The challenge of consent in clinical genome-wide testing

"We've Opened Pandora's Box, Haven't We?" Clinical Geneticists' Views on Ethical Aspects of Genomic Testing in Neonatal Intensive Care

The increasing use of genomic testing in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) gives rise to ethical issues. Yet little is known regarding what health professionals implementing the testing think about its ethical aspects. We therefore explored the views of Australian clinical geneticists towards ethical issues in the use of genomic testing in the Neonatal Intensive care Unit (NICU). Semi-structured interviews with 11 clinical geneticists were conducted, transcribed and analysed thematically. Four themes were identified: 1) Consent: the craft is in the conversation, which encapsulated the challenges in the consent process, and with pre-test counseling; 2) Whose autonomy and who decides? This illustrates the balancing of clinical utility and potentially harms the test, and how stakeholder interests are balanced; 3) The winds of change and ethical disruption, recognizing that while professional expertise is vital to clinical decision-making and oversight of mainstreaming, participants also expressed concern over the size of the genetics workforce and 4). Finding Solutions - the resources and mechanisms to prevent and resolve ethical dilemmas when they arise, such as quality genetic counseling, working as a team and drawing on external ethics and legal expertise. The findings highlight the ethical complexities associated with genomic testing in the NICU. They suggest the need for a workforce that has the necessary support and skills to navigate the ethical terrain, drawing on relevant ethical concepts and guidelines to balance the interests of neonates, their careers and health professionals.

Decision-making, attitudes, and understanding among patients and relatives invited to undergo genome sequencing in the 100,000 Genomes Project: A multisite survey study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess decisions, attitudes, and understanding of participants (patients, parents, relatives) having genome sequencing for rare disease diagnosis.

METHODS

This study involved a cross-sectional observational survey with participants in the 100,000 Genomes Project.

RESULTS

Survey response rate was 51% (504/978). Most participants self-reported that they had decided to undergo genome sequencing (94%) and that this was an informed decision (84%) with low decisional conflict (95%). Most self-reported that they had chosen to receive additional findings (88%) and that this was an informed decision (89%) with low decisional conflict (95%). Participants were motivated more by the desire to help others via research than by the belief it would help them obtain a diagnosis (Z = 14.23, P = 5.75 × 10^-46), although both motivations were high. Concerns were relatively few but, where expressed, were more about the potential psychological impact of results than data sharing/access (Z = 9.61, P = 7.65 × 10^-22). Concerns were higher among male, Asian or Asian British, and more religious participants. General and context-specific understanding of genome sequencing were both moderately high (means 5.2/9.0 and 22.5/28.0, respectively).

CONCLUSION

These findings are useful to inform consent guidelines and clinical implementation of genome sequencing.

The full spectrum of ethical issues in pediatric genome-wide sequencing: a systematic qualitative review

Background

The use of genome-wide sequencing in pediatric medicine and research is growing exponentially. While this has many potential benefits, the normative and empirical literature has highlighted various ethical issues. There have not been, however, any systematic reviews of these issues. The aim of this systematic review is to determine systematically the spectrum of ethical issues that is raised for stakeholders in in pediatric genome-wide sequencing.

Methods

A systematic review in PubMed and Google Books (publications in English or German between 2004 and 2021) was conducted. Further references were identified via reference screening. Data were analyzed and synthesized using qualitative content analysis. Ethical issues were defined as arising when a relevant normative principle is not adequately considered or when two principles come into conflict.

Results

Our literature search retrieved 3175 publications of which 143 were included in the analysis. Together these mentioned 106 ethical issues in pediatric genome-wide sequencing, categorized into five themes along the pediatric genome-wide sequencing lifecycle. Most ethical issues identified in relation to genome-wide sequencing typically reflect ethical issues that arise in general genetic testing, but they are often amplified by the increased quantity of data obtained, and associated uncertainties. The most frequently discussed ethical aspects concern the issue of unsolicited findings.

Conclusion

Concentration of the debate on unsolicited findings risks overlooking other ethical challenges. An overarching difficulty presents the terminological confusion: both with regard to both the test procedure/ the scope of analysis, as well as with the topic of unsolicited findings. It is important that the genetics and ethics communities together with other medical professions involved work jointly on specific case related guidelines to grant the maximum benefit for the care of the children, while preventing patient harm and disproportionate overload of clinicians and the healthcare system by the wealth of available options and economic incentives to increase testing.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-021-02830-w.

