Outcomes of an International Workshop on Preconception Expanded Carrier Screening: Some Considerations for Governments

Reproductive genetic carrier screening in pregnancy: improving health outcomes and expanding access

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) serves to screen couples for their risk of having children affected by monogenic conditions. The included conditions are mostly autosomal recessive or X-linked with infantile or early-childhood onset. Cystic fibrosis, spinal muscular atrophy, and hemoglobinopathies are now recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) for universal screening. Recommendations for further RGCS remain ethnicity based. The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors in recent years have recommended universal expanded-panel RGCS and moving towards a more equitable approach. ACOG guidelines state that offering RGCS is an acceptable option, however it has not provided clear guidance on standard of care. Positive results on RGCS can significantly impact reproductive plans for couples, including pursuing in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing, prenatal genetic testing, specific fetal or neonatal treatment, or adoption. RGCS is a superior approach compared to ethnicity-based carrier screening and moves away from single race-based medical practice. We urge the obstetrics and gynecology societies to adopt the guidelines for RGCS put forward by multiple societies and help reduce systemic inequalities in medicine in our new genetic age. Having national societies such as ACOG and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine officially recommend and endorse RGCS would bolster insurance coverage and financial support by employers for RGCS. The future of comprehensive reproductive care in the age of genomic medicine entails expanding access so patients and families can make the reproductive options that best fit their needs.

Should genes for non-syndromic hearing loss be included in reproductive genetic carrier screening: Views of people with a personal or family experience of deafness

Many commercial reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) panels include genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL), however little is known about the general acceptability of their inclusion. Although some couples wish to avoid having a deaf child, there are effective interventions and supports available for deafness, and no consensus on whether it is appropriate to reproductively screen NSHL genes. This study explored views of people with personal experience of deafness regarding carrier screening for genes associated with NSHL. We interviewed 27 participants; 14 who identified as deaf and 13 hearing parents of a deaf child. Thematic analysis was undertaken on transcripts of interviews. The findings reveal the complexity of attitudes within these groups. Some vacillated between the wish to support prospective parents' reproductive autonomy and concerns about potential harms, especially the expression of negative messages about deafness and the potential loss of acceptance in society. While some participants felt carrier screening could help prospective parents to prepare for a deaf child, there was little support for reproductive screening and termination of pregnancy. Participants emphasized the need for accurate information about the lived experience of deafness. The majority felt deafness is not as severe as other conditions included in RGCS, and most do not consider deafness as a disability. People with personal experience of deafness have diverse attitudes towards RGCS for deafness informed by their own identify and experience, and many have concerns about how it should be discussed and implemented in a population wide RGCS program.

Carrier screening programs for rare diseases in developed countries and the case of Turkey: A systematic review

Effective control of rare diseases requires health programs based on principles of protection and prevention. Carrier screening programs serve as preventive measures by identifying at-risk groups. This review examines the impact, implementation, advantages, and disadvantages of carrier screening, incorporating examples from ten countries: the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Israel, China, Australia, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Data on carrier screening and related policies were collected from July to November 2022 and presented in a tabular format using a coding system devised by the authors. Variability was observed in the diseases/disorders and populations screened, screening expenses, and government provision across the countries. The number of diseases/disorders examined, ranging from 3 to 47, was determined by committee guidelines, government resources, pilot studies, and national institute resources. Notably, carrier screening programs exhibited greater worldwide inconsistency compared to newborn screening programs. The comparative analysis of developed countries serves to guide emerging nations. To address inequalities at both local and global levels, there is a need to enhance the establishment, development, and implementation of carrier screening programs. Furthermore, cost analyses of screening should be conducted, and adequate funding should be allocated to countries. In conclusion, this review highlights the preventive potential of carrier screening for rare diseases and emphasizes the importance of improving carrier screening programs globally to achieve equitable healthcare outcomes.

Scaling-up and future sustainability of a national reproductive genetic carrier screening program

An understanding of factors influencing implementation is essential to realise the benefits of population-based reproductive genetic carrier screening programs. The aim of this study was to synthesise data collected during the Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project (Mackenzie's Mission) to track how priorities shifted over time and identify important factors during scaling-up and for sustainment. We used a multi-method qualitative approach to integrate longitudinal project data collected from 10 project committees with 16 semi-structured interviews conducted with study team members. Both datasets were analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify constructs of interest within early, mid-point, and future implementation phases. Several CFIR constructs were present across implementation. The complexity of implementation presented challenges that were overcome through a quality-designed and packaged product, formal and informal networks and communication, and access to knowledge and information. Addressing the diverse consumer needs through resources and increasing community and non-genetic speciality engagement remained a priority throughout and for future sustainment. Going forward, further addressing program complexities and securing funding were emphasised. By applying an implementation framework, findings from this study may be useful for future effort towards building and/or sustaining reproductive genetic carrier screening programs.

