Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations

The modernisation of newborn screening as a pan-European challenge - An international delphi study

Newborn screening is a public health measure to diagnose rare diseases at birth, thereby minimising negative effects of late treatment. Genomic technologies promise an unprecedented expansion of screened diseases at low cost and with transformative potential for newborn screening programmes. However, barriers to the public funding of genomic newborn screening are poorly understood, particularly in light of the heterogenous European newborn screening landscape. This study therefore aims to understand whether international newborn screening experts share a common understanding of the barriers to fund genomic newborn screening. For this purpose, we convened 21 European newborn screening experts across a range of professions and national backgrounds in a Delphi study. Stable consensus, determined via the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test, was found via three consecutive survey rounds for all presented barriers. Experts generally judged the scenario of genomic newborn screening being available to every newborn in seven years to be unlikely, identifying treatability and the absence of counselling and a skilled workforce as the most significant barriers to public funding. We identify value re-definition for rare disease treatments, centralisation of genomic expertise, and international research consortia as avenues for pan-European actions which build on the consensus achieved by our Delphi panel.

Promise and Peril of a Genotype-First Approach to Mendelian Cardiovascular Disease

Precision medicine, which among other aspects includes an individual's genomic data in diagnosis and management, has become the standard-of-care for Mendelian cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, early identification and management of asymptomatic patients with potentially lethal and manageable Mendelian CVD through screening, which is the promise of precision health, remains an unsolved challenge. The reduced costs of genomic sequencing have enabled the creation of biobanks containing in-depth genetic and health information, which have facilitated the understanding of genetic variation, penetrance, and expressivity, moving us closer to the genotype-first screening of asymptomatic individuals for Mendelian CVD. This approach could transform health care by diagnostic refinement and facilitating prevention or therapeutic interventions. Yet, potential benefits must be weighed against the potential risks, which include evolving variant pathogenicity assertion or identification of variants with low disease penetrance; costly, stressful, and inappropriate diagnostic evaluations; negative psychological impact; disqualification for employment or of competitive sports; and denial of insurance. Furthermore, the natural history of Mendelian CVD is often unpredictable, making identification of those who will benefit from preventive measures a priority. Currently, there is insufficient evidence that population-based genetic screening for Mendelian CVD can reduce adverse outcomes at a reasonable cost to an extent that outweighs the harms of true-positive and false-positive results. Besides technical, clinical, and financial burdens, ethical and legal aspects pose unprecedented challenges. This review highlights key developments in the field of genotype-first approaches to Mendelian CVD and summarizes challenges with potential solutions that can pave the way for implementing this approach for clinical care.

A Systematic Literature Review on the Global Status of Newborn Screening for Mucopolysaccharidosis II

A systematic literature review was conducted to determine the global status of newborn screening (NBS) for mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) II (Hunter syndrome; OMIM 309900). Electronic databases were searched in July 2023 for articles referencing NBS for lysosomal storage diseases: 53 featured MPS II. Until recently, only Taiwan and two US states (Illinois and Missouri) formally screened newborns for MPS II, although pilot programs have been conducted elsewhere (Japan, New York, and Washington). In 2022, MPS II was added to the US Recommended Uniform Screening Panel, with increased uptake of NBS anticipated across the USA. While the overall MPS II birth prevalence, determined from NBS initiatives, was higher than in previous reports, it was lower in the USA (approximately 1 in 73,000 according to recent studies in Illinois and Missouri) than in Asia (approximately 1 in 15,000 in Japan). NBS programs typically rely on tandem mass spectrometry quantification of iduronate-2-sulfatase activity for first-tier testing. Diagnosis is often confirmed via molecular genetic testing and/or biochemical testing but may be complicated by factors such as pseudodeficiency alleles and variants of unknown significance. Evidence relating to MPS II NBS is lacking outside Taiwan and the USA. Although broad benefits of NBS are recognized, few studies specifically explored the perspectives of families of children with MPS II.

International policies guiding the selection, analysis, and clinical management of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: A systematic review

Secondary findings (SFs) from genomic sequencing can have significant impacts on patient health, yet existing practices guiding their clinical investigation are inconsistent. We systematically reviewed existing SFs policies to identify variations and gaps in guidance. We cataloged and appraised international policies from academic databases (n = 5, inception-02/2022) and international human genetic societies (n = 64; inception-05/2022), across the continuum of SFs selection, analysis, and clinical management. We assessed quality using AGREE-II and interpreted results using qualitative description. Of the 63 SFs policies identified, most pertained to clinical management of SFs (98%; n = 62; primarily consent and disclosure), some guided SFs analysis (60%; n = 38), while fewer mentioned SFs selection (48%; n = 30). Overall, policies recommend (1) identifying clinically actionable, pathogenic variants with high positive predictive values for disease (selection), (2) bioinformatically filtering variants using evidence-informed gene lists (analysis), and (3) discussing with affected individuals the SFs identified, their penetrance, expressivity, medical implications, and management (clinical management). Best practices for SFs variant analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up (i.e., surveillance, treatment, etc.) were minimally described. Upon quality assessment, policies were highly rated for scope and clarity (median score, 69) but were limited by their rigor and applicability (median scores, 27 and 25). Our review represents a comprehensive international synthesis of policy guiding SFs across the continuum of selection, analysis, and clinical management. Our synthesis will help providers navigate critical decision points in SFs investigation, although significant work is needed to address gaps in SFs analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up processes and to support evidence-based practice.

Riding the gene therapy wave: challenges and opportunities for rare disease patients and clinicians

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A growing number of gene therapies are getting FDA-approved for pediatric rare disorders to treat once incurable diseases. Opportunities for preventing lifetime illness and improving quality of life for these patients is now becoming a reality. Challenges exist in navigating the complexities of determining which patients will benefit from these new gene therapies and how to effectively deliver them as a standard of care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Gene therapies have been approved for pediatric hematological, neuromuscular, cancer, and other disorders that have improved the quality of life for rare disease patients. FDA approval of these drugs has been on a case-by-case basis leading towards gaps in drug approval, physician and patient knowledge of new gene therapies, and ultimate delivery of these drugs. Identifying patients that would benefit from these drugs and other coordination of care issues have arisen with each unique gene therapy product. These gene therapies have unique requirements and patient indications that require a knowledgeable group of physicians and hospital administrators to incorporate their use as a standard of care. With more gene therapies on the near horizon for FDA approval, multidisciplinary teams may improve patient access to these drugs by streamlining approaches towards adapting gene therapies into clinical use.

