-87. [PMID: 25979780 DOI: 10.1053/j.semperi.2015.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 353] [Impact Index Per Article: 39.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Newborn screening describes various tests that can occur during the first few hours or days of a newborn's life and have the potential for preventing severe health problems, including death. Newborn screening has evolved from a simple blood or urine screening test to a more comprehensive and complex screening system capable of detecting over 50 different conditions. While a number of papers have described various newborn screening activities around the world, including a series of papers in 2007, a comprehensive review of ongoing activities since that time has not been published. In this report, we divide the world into 5 regions (North America, Europe, Middle East and North Africa, Latin America, and Asia Pacific), assessing the current NBS situation in each region and reviewing activities that have taken place in recent years. We have also provided an extensive reference listing and summary of NBS and health data in tabular form.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bradford L Therrell
- National Newborn Screening and Genetics Resource Center (NNSGRC), Austin, TX; Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
| | - Carmencita David Padilla
- College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines; Newborn Screening Reference Center, National Institutes of Health (Philippines), Manila, Ermita, Philippines
| | - J Gerard Loeber
- International Society for Neonatal Screening, Bilthoven, Netherlands
| | - Issam Kneisser
- Newborn Screening Unit, Medical Genetic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Saint Joseph University, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Amal Saadallah
- Newborn Screening and Biochemical Genetics Laboratory, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Gustavo J C Borrajo
- Programa de Detección de Errores Congénitos, Fundación Bioquímica Argentina, La Plata, Argentina
| | - John Adams
- Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Parents are interested in newborn genomic testing during the early postpartum period. Genet Med 2014; 17:501-4. [PMID: 25474344 PMCID: PMC4452417 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2014.139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2014] [Accepted: 08/28/2014] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We surveyed parents to ascertain interest in newborn genomic testing and determine whether these queries would provoke refusal of conventional state-mandated newborn screening. METHODS After a brief genetics orientation, parents rated their interest in receiving genomic testing for their healthy newborn on a 5-point Likert scale and answered questions about demographics and health history. We used logistic regression to explore factors associated with interest in genomic testing and tracked any subsequent rejection of newborn screening. RESULTS We queried 514 parents within 48 hours after birth while still in hospital (mean age (SD) 32.7 (6.4) years, 65.2% female, 61.2% white, 79.3% married). Parents reported being not at all (6.4%), a little (10.9%), somewhat (36.6%), very (28.0%), or extremely (18.1%) interested in genomic testing for their newborns. None refused state-mandated newborn screening. Married participants and those with health concerns about their infant were less interested in newborn genomic testing (P = 0.012 and P = 0.030, respectively). Degree of interest for mothers and fathers was discordant (at least two categories different) for 24.4% of couples. CONCLUSION Interest in newborn genomic testing was high among parents of healthy newborns, and the majority of couples had similar levels of interest. Surveying parents about genomic sequencing did not prompt rejection of newborn screening.Genet Med 17 6, 501-504.
Collapse
|
35
|
Genetics professionals' opinions of whole-genome sequencing in the newborn period. J Genet Couns 2014; 24:452-63. [PMID: 25348082 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-014-9779-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2014] [Accepted: 09/24/2014] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) programs have been successful in identifying infants with rare, treatable, congenital conditions. While current programs rely largely on biochemical analysis, some predict that in the future, genome sequencing may be used as an adjunct. The purpose of this exploratory pilot study was to begin to characterize genetics professionals' opinions of the use of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) in NBS. We surveyed members of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) via an electronic survey distributed through email. The survey included questions about results disclosure, the current NBS paradigm, and the current criteria for adding a condition to the screening panel. The response rate was 7.3 % (n = 113/1549). The majority of respondents (85 %, n = 96/113) felt that WGS should not be currently used in NBS, and that if it were used, it should not be mandatory (86.5 %, n = 96/111). However, 75.7 % (n = 84/111) foresee it as a future use of WGS. Respondents felt that accurate interpretation of results (86.5 %, n = 83/96), a more extensive consent process (72.6 %, n = 69/95), pre- (79.2 %, n = 76/96) and post-test (91.6 %, n = 87/95) counseling, and comparable costs (70.8 %, n = 68/96) and turn-around-times (64.6 %, n = 62/96) to current NBS would be important for using WGS in NBS. Participants were in favor of disclosing most types of results at some point in the lifetime. However, the majority (87.3 %, n = 96/110) also indicated that parents should be able to choose what results are disclosed. Overall, respondents foresee NBS as a future use of WGS, but indicated that WGS should not occur within the framework of traditional NBS. They agreed with the current criteria for including a condition on the recommended uniform screening panel (RUSP). Further discussion about these criteria is needed in order to better understand how they could be utilized if WGS is incorporated into NBS.
Collapse
|
36
|
Knoppers BM, Senecal K, Borry P, Avard D. Whole-Genome Sequencing in Newborn Screening Programs. Sci Transl Med 2014; 6:229cm2. [DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3008494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
|