Attitudes of professional stakeholders towards implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening: a systematic review

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) for hundreds of different genetic conditions is technically available for prospective parents, but these tests have not been integrated in a public health policy except for specific sub-groups. We aimed to provide an overview of the perspectives of multiple professional stakeholder groups in order to enhance a responsible implementation of population-based reproductive genetic carrier screening. We conducted a systematic literature search using eight online databases focussing on studies that were published from January 2009 to January 2021. We selected articles dealing with attitudes and opinions from different professional stakeholders, in particular healthcare professionals and policymakers, on how to implement a policy about carrier screening for a reproductive purpose. We identified 18 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Based on our inductive analysis, we identified ten themes categorized in both clinical and program management challenges: ensuring availability of RGCS to all couples who request the test, embedding RGCS as a test offer before pregnancy, providing clear and reliable information, ensuring voluntary participation, developing genetic counselling pre- and post-testing (after positive or negative result), avoiding psychological harm, ensuring equal access, avoiding social pressure, educating and involving a broad spectrum of non-genetic health care professionals, and promoting an independent non-commercial organisational structure. We highlight one major stumbling block on how to responsibly inform couples about hundreds different genetic conditions within constraints regarding time and ability of non-genetic professionals. We promote further research to tackle the issues brought up by this systematic review through pilot studies. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO 2021 # CRD42021233762; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=233762 .

Expanded carrier screening for reproductive risk assessment: An evidence-based practice guideline from the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) intends to broadly screen healthy individuals to determine their reproductive chance for autosomal recessive (AR) and X-linked (XL) conditions with infantile or early-childhood onset, which may impact reproductive management (Committee Opinion 690, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2017, 129, e35). Compared to ethnicity-based screening, which requires accurate knowledge of ancestry for optimal test selection and appropriate risk assessment, ECS panels consist of tens to hundreds of AR and XL conditions that may be individually rare in various ancestries but offer a comprehensive approach to inherited disease screening. As such, the term "equitable carrier screening" may be preferable. This practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for ECS using the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework (Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 995; Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 924). We used evidence from a recent systematic evidence review (Ramdaney et al., Genetics in Medicine, 2022, 20, 374) and compiled data from peer-reviewed literature, scientific meetings, and clinical experience. We defined and prioritized the outcomes of informed consent, change in reproductive plans, yield in identification of at-risk carrier pairs/pregnancies, perceived barriers to ECS, amount of provider time spent, healthcare costs, frequency of severely/profoundly affected offspring, incidental findings, uncertain findings, patient satisfaction, and provider attitudes. Despite the recognized barriers to implementation and change in management strategies, this analysis supported implementation of ECS for these outcomes. Based upon the current level of evidence, we recommend ECS be made available for all individuals considering reproduction and all pregnant reproductive pairs, as ECS presents an ethnicity-based carrier screening alternative which does not rely on race-based medicine. The final decision to pursue carrier screening should be directed by shared decision-making, which takes into account specific features of patients as well as their preferences and values. As a periconceptional reproductive risk assessment tool, ECS is superior compared to ethnicity-based carrier screening in that it both identifies more carriers of AR and XL conditions as well as eliminates a single race-based medical practice. ECS should be offered to all who are currently pregnant, considering pregnancy, or might otherwise biologically contribute to pregnancy. Barriers to the broad implementation of and access to ECS should be identified and addressed so that test performance for carrier screening will not depend on social constructs such as race.

Societal implications of expanded universal carrier screening: a scoping review

Carrier screening aims to identify couples at risk of conceiving children with a recessive condition. Until recently, carrier screening was primarily offered ancestry-based. Technological advances now facilitate expanded universal carrier screening (EUCS). This scoping review aimed to map EUCS's potential societal implications based on both theoretical studies and empirical evidence. To this aim, we performed a CoCites search to find relevant articles, including articles describing carrier screening for at-risk populations, based on five selected query articles. Forty articles were included. Three main potential societal implications were identified: (1) unwanted medicalization, (2) stigmatization and discrimination of carriers and people affected with the conditions screened and (3) challenges in achieving equitable access. Within these themes, potential positive implications are reduction of ethnic stigmatization in ancestry-based offers and increased equity. Potential negative implications are reinforcement of disability-based stigmatization, less possibility for developing expertise in healthcare and societal pressure to partake in screening. Empirical evidence on all these implications is however scarce. In conclusion, both positive and negative potential societal implications of implementing EUCS, primarily theoretical, were identified, even in at-risk groups where evidence is mostly lacking. Empirical research in EUCS pilots is needed to identify which societal implications are likely to occur and therefore should be overcome when implementing EUCS.