SUMMARY

The rapid increase in the number of FDA-approved gene therapies has not only created a number of challenges but also opportunities to improve the lives of pediatric patients with rare disorders. The adaptability of physicians, hospitals, and governmental regulatory boards is essential for delivering these new gene therapies safely and efficiently to these rare disease patients. Challenges still remain as to future requirements for additional gene therapy dosing and how to best manage financial burdens placed on the patient and providing institution.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Newborn Screening Program Using Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing in One Maternity Hospital in Southern Belgium

PURPOSE

Genomic newborn screening programs are emerging worldwide. With the support of the local pediatric team of Liege, Belgium, we developed a panel of 405 genes that are associated with 165 early-onset, treatable diseases with the goal of creating a newborn screening test using targeted next-generation sequencing for all early-onset, treatable, and serious conditions.

METHODS

A process was developed that informed the future parents about the project and collected their consent during a face-to-face discussion with a trained investigator. The first baby was screened on 1 September 2022. The main objective of the study was to test the feasibility and the acceptability of targeted sequencing at birth as a first-tier newborn screening approach to detect treatable genetic conditions or genetic conditions for which a pre-symptomatic or early symptomatic clinical trial is available.

RESULTS

As of 20 June 2024, the parents of 4425 children had been offered the test; 4005 accepted (90.5%) and 420 refused (9.5%). The main reasons for refusal were the research nature of the project and the misunderstanding of what constitutes genetic conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate the high acceptability of genomic newborn screening in a properly informed population.

A degranulation assay using Vγ9Vδ2 T cells for the rapid diagnosis of familial hemophagocytic syndromes

Introduction

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a life-threatening immune disorder characterized by uncontrolled lymphocyte and macrophage activation and a subsequent cytokine storm. The timely initiation of immunosuppressive treatment is crucial for survival.

Methods

Here, we harnessed Vγ9Vδ2 T cell degranulation to develop a novel functional assay for the diagnosis of HLH. We compared the novel assay with the conventional natural killer (NK) cell stimulation method in terms of efficiency, specificity, and reliability. Our analysis involved 213 samples from 182 individuals, including 23 samples from 12 patients with degranulation deficiency (10 individuals with UNC13D deficiency, 1 with STXBP2 deficiency, and 1 with RAB27A deficiency).

Results

While both tests exhibited 100% sensitivity, the Vγ9Vδ2 T cell degranulation assay showed a superior specificity of 86.2% (n=70) compared to the NK cell degranulation assay, which achieved 78.9% specificity (n=213). The Vγ9Vδ2 T cell degranulation assay offered simpler technical requirements and reduced labor intensity, leading to decreased susceptibility to errors with faster processing times.

Discussion

This efficiency stemmed from the sole requirement of dissolving (E)-4-hydroxy-3-methyl-but-2-enyl pyrophosphate (HMBPP) powder, contrasting with the intricate maintenance of K562 cells necessary for the NK cell degranulation assay. With its diminished susceptibility to errors, we anticipate that the assay will require fewer repetitions of analysis, rendering it particularly well-suited for testing infants.

Conclusion

The Vγ9Vδ2 T cell degranulation assay is a user-friendly, efficient diagnostic tool for HLH. It offers greater specificity, reliability, and practicality than established methods. We believe that our present findings will facilitate the prompt, accurate diagnosis of HLH and thus enable rapid treatment and better patient outcomes.

Key informant perspectives on implementing genomic newborn screening: a qualitative study guided by the Action, Actor, Context, Target, Time framework

Newborn screening (NBS) programmes are highly successful, trusted, public health interventions. Genomic sequencing offers the opportunity to increase the benefits of NBS by screening infants for a greater number and variety of childhood-onset conditions. This study aimed to describe who needs to do what, when, and for whom to deliver genomic newborn screening (gNBS) and capture perceived implementation barriers and enablers. 'Key informants' (individuals involved in the delivery of NBS) were interviewed. The Actor, Action, Context, Time and Target framework guided data collection and analysis. Participants (N = 20) identified new Actions required to deliver gNBS (educating healthcare providers, longitudinal psychosocial support), NBS Actions needing modification (obtaining consent) and NBS Actions that could be adopted for gNBS (prompt referral pathways). Obtaining consent in a prenatal Context was a source of some disagreement. The Time to disclose high chance results was raised as a key consideration in gNBS programme design. Genetic counsellors were identified as key Actors in results management, but workforce limitations may be a barrier. Online decision support tools were an enabler to offering gNBS. The implementation of gNBS will require behaviour changes from HCPs delivering NBS. Findings can inform how to deliver gNBS at population-scale.

Genomic sequencing for newborn screening: current perspectives and challenges

Traditional newborn screening (NBS) serves as a critical tool in identifying conditions that may impact a child's health from an early stage. Newborn sequencing (NBSeq), the comprehensive analysis of an infant's genome, holds immense promise for revolutionizing health care throughout the lifespan. NBSeq allows for early detection of genetic disease risk and precision personalized medicine. The rapid evolution of DNA sequencing technologies and increasing affordability have spurred numerous endeavors to explore the potential of whole-genome sequencing in newborn screening. However, this transformative potential cannot be realized without challenges. Ethical aspects must be carefully navigated to safeguard individual rights and maintain public trust. Moreover, genomic data interpretation poses complex challenges due to its amount, the presence of variants of uncertain significance, and the dynamic nature of our understanding of genetics. Implementation hurdles, including cost, infrastructure, and specialized expertise, also present barriers to the widespread adoption of NBSeq. Addressing these challenges requires collaboration among clinicians, researchers, policymakers, ethicists, and stakeholders across various sectors. Robust frameworks for informed consent, data protection, and governance are essential. Advances in bioinformatics, machine learning, and genomic interpretation are crucial for translation into actionable clinical insights. Scalability and improving downstream health care access are vital for equitability, particularly in underserved communities. By fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, advancing technology and infrastructure, and upholding ethical principles, we can unlock the full potential of NBSeq as a tool for precision medicine and pave the way toward a future where every child has the opportunity for a healthier, genomics-informed start to life.

Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation

Background

Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from an antenatal or newborn screening programme, driven by multiple benefits and harms, are justifiable. It is not known what benefits and harms have been adopted by economic evaluations assessing these programmes and whether they omit benefits and harms considered important to relevant stakeholders.

Objectives

(1) To identify the benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments in this area, and to assess how they have been measured and valued; (2) to identify attributes or relevance to stakeholders that ought to be considered in future economic assessments; and (3) to make recommendations about the benefits and harms that should be considered by these studies.

Design

Mixed methods combining systematic review and qualitative work.

Systematic review methods

We searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021 using all major electronic databases. Economic evaluations of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in one or more Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries were considered eligible. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis and constructed a thematic framework.

Qualitative methods

We conducted a meta-ethnography of the existing literature on newborn screening experiences, a secondary analysis of existing individual interviews related to antenatal or newborn screening or living with screened-for conditions, and a thematic analysis of primary data collected with stakeholders about their experiences with screening.

Results

The literature searches identified 52,244 articles and reports, and 336 unique studies were included. Thematic framework resulted in seven themes: (1) diagnosis of screened for condition, (2) life-years and health status adjustments, (3) treatment, (4) long-term costs, (5) overdiagnosis, (6) pregnancy loss and (7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened-for condition (115, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90, 37.2%) and treatment (88, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Long-term costs, overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. The wide-reaching family implications of screening were considered important to stakeholders. We observed good overlap between the thematic framework and the qualitative evidence.

Limitations

Dual data extraction within the systematic literature review was not feasible due to the large number of studies included. It was difficult to recruit healthcare professionals in the stakeholder's interviews.

Conclusions

There is no consistency in the selection of benefits and harms used in health economic assessments in this area, suggesting that additional methods guidance is needed. Our proposed thematic framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165236.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127489) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

A newborn Screening Programme for Inborn errors of metabolism in Galicia: 22 years of evaluation and follow-up

BACKGROUND

There is a notable lack of harmonisation in newborn screening (NBS) programmes worldwide. The Galician programme for early detection of inborn errors of metabolism (IEM) was one of the first NBS programmes in Europe to incorporate mass spectrometry (July 2000). This programme currently screens for 26 IEMs in dried blood and urine samples collected 24-72 h after birth.

RESULTS

In its 22-year history, this programme has analysed samples from 440,723 neonates and identified 326 cases of IEM with a prevalence of 1:1351. The most prevalent IEMs were hyperphenylalaninaemia (n = 118), followed by medium chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency (MCADD, n = 26), galactosaemia (n = 20), and cystinurias (n = 43). Sixty-one false positives and 18 conditions related to maternal pathologies were detected. Urine samples have been identified as a useful secondary sample to reduce the rate of false positives and identify new defects. There were 5 false negatives. The overall positive value was 84.23%. The fatality rate over a median of 12.1 years of follow-up was 2.76%. The intelligence quotient of patients was normal in 95.7% of cases, and school performance was largely optimal, with pedagogic special needs assistance required in < 10% of cases. Clinical onset of disease preceded diagnosis in 4% of cases. The age at which first NBS report is performed was reduced by 4 days since 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the benefits of collecting urine samples, reduce NBS reporting time and expanding the number of IEMs included in NBS programmes.

Australian public perspectives on genomic newborn screening: which conditions should be included?

BACKGROUND

Implementing genomic sequencing into newborn screening programs allows for significant expansion in the number and scope of conditions detected. We sought to explore public preferences and perspectives on which conditions to include in genomic newborn screening (gNBS).

METHODS

We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age, using social media, and invited them to participate in online focus groups.

RESULTS

Seventy-five members of the public aged 23-72 participated in one of fifteen focus groups. Participants agreed that if prioritisation of conditions was necessary, childhood-onset conditions were more important to include than later-onset conditions. Despite the purpose of the focus groups being to elicit public preferences, participants wanted to defer to others, such as health professionals or those with a lived experience of each condition, to make decisions about which conditions to include. Many participants saw benefit in including conditions with no available treatment. Participants agreed that gNBS should be fully publicly funded.

CONCLUSION

How many and which conditions are included in a gNBS program will be a complex decision requiring detailed assessment of benefits and costs alongside public and professional engagement. Our study provides support for implementing gNBS for treatable childhood-onset conditions.

Patient preferences in genetic newborn screening for rare diseases: study protocol

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).

Australian Public Perspectives on Genomic Newborn Screening: Risks, Benefits, and Preferences for Implementation

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.

Genomic newborn screening for rare diseases

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.

Newborn Screening for Neurodevelopmental Disorders May Exacerbate Health Disparities

Newborn screening (NBS) began in the early 1960s with screening for phenylketonuria on blood collected on filter paper. The number of conditions included in NBS programs expanded significantly with the adoption of tandem mass spectrometry. The recommended uniform screening panel provides national guidance and has reduced state variability. Universality and uniformity have been supported to promote equity. Recently, a number of researchers have suggested expanding NBS to include genomic sequencing to identify all genetic disorders in newborns. This has been specifically suggested for genes that increase the risk for neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), with the presumption that early identification in the newborn period would reduce disabilities. We offer arguments to show that genomic sequencing of newborns for NDDs risks exacerbating disparities. First, the diagnosis of NDD requires clinical expertise, and both genetic and neurodevelopmental expertise are in short supply, leading to disparities in access to timely follow-up. Second, therapies for children with NDDs are insufficient to meet their needs. Increasing early identification for those at risk who may never manifest developmental delays could shift limited resources to those children whose parents are more poised to advocate, worsening disparities in access to services. Rather, we suggest an alternative: genomic sequencing of all children with diagnosed NDDs. This focused strategy would have the potential to target genomic sequencing at children who manifest NDDs across diverse populations which could better improve our understanding of contributory genes to NDDs.

