Informed Consent Should Be a Required Element for Newborn Screening, Even for Disorders with High Benefit-Risk Ratios

Expanding Neonatal Bloodspot Screening: A Multi-Stakeholder Perspective

Neonatal bloodspot screening (NBS) aims to detect treatable disorders in newborns. The number of conditions included in the screening is expanding through technological and therapeutic developments, which can result in health gain for more newborns. NBS expansion, however, also poses healthcare, ethical and societal challenges. This qualitative study explores a multi-stakeholders' perspective on current and future expansions of NBS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 Dutch professionals, including healthcare professionals, test developers and policy makers, and 17 parents of children with normal and abnormal NBS results. Addressed themes were (1) benefits and challenges of current expansion, (2) expectations regarding future developments, and (3) NBS acceptance and consent procedures. Overall, participants had a positive attitude toward NBS expansion, as long as it is aimed at detecting treatable disorders and achieving health gain. Concerns were raised regarding an increase in results of uncertain significance, diagnosing asymptomatic mothers, screening of subgroups ("males only"), finding untreatable disorders, along with increasingly complex consent procedures. Regarding the scope of future NBS expansions, two types of stakeholder perspectives emerged. Stakeholders with a "targeted-scope" perspective saw health gain for the neonate as the exclusive NBS aim. They thought pre-test information could be limited, and parents should be protected against too much options or information. Stakeholders with a "broad-scope" perspective thought the NBS aim should be formulated broader, for example, also taking (reproductive) life planning into account. They put more emphasis on individual preferences and parental autonomy. Policy-makers should engage with both perspectives when making further decisions about NBS.

Local deliberative approach to the bioethical controversies: An opportunity for the proper implementation of neonatal screening

Introduction: The controversial characteristics of neonatal screening influenced by bioethical considerations make its implementation complex. Colombia is not an exception in this sense and local circumstances complicate the panorama. Objective: To establish how bioethical controversies on neonatal screening are approached at a local level as a basis for deliberating on the must-be of this activity in Colombia. Materials and methods: A survey immersed in an interpretative investigation with descriptive and deliberative components of analysis was applied to approach the values exposed by officials of the Colombian Instituto Nacional de Salud. Results: The compulsory offer of screening by the nation, regardless of its opportunity cost and the consent for the use in research of results and residual samples, were not controversial, but, in contrast, the type of information and the consent to authorize screening did arise controversy. The more experienced officials preferred mandatory screening (17.7 vs. 11.79 years on average, p=0.007). Surprisingly, despite the risk of discrimination, keeping the neonate as the purpose, there was agreement on giving all the information to parents and medical records. Another controversial aspect was the follow-up of cases without hiding their identification where officials with more experience in bioethical aspects preferred the use of codes (4.5 vs. 1.26 years on average, p=0.009). In this context, strategies such as informed dissent, specialized advice or public health programs that appreciate diversity would allow to rescue even seemingly opposite values. Conclusion: A local approach regarding what ought to be in neonatal screening based on a deliberative bioethical perspective allowed to present an implementation proposal for this activity

What is in a Name? Parent, Professional and Policy-Maker Conceptions of Consent-Related Language in the Context of Newborn Screening

Newborn bloodspot screening programs are some of the longest running population screening programs internationally. Debate continues regarding the need for parents to give consent to having their child screened. Little attention has been paid to how meanings of consent-related terminology vary among stakeholders and the implications of this for practice. We undertook semi-structured interviews with parents (n = 32), healthcare professionals (n = 19) and policy decision makers (n = 17) in two Canadian provinces. Conceptions of consent-related terms revolved around seven factors within two broad domains, decision-making and information attainment. Decision-making comprised: parent decision authority; voluntariness; parent engagement with decision-making; and the process of enacting choice. Information ascertainment comprised: professional responsibilities (including disclosure of information and time to review); parent responsibilities; and the need for discussion and understanding prior to a decision. Our findings indicate that consent-related terms are variously understood, with substantive implications for practice. We suggest that consent procedures should be explained descriptively, regardless of approach, so there are clear indications of what is expected of parents and healthcare professionals. Support systems are required both to meet the educational needs of parents and families and to support healthcare professionals in delivering information in a manner in keeping with parent needs.

Early Check: translational science at the intersection of public health and newborn screening

Background

Newborn screening (NBS) occupies a unique space at the intersection of translational science and public health. As the only truly population-based public health program in the United States, NBS offers the promise of making the successes of translational medicine available to every infant with a rare disorder that is difficult to diagnose clinically, but for which strong evidence indicates that presymptomatic treatment will substantially improve outcomes. Realistic NBS policy requires data, but rare disorders face a special challenge: Screening cannot be done without supportive data, but adequate data cannot be collected in the absence of large-scale screening. The magnitude and scale of research to provide this expanse of data require working with public health programs, but most do not have the resources or mandate to conduct research.