Challenges of preconception genetic testing in France: A qualitative study

Preconception genetic testing is carried out to inform couples on their carrier status for recessive or X-linked genetic disease, and aims to extend their possible reproductive choices. These genetic tests are available in several countries and are currently being considered in France in the context of bioethics laws revision, raising multiple medical, ethical, and societal concerns. To provide insights into questions relative to preconception genetic testing implementation, we conducted, through a qualitative research methodology, individual and group interviews in families with experience of genetic disease, physicians and researchers in the human and social sciences, and an ethics committee. In particular, the respondents agreed on the importance of a free test and an informed choice. The economic stakes of the test appeared to be a major determinant of its development for the participants. The use of genetic data has been a source of raised fears of a eugenic drift. The remaining questions were relative to the pathologies to be tested, the access to the test, its supervision, the role of physicians and in particular of primary care professionals. Based on individual opinions and collective debates, our work delimits the challenges of preconception genetic testing implementation in France through a qualitative methodology, providing further data necessary to its introduction in the health care system.

Outcomes of Importance to Patients in Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: A Qualitative Study to Inform a Core Outcome Set

There is significant heterogeneity in the outcomes assessed across studies of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). Only a small number of studies have measured patient-reported outcomes or included patients in the selection of outcomes that are meaningful to them. This study was a cross-sectional, qualitative study of 15 patient participants conducted to inform a core outcome set. A core outcome set is an approach to facilitate standardisation in outcome reporting, allowing direct comparison of outcomes across studies to enhance understanding of impacts and potential harms. The aim of this study was to incorporate the patient perspective in the development of a core outcome set by eliciting a detailed understanding of outcomes of importance to patients. Data were collected via online, semi-structured interviews using a novel method informed by co-design and the nominal group technique. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes elicited from patient stakeholder interviews highlighted several under-explored areas for future research. This includes the role of grief and loss in increased risk couples, the role of empowerment in conceptualising the utility of RGCS, the impact of societal context and barriers that contribute to negative experiences, and the role of genetic counselling in ensuring that information needs are met and informed choice facilitated as RGCS becomes increasingly routine. Future research should focus on incorporating outcomes that accurately reflect patient needs and experience.

Views of patients and parents of children with genetic disorders on population-based expanded carrier screening

Objective

Faster and cheaper next generation sequencing technologies have enabled expansion of carrier screening for recessive disorders, potentially facilitating population‐based implementation regardless of ancestry or family history. Little is known, however, about the attitudes regarding population‐based carrier screening among families with genetic disorders. This study assessed views among parents and patients with a recessive disorder and parents of children with Down syndrome (DS) on expanded carrier screening (ECS).

Method

In total, 85 patients with various recessive disorders, 110 parents of a child with a recessive disorder and 89 parents of a child with DS participated in an online survey in the Netherlands. Severity of recessive disorders was classified as mild/moderate or severe/profound.

Results

The majority of the (parents of) patients with a recessive disorder had a positive attitude towards population‐based ECS, including screening for their own or their child's disorder. DS parents were significantly less positive towards ECS. Subgroup analyses showed that the severity of the disorder, rather than being a patient or parent, influences the attitudes, beliefs and intention to participate in ECS.

Conclusion

Our findings have important implications for future implementation initiatives as they demonstrate the different perspectives from people with experiential knowledge with genetic disorders.

What's already known about this topic?

Carrier screening panels for recessive disorders are rapidly expanding.

Concerns have been raised about the possible impact of expanded carrier screening (ECS) on people affected by genetic disorders.

What does this study add?

The majority of Dutch (parents of) patients with a recessive disorder had a positive attitude towards ECS. Parents of children with Down syndrome are less positive.

Severity of the disorder, rather than being a patient or parent, influenced the attitudes, beliefs and intention to participate in ECS.