Parental Preferences for Expanded Newborn Screening: What Are the Limits?

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.

Expanding the Australian Newborn Blood Spot Screening Program using genomic sequencing: do we want it and are we ready?

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.

Combined genetic screening and traditional newborn screening to improve the screening efficiency of congenital hypothyroidism

Background

Congenital hypothyroidism (CH) is an neonatal endocrine disorder. Traditional newborn screening is the mainstream method of CH screening, so as to ensure the early detection and treatment of CH. This method is limited as it has high rates of false positives and negatives. Genetic screening can be used to address the shortcomings of traditional newborn Screening (NBS); however, the comprehensive clinical value of genetic screening is yet to be systematically studied.

Methods

A total of 3,158 newborns who accepted the newborn screening and genetic screening were recruited for this study. Biochemical screening and genetic screening were performed at the same time. The level of TSH with the DBS was detected by time-resolved immunofluorescence assay. High-throughput sequencing technology based on targeted gene capture was used for genetic screening. The suspected neonatal was recalled and tested serum TSH, and FT4. Finally, the effectiveness of traditional NBS and combined screening was compared.

Results

In this study, 16 cases were diagnosed by traditional NBS. 10 cases of DUOX2 mutation were found in newborn CH-related genetic screening, including 5 homozygous and 5 compound heterozygous variations. We found that the c.1588A > T mutations in DUOX2 constituting the predominant site in the present cohort.Compared with NBS and genetic screening, the sensitivity of combined screening increased by 11.1% and 55.6%, respectively. Compared with NBS and genetic screening, the negative predictive value of combined screening increased by 0.1% and 0.4%, respectively.

Conclusions

Combined traditional NBS and genetic screening reduces the false negative rate of CH screening and improves the early and accurate identification of neonates with CH. Our research explains the mutation spectrum of CH in this region, and provisionally demonstrates the necessity, feasibility and significance of genetic screening in newborns and provides a solid basis for future clinical developments.

Perspectives of Rare Disease Experts on Newborn Genome Sequencing

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.

Psychological and Ethical Challenges of Introducing Whole Genome Sequencing into Routine Newborn Screening: Lessons Learned from Existing Newborn Screening

As a psychologist and an ethicist, we have explored empirically newborn screening consent and communication processes. In this paper we consider the impact on families if newborn screening uses whole genome sequencing. We frame this within the World Health Organization's definition of health and contend that proposals to use whole genome sequencing in newborn screening take into account the ethical, practical and psychological impact of such screening. We argue that the important psychological processes occurring in the neonatal phase necessitate a clear justification that providing risk information at this stage provides a health benefit. We illustrate how research on current newborn screening can inform whole genome sequencing debates, whilst highlighting important gaps. Obtaining explicit, voluntary, and sufficiently informed consent for newborn screening is challenging, however we stress that such consent is ethically and legally appropriate and psychologically and practically important. We conclude by outling how this might be done.

How does the genomic naive public perceive whole genomic testing for health purposes? A scoping review

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.

Opportunities and challenges for newborn screening and early diagnosis of rare diseases in Latin America

Rare diseases (RDs) cause considerable death and disability in Latin America. Still, there is no consensus on their definition across the region. Patients with RDs face a diagnostic odyssey to find a correct diagnosis, which may last many years and creates a burden for caregivers, healthcare systems, and society. These diagnostic delays have repercussions on the health and economic burden created by RDs and continue to represent an unmet medical need. This review analyzes barriers to the widespread adoption of newborn screening (NBS) programs and early diagnostic methods for RDs in Latin America and provides recommendations to achieve this critical objective. Increasing the adoption of NBS programs and promoting early diagnosis of RDs are the first steps to improving health outcomes for patients living with RDs. A coordinated, multistakeholder effort from leaders of patient organizations, government, industry, medical societies, academia, and healthcare services is required to increase the adoption of NBS programs. Patients' best interests should remain the guiding principle for decisions regarding NBS implementation and early diagnosis for RDs.

Benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes in OECD countries: A systematic review of 336 articles and reports

BACKGROUND

Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from a screening programme, driven by multiple complex benefits and harms, are justifiable. We systematically identified the benefits and harms incorporated within economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes.

METHODS

For this systematic review and thematic analysis, we searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021. Studies that included an economic evaluation of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in an OECD country were eligible. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis, and illustrated a thematic framework. (Systematic review registration PROSPERO, CRD42020165236).

FINDINGS

The searches identified 52,244 articles and reports and 336 (242 antenatal and 95 newborn) were included. Eighty-six subthemes grouped into seven themes were identified: 1) diagnosis of screened for condition, 2) life years and health status adjustments, 3) treatment, 4) long-term costs, 5) overdiagnosis, 6) pregnancy loss, and 7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened for condition (115 studies, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90 studies, 37.2%) and treatment (88 studies, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored.

INTERPRETATION

Our proposed framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes, to prevent exclusion of important potential benefits and harms.

What does the best interests principle of the convention on the rights of the child mean for paediatric healthcare?

The present review analyses the implications of the best interests of the child principle, which is one of the most widely discussed principles of medical ethics and human rights, for paediatric healthcare. As a starting point, it presents the interpretation of the best interests principle by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. On this basis, it points out possible fields of application of the best interests principle with regard to paediatric healthcare and discusses the potential difficulties in the application of the best interests principle. Based on this, it illustrates the implications of the best interests principle for paediatric healthcare through four case studies, which look at ethical dilemmas in paediatric gynaecology, end-of-life care, HIV care and genetic testing.   Conclusion: The best interests principle requires action, inter alia, by health policymakers, professional associations, hospital managers and medical teams to ensure children receive the best possible healthcare. Whilst the best interests principle does not provide a conclusive solution to all ethical dilemmas in paediatric healthcare (as illustrated by the case studies), it provides children, medical teams, parents and families, and clinical ethicists with an indispensable framework for health care centred on the rights of the child. What is Known: • The best interests principle is one of the most widely discussed principles of medical ethics and human rights and one of the four general principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. What is New: • The present review discusses possible fields of application and potential difficulties of the best interests principle with regard to paediatric healthcare. • Based on this, it illustrates the implications of the best interests principle for paediatric healthcare through four case studies, which look at ethical dilemmas in paediatric gynaecology, end-of-life care, HIV care and genetic testing.