The fetus in the age of the genome

Due to a number of recent achievements, the field of prenatal medicine is now on the verge of a profound transformation into prenatal genomic medicine. This transformation is expected to not only substantially expand the spectrum of prenatal diagnostic and screening possibilities, but finally also to advance fetal care and the prenatal management of certain fetal diseases and malformations. It will come along with new and profound challenges for the normative framework and clinical care pathways in prenatal (and reproductive) medicine. To adequately address the potential ethically challenging aspects without discarding the obvious benefits, several agents are required to engage in different debates. The permissibility of the sequencing of the whole fetal exome or genome will have to be examined from a philosophical and legal point of view, in particular with regard to conflicts with potential rights of future children. A second requirement is a societal debate on the question of priority setting and justice in relation to prenatal genomic testing. Third, a professional-ethical debate and positioning on the goal of prenatal genomic testing and a consequential re-structuring of clinical care pathways seems to be important. In all these efforts, it might be helpful to envisage the unborn rather not as a fetus, not as a separate moral subject and a second "patient", but in its unique physical connection with the pregnant woman, and to accept the moral quandaries implicitly given in this situation.

Die Rechte zukünftiger Kinder im Kontext pränataler Diagnostik

Das Gendiagnostikgesetz (GenDG) verbietet seit 2010 die pränatale Diagnostik spätmanifestierender Erkrankungen (§ 15(2) GenDG). In seiner Begründung bezog sich der Gesetzgeber in Analogie zu internationalen Empfehlungen für den pädiatrischen Bereich vor allem auf das Recht des heranwachsenden Kindes bzw. des späteren Erwachsenen auf Nichtwissen. Mit diesem gesetzlichen Verbot hat Deutschland einen viel diskutierten Sonderweg in der Regulierung genetischer Pränataldiagnostik eingeschlagen. Seither jedoch hat sich nicht nur die Perspektive auf prädiktive Testungen im Kindesalter verändert. In zunehmendem Maße generieren auf das gesamte Genom abzielende Diagnostikangebote auch andere vorgeburtlich genetische Informationen, die – in ähnlicher Weise wie diejenigen zu spätmanifestierenden Erkrankungen eine potenzielle Gefahr für das Recht auf Nichtwissen der späteren Person darstellen. Es soll daher im Rahmen dieses Beitrages überprüft werden, inwiefern das deutsche Diagnostikverbot und dessen Bezug auf das Recht auf Nichtwissen des späteren Kindes eine tragfähige Basis zur Regulierung gendiagnostischer Untersuchungen in der Pränatalmedizin insgesamt darstellt bzw. zukünftig darstellen kann.

Untersucht wird der Argumentationsgang des Diagnostikverbotes im Hinblick auf spätmanifestierende Erkrankungen vor dem Hintergrund der Entwicklungen in der prädiktiven (genomischen) Diagnostik. Eine Analyse des normativen Begründungsrahmens zeigt, dass nach wie vor deutlicher Klärungsbedarf hinsichtlich der philosophisch-ethischen Fundierung wie auch hinsichtlich der Interpretation eines Rechts auf Nichtwissen eines (zukünftigen) Kindes im Kontext von genetischer Diagnostik besteht. Darüber hinaus müssen auch Interessen des (zukünftigen) Kindes an eventuell möglich werdender pränataler Behandlung oder Prävention von Erkrankungen in die Abwägung miteinbezogen werden.

Um zukünftigen Herausforderungen genomischer Pränataldiagnostik und -therapie begegnen zu können, müsste dringend geklärt werden, inwiefern Rechte zukünftiger Personen tatsächlich in der speziellen Situation der Schwangerschaft relevant sein können und mit welchen Pflichten diese für den Gesetzgeber, aber insbesondere auch für zukünftige Eltern und Ärzte einhergehen. Der Menschenrechtsdiskurs könnte hierfür eine tragfähige Basis und hilfreiche Strategien liefern.

Congenital Cataract and Its Genetics: The Era of Next-Generation Sequencing

Congenital cataract is a challenging ophthalmological disorder which can cause severe visual loss. It can be diagnosed at birth or during the first year of life. Early diagnosis and treatment are crucial for the visual prognosis. It can be associated with various ocular and systemic abnormalities. Determining whether congenital cataract is isolated or associated with other pathology is an indispensable step for the prediction of potential vision as well as early diagnosis and treatment of conditions that can cause morbidity or mortality. Many genes have been identified in the molecular etiology of congenital cataract. Most mutations have been reported in the crystallin genes. Determination of the genetic cause may not only enable individualized genetic counseling but also help to identify concomitant ocular and/or systemic disorders depending on the characteristics of the genetic test used. Recently, next-generation sequencing in particular has become an evolving technology for determining the molecular etiology of congenital cataract and furthering our knowledge of the disease.