Systematic review of outcomes in studies of reproductive genetic carrier screening: Towards development of a core outcome set

PURPOSE

Current practice recommendations support the widespread implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). These consensus-based recommendations highlight a research gap, with findings from current studies being insufficient to meet the standard required for more rigorous evidence-based recommendations. This systematic review assessed methodological aspects of studies on RGCS to inform the need for a core outcome set.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search to identify peer-reviewed published studies offering population-based RGCS. Study designs, outcomes, and measurement methods were extracted. A narrative synthesis was conducting using an existing outcome taxonomy and criteria used in the evaluation of genetic screening programs as frameworks.

RESULTS

Sixty-five publications were included. We extracted 120 outcomes representing 24 outcome domains. Heterogeneity in outcome selection, measurement methods and time points of assessment was extensive. Quality appraisal raised concerns for bias. We found that reported outcomes had limited applicability to criteria used to evaluate genetic screening programs.

CONCLUSION

Despite a large body of literature, diverse approaches to research have limited the conclusions that can be cumulatively drawn from this body of evidence. Consensus regarding meaningful outcomes for evaluation of RGCS would be a valuable first step in working towards evidence-based practice recommendations, supporting the development of a core outcome set.

What is a 'serious' genetic condition? The perceptions of people living with genetic conditions

Despite no consensus on the definition of ‘seriousness’, the concept is regularly used in policy and practice contexts to categorise conditions, determine access to genetic technologies and uses of selective pregnancy termination. Whilst attempts have been made to create taxonomies of genetic condition seriousness to inform clinical and policy decision-making, these have often relied on condition appraisals made by health and genetics professionals. The views of people with genetic conditions have been largely under-represented. This study explores the concept of seriousness through the perspectives of people with a range of ‘clinically serious’ conditions (fragile X conditions, spinal muscular atrophy, cystic fibrosis, haemophilia, thalassaemia). Attitudes towards suffering, quality of life (QoL) and selective pregnancy termination were elucidated from 45 in-depth qualitative interviews and 469 postal/online surveys. The majority of participants reported good health/wellbeing, and the capacity for good QoL, despite experiencing suffering with their condition. Notably, participants with later-onset conditions held more negative views of their health and QoL, and were more likely to view their condition as an illness, than those with early-onset conditions. These participants were more likely to see their condition as part of their identity. Whilst most participants supported prenatal screening, there was little support for selective termination. Moreover, social environment emerged as a critical mediator of the experience of the condition. The complex and rich insights of people living with genetic conditions might usefully be incorporated into future genetic taxonomies of ‘seriousness’ to ensure they more accurately reflect the lived reality of those with genetic conditions.

Ethical considerations in gene selection for reproductive carrier screening

Genetic carrier screening for reproductive purposes has existed for half a century. It was originally offered to particular ethnic groups with a higher prevalence of certain severe recessive or X-linked genetic conditions, or (as carrier testing) to those with a family history of a particular genetic condition. Commercial providers are increasingly offering carrier screening on a user-pays basis. Some countries are also trialing or offering public reproductive genetic carrier screening with whole populations, rather than only to those known to have a higher chance of having a child with an inherited genetic condition. Such programs broaden the ethical and practical challenges that arise in clinical carrier testing. In this paper we consider three aspects of selecting genes for population reproductive genetic carrier screening panels that give rise to important ethical considerations: severity, variable penetrance and expressivity, and scalability; we also draw on three exemplar genes to illustrate the ethical issues raised: CFTR, GALT and SERPINA1. We argue that such issues are important to attend to at the point of gene selection for RGCS. These factors warrant a cautious approach to screening panel design, one that takes into account the likely value of the information generated by screening and the feasibility of implementation in large and diverse populations. Given the highly complex and uncertain nature of some genetic variants, careful consideration needs to be given to the balance between delivering potentially burdensome or harmful information, and providing valuable information to inform reproductive decisions.

What women want: General population perspectives and access to preconception expanded carrier screening

OBJECTIVE

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) assesses the risk of individuals and couples of having a child affected with a set of genetic conditions. Carriers have options available to optimize pregnancy outcomes based on personal values and preferences. The greatest range of options is available prior to pregnancy, therefore professional societies recommend this screening be performed preconception. This study aimed to assess awareness of, and interest in, ECS in women preconception. Additionally, it aimed to evaluate preferences for timing and location of education and availability of ECS.