Cost-effectiveness frameworks for comparing genome and exome sequencing versus conventional diagnostic pathways: A scoping review and recommended methods

PURPOSE

Methodological challenges have limited economic evaluations of genome sequencing (GS) and exome sequencing (ES). Our objective was to develop conceptual frameworks for model-based cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of diagnostic GS/ES.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of economic analyses to develop and iterate with experts a set of conceptual CEA frameworks for GS/ES for prenatal testing, early diagnosis in pediatrics, diagnosis of delayed-onset disorders in pediatrics, genetic testing in cancer, screening of newborns, and general population screening.

RESULTS

Reflecting on 57 studies meeting inclusion criteria, we recommend the following considerations for each clinical scenario. For prenatal testing, performing comparative analyses of costs of ES strategies and postpartum care, as well as genetic diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes. For early diagnosis in pediatrics, modeling quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs over ≥20 years for rapid turnaround GS/ES. For hereditary cancer syndrome testing, modeling cumulative costs and QALYs for the individual tested and first/second/third-degree relatives. For tumor profiling, not restricting to treatment uptake or response and including QALYs and costs of downstream outcomes. For screening, modeling lifetime costs and QALYs and considering consequences of low penetrance and GS/ES reanalysis.

CONCLUSION

Our frameworks can guide the design of model-based CEAs and ultimately foster robust evidence for the economic value of GS/ES.

Exome/Genome-Wide Testing in Newborn Screening: A Proportionate Path Forward

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.

Developing a National Newborn Genomes Program: An Approach Driven by Ethics, Engagement and Co-design

The transformative potential of whole genome sequencing (WGS) as a diagnostic tool in healthcare has been demonstrated by initiatives including the 100,000 Genomes Project and is now offered to certain patients in the National Health Service (NHS) in England. Building on these foundations, the utility of WGS in the newborn period can now be explored. Genomics England is working in partnership with NHS England and NHS Improvement and other healthcare, patient and public interest groups to design a research program embedded in the NHS to explore the potential challenges and implications of offering WGS in all newborns. The program will aim to: 1) evaluate the feasibility, utility and impact on the NHS of screening for childhood-onset rare actionable genetic conditions; 2) understand how, with consent, genomic and healthcare data could be used to enable research to develop new diagnostics and treatments; and 3) explore the implications of storing an individual's genome for use over their lifetime. Recognizing the important practical, scientific and ethical questions that we must explore in dialogue with the public and experts, we are taking a collaborative, evidence-based and ethically deliberate approach to designing the program. An iterative co-design process including a nationwide public dialogue has identified emergent themes and ethical considerations which are the focus of the program's design. These themes will be further developed through continued engagement with healthcare professionals, researchers, ethics experts, patient groups and the public, with an ongoing commitment to embedding ongoing ethics research and co-design into the delivery of the program.

Challenges for precision public health communication in the era of genomic medicine

Although still in the early stages of development, the advent of fast, high-output, and cost-effective next-generation DNA sequencing technology is moving precision medicine into public health. Before this shift toward next-generation sequencing in public health settings, individual patients met geneticists after showing symptoms and through limited family screening. In the new era of precision public health, everyone is a possible participant in genetic sequencing, simply by being born (newborn screening), by donating blood (biobanking), or through population screening. These initiatives are increasingly offered to individuals throughout their life and more individuals are encountering opportunities to use DNA sequencing. This article raises awareness of these growing areas and calls for different models of public engagement and communication about genomics, including screening asymptomatic populations, obtaining consent for unspecified and unforeseen future uses of genomic data, and managing variants of uncertain significance. Given that such communication challenges loom large, established norms of practice in genomic medicine and research should be reconsidered.

Pursuing Public Health Benefit Within National Genomic Initiatives: Learning From Different Policies

Introduction: Population-based genomic research is expected to deliver substantial public health benefits. National genomics initiatives are widespread, with large-scale collection and research of human genomic data. To date, little is known about the actual public health benefit that is yielded from such initiatives. In this study, we explore how public health benefit is being pursued in a selection of national genomics initiatives.

Methods: A mixed-method study was carried out, consisting of a literature-based comparison of 11 purposively sampled national genomics initiatives (Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, United Kingdom (UK), and United States (USA)), and five semi-structured interviews with experts (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, UK, USA). It was analyzed to what extent and how public health benefit was pursued and then operationalized in each phase of an adapted public health policy cycle: agenda setting, governance, (research) strategy towards health benefit, implementation, evaluation.

Results: Public health benefit within national genomics initiatives was pursued in all initiatives and also operationalized in all phases of the public health policy cycle. The inclusion of public health benefit in genomics initiatives seemed dependent on the outcomes of agenda setting, such as the aims and values, as well as design of governance, for example involved actors and funding. Some initiatives focus on a research-based strategy to contribute to public health, while others focus on research translation into healthcare, or a combination of both. Evaluation of public health benefits could be performed qualitatively, such as assessing improved public trust, and/or quantitatively, e.g. research output or number of new diagnoses. However, the created health benefit for the general public, both short- and long-term, appears to be difficult to determine.

Conclusion: Genomics initiatives hold the potential to deliver health promises of population-based genomics. Yet, universal tools to measure public health benefit and clarity in roles and responsibilities of collaborating stakeholders are lacking. Advancements in both aspects will help to facilitate and achieve the expected impact of genomics initiatives and enable effective research translation, implementation, and ultimately improved public health.

Pregnant Latinas' views of adopting exome sequencing into newborn screening: A qualitative study

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.

