Genetic testing of newborns for type 1 diabetes susceptibility: a prospective cohort study on effects on maternal mental health

Parental Experiences of Genetic Testing

Genetic testing is increasingly used in clinical practice in the neonatal period, including in NICUs. This testing may have psychological consequences for parents. To best support families, neonatal clinicians should be aware of the various ways in which parents view and respond to genetic testing. In this review, we summarize research on the parental experience of having a newborn infant undergo genetic testing.

Psychosocial Effect of Newborn Genomic Sequencing on Families in the BabySeq Project: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) may provide health benefits throughout the life span, but there are concerns that it could also have an unfavorable (ie, negative) psychosocial effect on families.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the psychosocial effect of nGS on families from the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of nGS on the clinical care of newborns from well-baby nurseries and intensive care units.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this randomized clinical trial conducted from May 14, 2015, to May 21, 2019, at well-baby nurseries and intensive care units at 3 Boston, Massachusetts, area hospitals, 519 parents of 325 infants completed surveys at enrollment, immediately after disclosure of nGS results, and 3 and 10 months after results disclosure. Statistical analysis was performed on a per-protocol basis from January 16, 2019, to December 1, 2019.

INTERVENTION

Newborns were randomized to receive either standard newborn screening and a family history report (control group) or the same plus an nGS report of childhood-onset conditions and highly actionable adult-onset conditions (nGS group).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Mean responses were compared between groups and, within the nGS group, between parents of children who received a monogenic disease risk finding and those who did not in 3 domains of psychosocial impact: parent-child relationship (Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale), parents' relationship (Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale), and parents' psychological distress (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale).

RESULTS

A total of 519 parents (275 women [53.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.1 [4.5] years) were included in this study. Although mean scores differed for some outcomes at singular time points, generalized estimating equations models did not show meaningful differences in parent-child relationship (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale scores: postdisclosure, 0.04 [0.15]; 3 months, -0.18 [0.18]; 10 months, -0.07 [0.20]; joint P = .57) or parents' psychological distress (between-group ratio of adjusted mean [SE] Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale scores: postdisclosure, 1.04 [0.08]; 3 months, 1.07 [0.11]; joint P = .80) response patterns between study groups over time for any measures analyzed in these 2 domains. Response patterns on one parents' relationship measure differed between groups over time (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale scores: postdisclosure, -0.19 [0.07]; 3 months, -0.04 [0.07]; and 10 months, -0.01 [0.08]; joint P = .02), but the effect decreased over time and no difference was observed on the conflict measure responses over time. We found no evidence of persistent negative psychosocial effect in any domain.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial of nGS, there was no persistent negative psychosocial effect on families among those who received nGS nor among those who received a monogenic disease risk finding for their infant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02422511.

The Genetic Architecture of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Implications for Clinical Practice

The genetic architecture of diabetes mellitus in general and in pregnancy is complex, owing to the multiple types of diabetes that comprise both complex/polygenic forms and monogenic (largely caused by a mutation in a single gene) forms such as maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY). Type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) have complex genetic etiologies, with over 40 and 90 genes/loci, respectively, implicated that interact with environmental/lifestyle factors. The genetic etiology of gestational diabetes mellitus has largely been found to overlap that of T2D. Genetic testing for complex forms of diabetes is not currently useful clinically, but genetic testing for monogenic forms, particularly MODY, has important utility for determining treatment, managing risk in family members, and pregnancy management. In particular, diagnosing MODY2, caused by GCK mutations, indicates that insulin should not be used, including during pregnancy, with the possible exception of an unaffected pregnancy during the third trimester to prevent macrosomia. A relatively simple method for identifying women with MODY2 has been piloted. MODY1, caused by HNF4A mutations, can paradoxically cause neonatal hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia and macrosomia, indicating that detecting these cases is also clinically important. Diagnosing all MODY types provides opportunities for diagnosing other family members.