METHODS

A total of 260 nulliparous women from the general population were surveyed through Qualtrics, a national market research survey platform. Data were delineated using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of this cohort, 43.5% reported being aware of ECS prior to the survey and 77.8% indicated interest. Those previously aware were first informed by family, friends, or independent online research. Interest was primarily driven by a desire for reassurance and to make informed decisions about future pregnancies. Interested respondents indicated a willingness to request testing from providers. Participants showed a preference for education and access from a healthcare provider in person.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide insight regarding when and where to best educate and reach women prior to pregnancy about ECS to maximize pregnancy outcomes.

Ethics of Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: From the Clinic to the Population

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RCS) is increasingly being offered more widely, including to people with no family history or otherwise elevated chance of having a baby with a genetic condition. There are valid reasons to reject a prevention-focused public health ethics approach to such screening programs. Rejecting the prevention paradigm in this context has led to an emphasis on more individually-focused values of freedom of choice and fostering reproductive autonomy in RCS. We argue, however, that population-wide RCS has sufficient features in common with other public health screening programs that it becomes important also to attend to its public health implications. Not doing so constitutes a failure to address the social conditions that significantly affect people's capacity to exercise their reproductive autonomy. We discuss how a public health ethics approach to RCS is broader in focus than prevention. We also show that additional values inherent to ethical public health-such as equity and solidarity-are essential to underpin and inform the aims and implementation of reproductive carrier screening programs.

Couple-based expanded carrier screening provided by general practitioners to couples in the Dutch general population: psychological outcomes and reproductive intentions

Purpose

The aim of expanded preconception carrier screening (ECS) is to inform any couple wishing to conceive about their chances of having children with severe autosomal or X-linked recessive conditions. Responsible implementation of ECS as reproductive genetic screening in routine care requires assessment of benefits and harms. We examined the psychological outcomes of couple-based ECS for 50 autosomal recessive (AR) conditions provided by general practitioners (GPs) to couples from the Dutch general population.

Methods

Dutch GPs invited 4,295 women aged 18–40. We examined anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI-6), worry, decisional conflict (DCS) over time in participants declining GP counseling or attending GP counseling with/without testing.

Results

One hundred ninety couples participated; 130 attended counseling, of whom 117 proceeded with testing. No carrier couples were identified. Before counseling, worry (median 6.0) and anxiety (mean 30–34) were low and lower than the population reference (36.4), although some individuals reported increased anxiety or worry. At follow-up, test acceptors reported less anxiety than test decliners (mean 29 vs. 35); differences in anxiety after testing compared to before counseling were not meaningful. Most participants (90%) were satisfied with their decision (not) to undergo testing.

Conclusion

Some individuals reported temporarily clinically relevant distress. Overall, the psychological outcomes are acceptable and no barrier to population-wide implementation.

Expanded universal carrier screening and its implementation within a publicly funded healthcare service

Carrier screening, a well-established clinical initiative, has been slow to take advantage of the new possibilities offered by high-throughput next generation sequencing technologies. There is evidence of significant benefit in expanding carrier screening to include multiple autosomal recessive conditions and offering a ‘universal’ carrier screen that could be used for a pan-ethnic population. However, the challenges of implementing such a programme and the difficulties of demonstrating efficacy worthy of public health investment are significant barriers. In order for such a programme to be successful, it would need to be applicable and acceptable to the population, which may be ethnically and culturally diverse. There are significant practical and ethical implications associated with determining which variants, genes and conditions to include whilst maintaining adequate sensitivity and accuracy. Although preconception screening would maximise the potential benefits from universal carrier screening, the resource implications of different modes of delivery need to be carefully evaluated and balanced against maximising reproductive autonomy and ensuring equity of access. Currently, although a number of existing initiatives are increasing access to carrier screening, there is insufficient evidence to inform the development of a publicly funded, expanded, universal carrier screening programme that would justify investment over other healthcare interventions.

Expanded carrier screening for autosomal recessive conditions in health care: Arguments for a couple-based approach and examination of couples' views

Background

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) is aimed at detecting carrier states for autosomal recessive (AR) or X‐linked conditions in couples from the general population planning a pregnancy. ECS is currently usually offered on an individual basis despite the fact that, for AR conditions, only carrier couples are at risk of affected offspring. In this paper, we present a couple‐based ECS test‐offer for AR conditions, where results are offered as couple‐results only, and describe how couples view such an offer.