A Window of Opportunity for Newborn Screening

Molecular diagnostics and therapies play a central role in an era of precision medicine, with the promise of more accurate diagnoses and more effective treatments. Universal newborn screening (NBS) identifies those health conditions that must be treated in early life and before clinical symptoms become apparent, to maximize effectiveness, prevent morbidity, and reduce or eliminate mortality. However, enthusiasm about NBS as the logical platform for early identification is tempered by the realization that NBS under public health authority exists in a complex ecology in which technology and medicine intersect with politics, ethics, advocacy, and resource constraints-a classic translational challenge that is exacerbated when considering the possible introduction of genome sequencing and molecular therapies in NBS. Substantial change is inevitable if the current model of NBS can be prepared for an envisioned future of greatly expanded molecular diagnostics and therapies. A window of opportunity for modernization now exists, but what changes are needed? The purpose of this commentary is to identify five major initiatives to stimulate focused discussion on how modernization might be achieved: (1) build systems for more rapid collection and integration of extant data relevant to NBS; (2) establish a national network of NBS research centers to design and conduct prospective research studies addressing critical NBS questions; (3) create a network of regional NBS laboratories to expedite state implementation of new methodologies or screening for newly recommended conditions; (4) establish a new stream of federal funding to provide financial support for states and incentivize national harmonization; and (5) integrate solutions in a way that is strategic and effective. Some aspects of these recommendations suggest that radical policy changes are needed to implement molecular testing in NBS and take advantage of emerging molecular therapies. I focus on recommendations for modernizing NBS in the US, some of which may be applicable in other countries.

Where is genetic medicine headed? Exploring the perspectives of Canadian genetic professionals on future trends using the Delphi method

Driven by technological and scientific advances, the landscape of genetic medicine is rapidly changing, which complicates strategic planning and decision-making in this area. To address this uncertainty, we sought to understand genetic professionals' opinions about the future of clinical genetic and genomic services in Canada. We used the Delphi method to survey Canadian genetic professionals about their perspectives on whether scenarios about changes in service delivery and the use of genomic testing would be broadly implemented in their jurisdiction by 2030. We conducted two survey rounds; the response rates were 32% (27/84) and 67% (18/27), respectively. The most likely scenario was the universal use of noninvasive prenatal screening. The least likely scenarios involved population-based genome-wide sequencing for unaffected individuals. Overall, the scenarios perceived as most likely were those that have existing evidence about their benefit and potential medical necessity, whereas scenarios were seen as unlikely if they involved emerging technologies. Participants expected that the need for genetic healthcare services would increase by 2030 owing to changes in clinical guidelines and increased use of genome-wide sequencing. This study highlights the uncertainty in the future of genetic and genomic service provision and contributes evidence that could be used to inform strategic planning in clinical genetics.

Newborn Screening: Review of its Impact for Cystinosis

Newborn screening (NBS) programmes are considered to be one of the most successful secondary prevention measures in childhood to prevent or reduce morbidity and/or mortality via early disease identification and subsequent initiation of therapy. However, while many rare diseases can now be detected at an early stage using appropriate diagnostics, the introduction of a new target disease requires a detailed analysis of the entire screening process, including a robust scientific background, analytics, information technology, and logistics. In addition, ethics, financing, and the required medical measures need to be considered to allow the benefits of screening to be evaluated at a higher level than its potential harm. Infantile nephropathic cystinosis (INC) is a very rare lysosomal metabolic disorder. With the introduction of cysteamine therapy in the early 1980s and the possibility of renal replacement therapy in infancy, patients with cystinosis can now reach adulthood. Early diagnosis of cystinosis remains important as this enables initiation of cysteamine at the earliest opportunity to support renal and patient survival. Using molecular technologies, the feasibility of screening for cystinosis has been demonstrated in a pilot project. This review aims to provide insight into NBS and discuss its importance for nephropathic cystinosis using molecular technologies.

Parental Guidance Suggested: Engaging Parents as Partners in Research Studies of Genomic Screening for a Pediatric Population

Recent advances in genomic sequencing and genomic medicine are reshaping the landscape of clinical care. As a screening modality, genetic sequencing has the potential to dramatically expand the clinical utility of newborn screening (NBS), though significant barriers remain regarding ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) and technical and evidentiary challenges. Stakeholder-informed implementation research is poised to grapple with many of these barriers, and parents are crucial stakeholders in this process. We describe the formation and activities of a Community Research Board (CRB) composed of parents with diverse backgrounds assembled to participate in an ongoing research partnership with genomic and public health researchers at the University of North Carolina. The mission of the CRB is to provide insight into parental perspectives regarding the prospect of adding genomic sequencing to NBS and collaboratively develop strategies to ensure its equitable uptake. We describe how these contributions can improve the accessibility of research and recruitment methods and promote trust and inclusivity within diverse communities to maximize the societal benefit of population genomic screening in healthy children.

Barriers and Facilitators for Population Genetic Screening in Healthy Populations: A Systematic Review

Studies suggest that 1-3% of the general population in the United States unknowingly carry a genetic risk factor for a common hereditary disease. Population genetic screening is the process of offering otherwise healthy patients in the general population testing for genomic variants that predispose them to diseases that are clinically actionable, meaning that they can be prevented or mitigated if they are detected early. Population genetic screening may significantly reduce morbidity and mortality from these diseases by informing risk-specific prevention or treatment strategies and facilitating appropriate participation in early detection. To better understand current barriers, facilitators, perceptions, and outcomes related to the implementation of population genetic screening, we conducted a systematic review and searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for articles published from date of database inception to May 2020. We included articles that 1) detailed the perspectives of participants in population genetic screening programs and 2) described the barriers, facilitators, perceptions, and outcomes related to population genetic screening programs among patients, healthcare providers, and the public. We excluded articles that 1) focused on direct-to-consumer or risk-based genetic testing and 2) were published before January 2000. Thirty articles met these criteria. Barriers and facilitators to population genetic screening were organized by the Social Ecological Model and further categorized by themes. We found that research in population genetic screening has focused on stakeholder attitudes with all included studies designed to elucidate individuals' perceptions. Additionally, inadequate knowledge and perceived limited clinical utility presented a barrier for healthcare provider uptake. There were very few studies that conducted long-term follow-up and evaluation of population genetic screening. Our findings suggest that these and other factors, such as prescreen counseling and education, may play a role in the adoption and implementation of population genetic screening. Future studies to investigate macro-level determinants, strategies to increase provider buy-in and knowledge, delivery models for prescreen counseling, and long-term outcomes of population genetic screening are needed for the effective design and implementation of such programs. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020198198.