Management of congenital nephrotic syndrome: consensus recommendations of the ERKNet-ESPN Working Group

Congenital nephrotic syndrome (CNS) is a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by nephrotic-range proteinuria, hypoalbuminaemia and oedema, which manifest in utero or during the first 3 months of life. The main cause of CNS is genetic defects in podocytes; however, it can also be caused, in rare cases, by congenital infections or maternal allo-immune disease. Management of CNS is very challenging because patients are prone to severe complications, such as haemodynamic compromise, infections, thromboses, impaired growth and kidney failure. In this consensus statement, experts from the European Reference Network for Kidney Diseases (ERKNet) and the European Society for Paediatric Nephrology (ESPN) summarize the current evidence and present recommendations for the management of CNS, including the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, diuretics, anticoagulation and infection prophylaxis. Therapeutic management should be adapted to the clinical severity of the condition with the aim of maintaining intravascular euvolaemia and adequate nutrition, while preventing complications and preserving central and peripheral vessels. We do not recommend performing routine early nephrectomies but suggest that they are considered in patients with severe complications despite optimal conservative treatment, and before transplantation in patients with persisting nephrotic syndrome and/or a WT1-dominant pathogenic variant.

Informed Consent in the Genomics Era

Informed consent, the process of gathering autonomous authorization for a medical intervention or medical research participation, is a fundamental component of medical practice. Medical informed consent assumes decision-making capacity, voluntariness, comprehension, and adequate information. The increasing use of genetic testing, particularly genomic sequencing, in clinical and research settings has presented many new challenges for clinicians and researchers when obtaining informed consent. Many of these challenges revolve around the need for patient comprehension of sufficient information. Genomic sequencing is complex-all of the possible results are too numerous to explain, and many of the risks and benefits remain unknown. Thus, historical standards of consent are difficult to apply. Alternative models of consent have been proposed to increase patient understanding, and several have empirically demonstrated effectiveness. However, there is still a striking lack of consensus in the genetics community about what constitutes informed consent in the context of genomic sequencing. Multiple approaches are needed to address this challenge, including consensus building around standards, targeted use of genetic counselors in nongenetics clinics in which genomic testing is ordered, and the development and testing of alternative models for obtaining informed consent.

Delivering genome sequencing for rapid genetic diagnosis in critically ill children: parent and professional views, experiences and challenges

Rapid genomic sequencing (RGS) is increasingly being used in the care of critically ill children. Here we describe a qualitative study exploring parent and professional perspectives around the usefulness of this test, the potential for unintended harms and the challenges for delivering a wider clinical service. The Rapid Paediatric Sequencing (RaPS) study offered trio RGS for diagnosis of critically ill children with a likely monogenic disorder. Main and actionable secondary findings were reported. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents of children offered RGS (n = 11) and professionals (genetic clinicians, non-genetic clinicians, scientists and consenters) (n = 19) by telephone (parents n = 10/professionals n = 1) or face-to-face (parents n = 1/professionals n = 18). We found that participants held largely positive views about RGS, describing clinical and emotional benefits from the opportunity to obtain a rapid diagnosis. Parental stress surrounding their child's illness complicates decision making. Parental concerns are heightened when offered RGS and while waiting for results. The importance of multidisciplinary team working to enable efficient delivery of a rapid service was emphasised. Our findings give insight into the perceived value of RGS for critically ill children. Careful pre-test counselling is needed to support informed parental decision making. Many parents would benefit from additional support while waiting for results. Education of mainstream clinicians is required to facilitate clinical implementation.

Shortened consent forms for genome-wide sequencing: Parent and provider perspectives

BACKGROUND

Consent forms for exome and/or genome sequencing, collectively called genome-wide sequencing (GWS), frequently contain detailed information on complex topics such as sequencing analysis and incidental findings. Considering recent endeavors by the health care community to simplify GWS consent forms, it is important to gain stakeholders' perspectives on the content, length, and use of consent forms.

METHODS

Thematic analysis was conducted on data obtained from focus groups with two participant cohorts: parents who previously provided consent for trio-based GWS as part of the translational pediatric GWS CAUSES Study, and genetic health care providers (HCP) who provide pre-test counseling for GWS.