Maternal anxiety about a child's diabetes risk in the TEDDY study: the potential role of life stress, postpartum depression, and risk perception

OBJECTIVE

To understand the association between life stress, postpartum depression (PD), maternal perception of her child's risk for type 1 diabetes (T1D) and a mother's anxiety about her child's T1D risk in mothers of genetically at risk children in The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study.

METHODS

A short form of the state component (SAI) of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, negative life events (LE), the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), and one question about the child's risk of developing T1D risk perceptions (RP) were given to mothers at the 6-month TEDDY clinic visit. The relationship between the four measures was modeled using multiple regressions.

RESULTS

Controlling for sociodemographic factors, significant country differences in SAI, LE, EPDS, and RP emerged. LE - particularly interpersonal LE - had a strong association to maternal anxiety about the baby's risk of diabetes. Both evidence of PD and accurate risk perceptions (RPs) about the child's T1D risk were associated with increased maternal anxiety about the child's T1D risk.

CONCLUSION

Heightened maternal anxiety in response to the news that a child is at increased risk for T1D is common. Mothers who have experienced recent negative LE, who experience PD and who accurately understand their child's risk may be particularly vulnerable to high levels of anxiety. The findings reported here need to be confirmed in future prospective studies.

Environmental trigger(s) of type 1 diabetes: why so difficult to identify?

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is one of the most common chronic diseases with childhood onset, and the disease has increased two- to fivefold over the past half century by as yet unknown means. T1D occurs when the body's immune system turns against itself so that, in a very specific and targeted way, it destroys the pancreatic β-cells. T1D results from poorly defined interactions between susceptibility genes and environmental determinants. In contrast to the rapid progress in finding T1D genes, identification and confirmation of environmental determinants remain a formidable challenge. This review article will focus on factors which have to be evaluated and decision to take before starting a new prospective cohort study. Considering all the large ongoing prospective studies, new and more conclusive data than that obtained so far should instead come from international collaboration on the ongoing cohort studies.

Public attitudes towards genomic risk profiling as a component of routine population screening

Including low penetrance genomic variants in population-based screening might enable personalization of screening intensity and follow up. The application of genomics in this way requires formal evaluation. Even if clinically beneficial, uptake would still depend on the attitudes of target populations. We developed a deliberative workshop on two hypothetical applications (in colorectal cancer and newborn screening) in which we applied stepped, neutrally-framed, information sets. Data were collected using nonparticipant observation, free-text comments by individual participants, and a structured survey. Qualitative data were transcribed and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Eight workshops were conducted with 170 individuals (120 colorectal cancer screening and 50 newborn screening for type 1 diabetes). The use of information sets promoted informed deliberation. In both contexts, attitudes appeared to be heavily informed by assessments of the likely validity of the test results and its personal and health care utility. Perceived benefits included the potential for early intervention, prevention, and closer monitoring while concerns related to costs, education needs regarding the probabilistic nature of risk, the potential for worry, and control of access to personal genomic information. Differences between the colorectal cancer and newborn screening groups appeared to reflect different assessments of potential personal utility, particularly regarding prevention.

Psychological impact of screening and prediction in type 1 diabetes

Screening programs designed to identify persons at risk for type 1 diabetes via genetic and antibody testing are controversial because they typically target children, provide only a crude estimate of type 1 diabetes risk, and offer no means of preventing the disease. For this reason, genetic and antibody testing for type 1 diabetes risk is usually limited to carefully conducted research studies. The psychological impact of such screening programs include cognitive, emotional, and behavioral sequelae; the available literature has focused primarily on parents, and usually mothers, since the target of screening is usually infants or young children. Diabetes risk is a difficult construct to effectively communicate. Many individuals fail to accurately understand risk; inaccurate risk perceptions may increase over time and have been associated with early study withdrawal. Simply asking study participants if they understand the risk information provided is insufficient. Anxiety and worry are common reactions to learning that you or a loved one is at increased risk for type 1 diabetes. For most people, anxiety and worry dissipate with time but some individuals may be particularly vulnerable to prolonged anxiety or depression. Although there is no known means to prevent type 1 diabetes in at-risk individuals, families often report increased surveillance of those at risk and behavior changes to prevent the disease, potentially threatening the internal validity of the study.