Select Ethical Aspects of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests for Newborn Screening and Diagnostic Evaluation of Critically Ill Newborns

In this review, we analyze medical and select ethical aspects of the increasing use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) based tests in newborn medicine. In the last five years, there have been several studies exploring the role of rapid exome sequencing (ES) and genome sequencing (GS) in critically ill newborns. While the advantages include a high diagnostic yield with potential changes in interventions, there have been ethical dilemmas surrounding consent, information about adult-onset diseases and resolution of variants of uncertain significance. Another active area of research includes a cohort of studies funded under Newborn Sequencing in Genomic Medicine and Public Health pertaining to the use of ES and GS in newborn screening (NBS). While these techniques may allow for screening for several genetic disorders that do not have a detectable biochemical marker, the high costs and long turnaround times of these tests are barriers in their utilization as public health screening tests. Discordant results between conventional NBS and ES-based NBS, as well as challenges with consent, are other potential pitfalls of this approach. Please see the Bush, Al-Hertani and Bodamer article in this Special Issue for the broader scope and further discussion.

Future Perspectives of Newborn Screening for Inborn Errors of Immunity

Newborn screening (NBS) programs continue to expand due to innovations in both test methods and treatment options. Since the introduction of the T-cell receptor excision circle (TREC) assay 15 years ago, many countries have adopted screening for severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) in their NBS program. SCID became the first inborn error of immunity (IEI) in population-based screening and at the same time the TREC assay became the first high-throughput DNA-based test in NBS laboratories. In addition to SCID, there are many other IEI that could benefit from early diagnosis and intervention by preventing severe infections, immune dysregulation, and autoimmunity, if a suitable NBS test was available. Advances in technologies such as KREC analysis, epigenetic immune cell counting, protein profiling, and genomic techniques such as next-generation sequencing (NGS) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) could allow early detection of various IEI shortly after birth. In the next years, the role of these technical advances as well as ethical, social, and legal implications, logistics and cost will have to be carefully examined before different IEI can be considered as suitable candidates for inclusion in NBS programs.

Second Tier Testing to Reduce the Number of Non-actionable Secondary Findings and False-Positive Referrals in Newborn Screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency

PURPOSE

Newborn screening (NBS) for severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) is based on the detection of T-cell receptor excision circles (TRECs). TRECs are a sensitive biomarker for T-cell lymphopenia, but not specific for SCID. This creates a palette of secondary findings associated with low T-cells that require follow-up and treatment or are non-actionable. The high rate of (non-actionable) secondary findings and false-positive referrals raises questions about the harm-benefit-ratio of SCID screening, as referrals are associated with high emotional impact and anxiety for parents.

METHODS

An alternative quantitative TREC PCR with different primers was performed on NBS cards of referred newborns (N = 56) and epigenetic immune cell counting was used as for relative quantification of CD3 + T-cells (N = 59). Retrospective data was used to determine the reduction in referrals with a lower TREC cutoff value or an adjusted screening algorithm.

RESULTS

When analyzed with a second PCR with different primers, 45% of the referrals (25/56) had TREC levels above cutoff, including four false-positive cases in which two SNPs were identified. With epigenetic qPCR, 41% (24/59) of the referrals were within the range of the relative CD3 + T-cell counts of the healthy controls. Lowering the TREC cutoff value or adjusting the screening algorithm led to lower referral rates but did not prevent all false-positive referrals.

CONCLUSIONS

Second tier tests and adjustments of cutoff values or screening algorithms all have the potential to reduce the number of non-actionable secondary findings in NBS for SCID, although second tier tests are more effective in preventing false-positive referrals.

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.

Newborn screening with targeted sequencing: a multicenter investigation and a pilot clinical study in China

Different newborn screening (NBS) programs have been practiced in many countries since the 1960s. It is of considerable interest whether next-generation sequencing is applicable in NBS. We have developed a panel of 465 causative genes for 596 early-onset, relatively high incidence, and potentially actionable severe inherited diseases in our Newborn Screening with Targeted Sequencing (NESTS) program to screen 11,484 babies in 8 Women and Children's hospitals nationwide in China retrospectively. The positive rate from preliminary screening of NESTS was 7.85% (902/11,484). With 45.89% (414/902) follow-up of preliminary positive cases, the overall clinically confirmative diagnosis rate of monogenic disorders was 12.07% (50/414), estimating an average of 0.95% (7.85% × 12.07%) clinical diagnosis rate, suggesting that monogenic disorders account for a considerable proportion of birth defects. The disease/gene spectrum varied in different regions of China. NESTS was implemented in a hospital by screening 3923 newborns to evaluate its clinical application. The turn-around time of a primary report, including the sequencing period of < 7 days, was within 11 days by our automatic interpretation pipeline. Our results suggest that NESTS is feasible and cost-effective as a first-tier NBS program, which will change the status of current clinical practice of NBS in China.

Genetic screening techniques and diseases for neonatal genetic diseases

Neonatal genetic disease is currently screened mainly based on metabolite biochemical technology. The false positive rate of biochemical screening technology is relatively high, and there are certain false negatives, and only few types of diseases can be screened. The genetic techniques have been gradually used for neonatal genetic disease screening in recent years. Gene detection technology includes quantitative PCR (qPCR) and high-throughput sequencing. High-throughput sequencing includes gene panel sequencing, whole-exome sequencing and whole-genome sequencing. At present, qPCR and gene panel sequencing are the main technologies to be used for newborn genetic disease screening. Genetic screening diseases range from single disease such as hearing loss, spinal muscular atrophy and severe combined immunodeficiency to multiple diseases. Besides standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants proposed by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology in 2015, the interpretation of genetic screening results should also consider biochemical results and other results. The development of newborn genetic screening needs to follow ethical principles, including the ethics of newborn genetic screening as a public health project, the privacy ethics of newborns and their family members, and the ethics of bioinformatics. The development of newborn genetic screening will enable more patients with inherited diseases to receive early diagnosis and treatment and improve their prognosis, which is a milestone in the field of neonatal screening.

Principles of Genomic Newborn Screening Programs: A Systematic Review

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.