RESULTS

Genetic HCP indicated that consent forms cannot replace pre-test counseling, and as such, a simplified consent form focusing on the implications of GWS would be beneficial to both patients and HCP. Although parents' primary concerns varied when considering GWS, they all highly valued information. Parents also indicated the need for community and support after the return of GWS results. Both participant cohorts recommended that consent forms be available online and include an appendix for supplementary information.

CONCLUSION

It is important to include both parents and HCP in the design of GWS consent forms, and also, to help connect families who have a shared diagnosis after the post-test counseling session.

Share and protect our health data: an evidence based approach to rare disease patients' perspectives on data sharing and data protection - quantitative survey and recommendations

Background

The needs and benefits of sharing health data to advance scientific research and improve clinical benefits have been well documented in recent years, specifically in the field of rare diseases where knowledge and expertise are limited and patient populations are geographically dispersed. Understanding what patients want and need from rare disease research and data sharing is important to ensure their participation and engagement in the process, and to ensure that these wishes and needs are embedded within research design. EURORDIS-Rare Diseases Europe regularly surveys the rare disease community to identify its perspectives and needs on a number of issues in order to represent rare disease patients and be their voice within European and International initiatives and policy developments.

Here, we present key findings from a large quantitative survey conducted with patients with rare diseases and family members as part of a continuous evidence-based advocacy process developed at EURORDIS. The aim of this survey was to explore patient and family perspectives on data sharing and data protection in research and healthcare settings and develop relevant recommendations to support shaping of future data sharing initiatives in rare disease research.

This survey, translated into 23 languages, was carried out via the Rare Barometer Programme and was designed to be accessible to a diverse population with a wide range of education backgrounds. It was widely disseminated via patient organisations worldwide to ensure that a wide range of voices and experiences were represented.

Main findings

Rare disease patients, regardless of the severity of their disease and their socio-demographic profile, are clearly supportive of data sharing to foster research and improve healthcare. However, rare disease patients’ willingness to share their data does come with specific requirements in order to respect their privacy, choices and needs for information regarding the use of their data.

Conclusions

To ensure sustainability and success of international data sharing initiatives in health and research for rare diseases, appropriate legislations need to be implemented and multi-stakeholder efforts need to be pursued to foster cultural and technological changes enabling the systematic integration of patients’ preferences regarding sharing of their own health data.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13023-019-1123-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rapid Challenges: Ethics and Genomic Neonatal Intensive Care

NICUs are a priority implementation area for genomic medicine. Rapid genomic testing in the NICU is expected to be genomic medicine's "critical application," providing such clear benefits that it drives the adoption of genomics more broadly. Studies from multiple centers worldwide have now demonstrated the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of rapid genomic sequencing in this setting, paving the way for widespread implementation. However, the introduction of this potentially powerful tool for predicting future impairment in the NICU also raises profound ethical challenges. Developing models of good practice that incorporate the identification, exploration, and analysis of ethical issues will be critical for successful implementation. In this article, we analyze 3 such issues: (1) the value and meaning of gaining consent to a complex test in a stressful, emotionally charged environment; (2) the effect of rapid diagnosis on parent-child bonding and its implications for medical and family decisions, particularly in relation to treatment limitation; and (3) distributive justice (ie, whether the substantial cost and diversion of resources to deliver rapid genomic testing in the NICU can be justified).

Ethics in genetic counselling

Difficult ethical issues arise for patients and professionals in medical genetics, and often relate to the patient's family or their social context. Tackling these issues requires sensitivity to nuances of communication and a commitment to clarity and consistency. It also benefits from an awareness of different approaches to ethical theory. Many of the ethical problems encountered in genetics relate to tensions between the wishes or interests of different people, sometimes even people who do not (yet) exist or exist as embryos, either in an established pregnancy or in vitro. Concern for the long-term welfare of a child or young person, or possible future children, or for other members of the family, may lead to tensions felt by the patient (client) in genetic counselling. Differences in perspective may also arise between the patient and professional when the latter recommends disclosure of information to relatives and the patient finds that too difficult, or when the professional considers the genetic testing of a child, sought by parents, to be inappropriate. The expectations of a patient's community may also lead to the differences in perspective between patient and counsellor. Recent developments of genetic technology permit genome-wide investigations. These have generated additional and more complex data that amplify and exacerbate some pre-existing ethical problems, including those presented by incidental (additional sought and secondary) findings and the recognition of variants currently of uncertain significance, so that reports of genomic investigations may often be provisional rather than definitive. Experience is being gained with these problems but substantial challenges are likely to persist in the long term.

Opening the "black box" of informed consent appointments for genome sequencing: a multisite observational study

Purpose

Little is known about how health-care professionals communicate with patients about consenting to genome sequencing. We therefore examined what topics health-care professionals covered and what questions patients asked during consent conversations.