Methods and results

An online survey covering attitudes, perceived difficulty, and intention to take up couple‐based ECS was used to examine couples' views. Results show that in 76% of the participating couples there is no objection at all towards receiving couple‐results only. Most couples display similar views. Observed discrepancies usually involved one of the couple members having a positive view, whilst the other was neutral. Although views stayed strikingly stable after discussion, the partner's opinion was regarded as important in deciding whether or not to have testing.

Conclusion

This study shows that most couples do not object to receiving couple rather than individual ECS results, have similar views towards the offer, and are able to discuss differences in views and intentions.

What's already known about this topic?

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) has become widely available

ECS is usually offered on individual basis, and individual carrier states are reported

Views of potential individual users have been researched

What does this study add?

A couple‐based ECS test‐offer for autosomal recessive conditions, where results are offered as couple‐results only

An examination of couples' views towards this offer: most couples do not object to receiving couple‐results only

Population genomic screening of all young adults in a health-care system: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Purpose

To consider the impact and cost-effectiveness of offering preventive population genomic screening to all young adults in a single-payer health-care system.

Methods

We modeled screening of 2,688,192 individuals, all adults aged 18–25 years in Australia, for pathogenic variants in BRCA1/BRCA2/MLH1/MSH2 genes, and carrier screening for cystic fibrosis (CF), spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), and fragile X syndrome (FXS), at 71% testing uptake using per-test costs ranging from AUD$200 to $1200 (~USD$140 to $850). Investment costs included genetic counseling, surveillance, and interventions (reimbursed only) for at-risk individuals/couples. Cost-effectiveness was defined below AUD$50,000/DALY (disability-adjusted life year) prevented, using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with current targeted testing. Outcomes were cancer incidence/mortality, disease cases, and treatment costs reduced.

Results

Population screening would reduce variant-attributable cancers by 28.8%, cancer deaths by 31.2%, and CF/SMA/FXS cases by 24.8%, compared with targeted testing. Assuming AUD$400 per test, investment required would be between 4 and 5 times higher than current expenditure. However, screening would lead to substantial savings in medical costs and DALYs prevented, at a highly cost-effective ICER of AUD$4038/DALY. At AUD$200 per test, screening would approach cost-saving for the health system (ICER = AUD$22/DALY).

Conclusion

Preventive genomic screening in early adulthood would be highly cost-effective in a single-payer health-care system, but ethical issues must be considered.

Responsibility, identity, and genomic sequencing: A comparison of published recommendations and patient perspectives on accepting or declining incidental findings

BACKGROUND

The use of genomic sequencing techniques is increasingly being incorporated into mainstream health care. However, there is a lack of agreement on how "incidental findings" (IFs) should be managed and a dearth of research on patient perspectives.

METHODS

In-depth qualitative interviews were carried out with 31 patients undergoing genomic sequencing at a regional genetics service in England. Interviews explored decisions around IFs and were comparatively analyzed with published recommendations from the literature.

RESULTS

Thirteen participants opted to receive all IFs from their sequence, 12 accepted some and rejected others, while six participants refused all IFs. The key areas from the literature, (a) genotype/phenotype correlation, (b) seriousness of the condition, and (c) implications for biological relatives, were all significant; however, patients drew on a broader range of social and cultural information to make their decisions.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the range of costs and benefits for patients of receiving IFs from a genomic sequence. While largely positive views toward the dissemination of genomic data were reported, ambivalence surrounding genetic responsibility and its associated behaviors (e.g., duty to inform relatives) was reported by both IF decliners and accepters, suggesting a need to further explore patient perspectives on this highly complex topic area.

The evolving landscape of expanded carrier screening: challenges and opportunities

Carrier screening allows individuals to learn their chance of passing on an autosomal or X-linked condition to their offspring. Initially introduced as single-disease, ancestry-based screening, technological advances now allow for the possibility of multi-disease, pan-ethnic carrier screening, which we refer to as “expanded carrier screening.” There are numerous potential benefits to expanded carrier screening, including maximizing the opportunity for couples to make autonomous reproductive decisions, and efficiency and marginal additional costs of including more conditions if the test is already being offered. While numerous laboratories currently offer expanded carrier screening services, it is not yet commonly used in clinical practice, and there is a lack of consensus among experts about the service, including whether this should be offered to individuals and couples, whether this should be offered preconception or prenatally, and what conditions to include in screening programs. Challenges for expanded carrier screening programs include a lack of demand from the public, low prioritization by health systems, the potential for pressure to undergo screening, the possibility of disability-based discrimination, needed adaptations to pre- and post-test counseling, technical limitations, and the evolving technological and socio-political landscape.