Ethical implications of next-generation sequencing and the future of newborn screening

ABSTRACT

Over the last 50 years, routine newborn blood screening for congenital disorders has been hailed as a miracle of modern science, saving countless lives by providing a means to detect and treat life-threatening disorders before symptoms present. Despite progress made with more than 5,000 babies effectively identified with rare conditions each year, congenital anomalies collectively remain at the top of the list as the cause of death for babies under 1 year of age, accounting for more than 20% of all infant mortalities. Rapid technological advances have seen the original singular newborn screen for phenylketonuria expand to a core set of 34 conditions and an additional 26 secondary conditions on the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel, with wide state-to-state variation for implementation. As genomic analysis evolves to enable next-generation sequencing, debates continue over the ethical, legal, and social implications of identifying conditions for which there is no effective treatment. Nurse practitioners should be engaged and informed in providing evidence-based support to families engaging in ethical complex decision making surrounding newborn screening while effectively balancing risk-benefit analysis with individual beliefs and values.

Personal utility of genomic sequencing for infants with congenital deafness

Decisions about genetic testing have traditionally been based on clinical utility and cost, but personal utility is increasingly recognized when assessing the value of testing. Whole exome sequencing (WES) was offered to a population cohort of 106 infants diagnosed with congenital hearing loss. Parents could choose to receive results relating to hearing loss only or also learn additional information about childhood-onset conditions (medically nonactionable and/or actionable). This study aimed to quantify the personal utility of WES for parents after a diagnosis of hearing loss in their child. Parents completed surveys pretest (63/106), after hearing loss results (52/106) and after receiving additional information (47/72). Open-ended responses from all three surveys (N = 67) were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Answers to questions regarding the value of sequencing to parents were analyzed and collated. Parents placed high value on diagnostic WES for hearing loss but had different perspectives on the personal utility of additional information. Diagnostic results provided certainty while the choice to learn additional information about childhood-onset disorders was associated with empowerment. WES also represented an opportunity to promote their child's best interests. Results provide insights into the utility of WES for the indication of congenital deafness and for genomic newborn screening broadly.

Actionability of commercial laboratory sequencing panels for newborn screening and the importance of transparency for parental decision-making

BACKGROUND

Newborn screening aims to identify individual patients who could benefit from early management, treatment, and/or surveillance practices. As sequencing technologies have progressed and we move into the era of precision medicine, genomic sequencing has been introduced to this area with the hopes of detecting variants related to a vastly expanded number of conditions. Though implementation of genomic sequencing for newborn screening in public health and clinical settings is limited, commercial laboratories have begun to offer genomic screening panels for neonates.

METHODS

We examined genes listed on four commercial laboratory genomic screening panels for neonates and assessed their clinical actionability using an established age-based semi-quantitative metric to categorize them. We identified genes that were included on multiple panels or distinct between panels.

RESULTS

Three hundred and nine genes appeared on one or more commercial panels: 74 (23.9%) genes were included in all four commercial panels, 45 (14.6%) were on only three panels, 76 (24.6%) were on only two panels, and 114 (36.9%) genes were listed on only one of the four panels. Eighty-two genes (26.5%) listed on one or more panels were assessed by our method to be inappropriate for newborn screening and to require additional parental decision-making. Conversely, 249 genes that we previously identified as being highly actionable were not listed on any of the four commercial laboratory genomic screening panels.

CONCLUSIONS

Commercial neonatal genomic screening panels have heterogeneous content and may contain some conditions with lower actionability than would be expected for public health newborn screening; conversely, some conditions with higher actionability may be omitted from these panels. The lack of transparency about how conditions are selected suggests a need for greater detail about panel content in order for parents to make informed decisions. The nuanced activity of gene list selection for genomic screening should be iteratively refined with evidence-based approaches to provide maximal benefit and minimal harm to newborns.

The promise of public health ethics for precision medicine: the case of newborn preventive genomic sequencing

Precision medicine aims to tailor medical treatment to match individual characteristics and to stratify individuals to concentrate benefits and avoid harm. It has recently been joined by precision public health-the application of precision medicine at population scale to decrease morbidity and optimise population health. Newborn preventive genomic sequencing (NPGS) provides a helpful case study to consider how we should approach ethical questions in precision public health. In this paper, I use NPGS as a case in point to argue that both precision medicine and precision public health need public health ethics. I make this argument in two parts. First, I claim that discussions of ethics in precision medicine and NPGS tend to focus on predominantly individualistic concepts from medical ethics such as autonomy and empowerment. This highlights some deficiencies, including overlooking that choice is subject to constraints and that an individual's place in the world might impact their capacity to 'be responsible'. Second, I make the case for using a public health ethics approach when considering ethics and NPGS, and thus precision public health more broadly. I discuss how precision public health needs to be construed as a collective enterprise and not just as an aggregation of individual interests. I also show how analysing collective values and interests through concepts such as solidarity can enrich ethical discussion of NPGS and highlight previously overlooked issues. With this approach, bioethics can contribute to more just and more appropriate applications of precision medicine and precision public health, including NPGS.

Scientific Citizenship’s Youngest Domain: Function Creep in Norway’s Newborn Screening Programme

Newborn screening (NBS) for inborn errors of metabolism and other serious conditions with onset during infancy is a widespread public health initiative. Like other screening programmes, it aims to discover and treat a disease before effects manifest themselves. Recently, there have been two prominent changes in NBS: a substantial increase in the number of conditions screened for and growing attention to secondary use of residual newborn blood spots. Here, we analyse how this latter change has transpired in Norway.

In 2018, Norway’s parliament sanctioned the secondary use of NBS samples for epidemiological research unrelated to NBS. This broadened the programme’s scope, co-opting it for research purposes, making samples available for inclusion in Norway’s biobanking strategy. We argue that this transformation is a case of function creep, whereby the function of screening samples is expanded to serve purposes other than helping newborns. The process provided only minimal involvement from ordinary citizens, but it transformed screened infants into potential scientific citizens. Henceforth, all future generations of Norwegians must choose to stay in or opt out of biobank research when they turn sixteen. Additionally, consenting to this research may occasion a second form of function creep, as ‘actionable findings’ are fed back to participants.