Methods

Twenty-one genome sequencing consent appointments were audio recorded and analyzed. Participants were 35 individuals being invited to participate in the 100,000 Genomes Project (14 participants with rare diseases, 21 relatives), and 10 health-care professionals (“consenters”).

Results

Two-thirds of participants’ questions were substantive (e.g., genetics and inheritance); one-third administrative (e.g., filling in the consent form). Consenters usually (19/21) emphasized participant choice about secondary findings, but less often (13/21) emphasized the uncertainty about associated disease risks. Consenters primarily used passive statements and closed-ended, rather than open-ended, questions to invite participants’ questions and concerns. In two appointments, one parent expressed negative or uncertain views about secondary findings, but after discussion with the other parent opted to receive them.

Conclusion

Health-care professionals need to be prepared to answer patients’ questions about genetics to facilitate genome sequencing consent. Health-care professionals’ education also needs to address how to effectively listen and elicit each patient’s questions and views, and how to discuss uncertainty around the disease risks associated with secondary findings.

Communicating complex genomic information: A counselling approach derived from research experience with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) share characteristics (impairments in socialization and communication, and repetitive interests and behaviour), but differ in their developmental course, pattern of symptoms, and cognitive and language abilities. The development of standardized phenotyping has revealed ASD to clinically be vastly heterogeneous, ranging from milder presentations to more severe forms associated with profound intellectual disability. Some 100 genes have now been implicated in the etiology of ASD, and advances in genome-wide testing continue to yield new data at an unprecedented rate. As the translation of this data is incorporated into clinical care, genetic professionals/counsellors, as well as other health care providers, will benefit from guidelines and tools to effectively communicate such genomic information. Here, we present a model to facilitate communication regarding the complexities of ASD, where clinical and genetic heterogeneity, as well as overlapping neurological conditions are inherent. We outline an approach for counselling families about their genomic results grounded in our direct experience from counselling families participating in an ASD research study, and supported by rationale from the literature.

Informed Consent in the Changing Landscape of Research

The history of informed consent dates back as early as the 16th century (Selek, 2010). The current tenets of informed consent pertaining to the ethical conduct of research on human participants predominately stems from the 1947 Nuremberg Code (National Institutes of Health, 2016), which was created following the Nuremberg trials at the end of World War II. The unethical conduct of research on human participants during the Holocaust, coupled with experiments (e.g., the Tuskegee syphilis study), prompted a more formalized structure for ensuring the well-being and autonomy of human participants in research studies. The World Medical Association (2013) created the Declaration of Geneva in 1948 (Fischer, 2006), followed by the Declaration of Helsinki in 1964, to apply ethical principles to medical research involving human participants (Fischer, 2006; Rickham, 1964). A decade later, on July 12, 1974, the National Research Act was signed into law (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], 1979). Through this act, the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research was formed and charged with developing guidelines for the conduct of biomedical and behavioral research. The guidelines were established in the Belmont Report (HHS, 1979; U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1979), which continues to be periodically updated. The Belmont Report describes the general principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, and it outlines the process of obtaining informed consent to ensure that these principles are followed (HHS, 1979). In 1998, an informed consent checklist was instituted (HHS, 1998). Although clearly outlined, defined, and described in consent forms, it is beneficial to revisit how informed participants are when they enter research studies, particularly for patients undergoing treatment for cancer. This article will provide an overview of several areas for consideration. 
.

Potential and pitfalls in the genetic diagnosis of kidney diseases

Next-generation sequencing has dramatically decreased the cost of gene sequencing, facilitating the simultaneous analysis of multiple genes at the same time; obtaining a genetic result for an individual patient has become much easier. The article by Ars and Torra in this issue of the Clinical Kidney Journal provides examples of the ever-increasing ability to understand a given patient's disease on the molecular level, so that in some cases not only the causative variants in a disease gene are identified, but also potential modifiers in other genes. Yet, with increased sequencing, a large number of variants are discovered that are difficult to interpret. These so-called 'variants of uncertain significance' raise important questions: when and how can pathogenicity be clearly attributed? This is of critical importance, as there are potentially serious consequences attached: decisions about various forms of treatment and even about life and death, such as termination of pregnancy, may hinge on the answer to these questions. Geneticists, thus, need to use the utmost care in the interpretation of identified variants and clinicians must be aware of this problem. We here discuss the potential of genetics to facilitate personalized treatment, but also the pitfalls and how to deal with them.