Methods

To address this gap, we have established Early Check, a research program in partnership with a state NBS program. Early Check provides the infrastructure needed to identify conditions for which there have been significant advances in treatment potential, but require a large-scale, population-based study to test benefits and risks, demonstrate feasibility, and inform NBS policy.

Discussion

Our goal is to prove the benefits of a program that can, when compared with current models, accelerate understanding of diseases and treatments, reduce the time needed to consider inclusion of appropriate conditions in the standard NBS panel, and accelerate future research on new NBS conditions, including clinical trials for investigational interventions.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov registration #NCT03655223. Registered on August 31, 2018.

Bioethics and public policies in neonatal screening in the United States, United Kingdom, and Colombia

Introduction: Thinking about how neonatal screening should be done requires explaining the relevance of the bioethical factors involved. Objective: To understand the relationship between bioethical considerations and the way neonatal screening is done and to identify its relevance in the Colombian legislation. Materials and methods: A comparative study of public policies in the United States and the United Kingdom was done, as they exemplify extreme cases of neonatal screening. The influence of bioethical principles was interpreted based on similarities and differences. With this information, locally affected bioethical considerations were identified in the Colombian legislation on neonatal screening. Results: In the United Kingdom, paternal autonomy prevails allowing parents to deny obligatory beneficence. In the USA, beneficence prevails and a significant number of anomalies must be screened for. This increases the likelihood of false positives and causes a high opportunity cost. Both countries have similarities which are also partially accepted in Colombia, such as the demand for equity of access. Others, such as specialized professional advice or the right to refuse screening, are not considered in the Colombian legislation on neonatal screening. Additionally, there are circumstances in Colombia such as different perspectives on what respecting justice means and how to apply that in choosing which abnormalities are screened for and lack of harmony between norms that prevents efficacious detection. Conclusion: Bioethical considerations explain the differences between countries and sometimes prevail in the development of public policies on neonatal screening. Their inclusion in high-level norms in Colombia for effective screening is proposed.

The New York pilot newborn screening program for lysosomal storage diseases: Report of the First 65,000 Infants

Purpose:

We conducted a consented pilot newborn screening (NBS) for Pompe, Gaucher, Niemann Pick A/B, Fabry, and MPS 1 to assess the suitability of these lysosomal storage disorders (LSD) for public health mandated screening.

Methods:

At five participating high-birth-rate, ethnically diverse New York City hospitals, recruiters discussed the study with post-partum parents and documented verbal consent. Screening on consented samples was performed using multiplexed tandem mass spectrometry. Screen-positive infants underwent confirmatory enzymology, DNA testing, and biomarker quantitation when available. Affected infants are being followed for clinical management and long term outcome.

Results:

65,605 infants participated over four years, representing an overall consent rate of 74%. Sixty-nine infants were screen-positive. Twenty-three were confirmed true positives, all of whom were predicted to have late-onset phenotypes. Six of the 69 currently have undetermined disease status.

Conclusion:

Our results suggest that NBS for LSDs is much more likely to detect individuals at risk for late-onset disease, similar to results from other NBS programs. This work has demonstrated the feasibility of using a novel consented pilot NBS study design that can be modified to include other disorders under consideration for public health implementation as a means to gather critical evidence for evidence-based NBS practices.

Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations

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.

Ethical issues in pediatric genetic testing and screening

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Developments in genetic test technologies enable a detailed analysis of the genomes of individuals across the range of human development from embryos to adults with increased precision and lower cost. These powerful technologies raise a number of ethical issues in pediatrics, primarily because of the frequent lack of clinical utility of genetic information, the generation of secondary results and questions over the proper scope of parental authority for testing.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several professional organizations in the fields of genetics and pediatrics have published new guidance on the ethical, legal, and policy issues relevant to genetic testing in children. The roles of predictive testing for adult-onset conditions, the management of secondary findings and the role of informed consent for newborn screening remain controversial. However, research and experience are not demonstrating serious adverse psychosocial impacts from genetic testing and screening in children. The use of these technologies is expanding with the notion that the personal utility of test results, rather than clinical utility, may be sufficient to justify testing.

SUMMARY

The use of microarray and genome sequencing technologies is expanding in the care of children. More deference to parental decision-making is evolving in contexts wherein information and counseling can be made readily available.