Whole-Genome Sequencing in Newborn Screening-Attitudes and Opinions of Bulgarian Pediatricians and Geneticists

Perceptions of genomic newborn screening: a cross-sectional survey conducted with UK medical students

BACKGROUND

With the potential to identify a vast number of rare diseases soon after birth, genomic newborn screening (gNBS) could facilitate earlier interventions and improve health outcomes. Designing a gNBS programme will involve balancing stakeholders' opinions and addressing concerns. The views of medical students-future clinicians who would deliver gNBS-have not yet been explored.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide online survey of UK medical students via the REDCap platform. Perceptions of gNBS, including scope of testing and potential benefits and drawbacks, were explored using a mix of multiple-choice questions, Likert scales, visual analogue scales and free-text questions.

RESULTS

In total, 116 medical students across 16 universities participated. Overall, 45% supported gNBS, with a positively skewed mean support score of 3.24 (SD 1.26, range: 1.0-5.0), and 55% felt it relevant to their future practice. Almost all agreed that infant-onset and childhood-onset diseases and conditions with effective treatments should be included. Most felt that earlier interventions and personalised care would be the most important benefit of gNBS. Other perceived benefits included earlier diagnoses, diagnosing more patients and enabling research for new treatments. However, several perceived challenges were highlighted: risk of genomic discrimination, incidental or uncertain findings, data security and breaching children's future autonomy. Students expressed conflicting opinions on the psychological impact on families, but most were concerned about a lack of support due to current resource limitations in health services. Students frequently reported having insufficient knowledge to form an opinion, which may reflect gaps in genomics education at medical school and the current lack of evidence base for gNBS.

CONCLUSION

Although some support for gNBS was demonstrated, ethicolegal and social challenges were raised, emphasising a need for ongoing discussions about the implications of gNBS.

Genetic counselors' perspectives on genomic screening of apparently healthy newborns in the United States

Purpose

There is growing international interest in using genomic sequencing to screen newborns and children for treatable genomic conditions. Although recent research has demonstrated increasing support for using genomic sequencing to screen newborns and children for treatable genomic conditions among various stakeholders, little is known about the perspectives of genetic counselors (GCs) in the United States, who are frequently engaged in the disclosure of positive newborn screening results and coordination of follow-up testing and management.

Methods

This study utilized a cross-sectional 3-section survey to explore GCs' perspectives on the benefits, limitations, and ethical and practical considerations of genomic sequencing in newborns as an adjunct screen to standard newborn screening (NBS). Additionally, we evaluated GCs' views on specific genes that could be added to NBS via sequencing.

Results

Of 176 GCs who participated in the study, most endorsed the addition of NBSeq for conditions that typically manifest in childhood and have a well-defined treatment or management protocol. Some perspectives, such as attitudes toward health inequity, varied by practice region. Most respondents endorsed 13 of 25 specific genetic conditions for inclusion in NBSeq.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate GCs' support for the expansion of NBS using genomic sequencing in the United States and the need for ongoing investigation of ethical and practical concerns related to its implementation.

Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023)

Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) began in the early 1960s based on the work of Dr. Robert "Bob" Guthrie in Buffalo, NY, USA. His development of a screening test for phenylketonuria on blood absorbed onto a special filter paper and transported to a remote testing laboratory began it all. Expansion of NBS to large numbers of asymptomatic congenital conditions flourishes in many settings while it has not yet been realized in others. The need for NBS as an efficient and effective public health prevention strategy that contributes to lowered morbidity and mortality wherever it is sustained is well known in the medical field but not necessarily by political policy makers. Acknowledging the value of national NBS reports published in 2007, the authors collaborated to create a worldwide NBS update in 2015. In a continuing attempt to review the progress of NBS globally, and to move towards a more harmonized and equitable screening system, we have updated our 2015 report with information available at the beginning of 2024. Reports on sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean, missing in 2015, have been included. Tables popular in the previous report have been updated with an eye towards harmonized comparisons. To emphasize areas needing attention globally, we have used regional tables containing similar listings of conditions screened, numbers of screening laboratories, and time at which specimen collection is recommended. Discussions are limited to bloodspot screening.

Perception of genomic newborn screening among peripartum mothers

Advances in genomic technology have generated possibilities for expanding newborn screening from traditional procedures to genomic newborn screening (gNBS). However, before the implementation of gNBS, it is crucial to address various aspects, including parental attitudes, at the national level. With this aim, we analyzed the attitudes and expectations of Slovenian peripartum mothers regarding gNBS and the acceptability of its implementation into the Slovenian health system. A questionnaire-based study was conducted on a convenience sample of 1136 peripartum mothers (a response rate of 84.1%) in a hospital setting in Slovenia. We measured participants' level of general genetic knowledge, motivation to undergo gNBS, attitude toward its benefits and drawbacks, willingness to participate financially, and factors that would influence their decision to undergo gNBS. Most participants exhibited a positive attitude (83.2%) and were motivated to undertake gNBS (63.4%). They were willing to share genetic data and also contribute to the testing costs. Mothers with better genetic literacy and higher education level, and those with the familial genetic testing experiences were more supportive of gNBS. However, several emotional and socio-ethical concerns were raised regarding how the genetic information would influence family and social life.

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.

Australian healthcare professionals' perspectives on the ethical and practical issues associated with genomic newborn screening

Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is a successful public health initiative that seeks to identify serious, treatable medical conditions. The increasing use of genomic sequencing (GS) in a wide range of medical settings has reignited the discussion on whether GS can and should be integrated into NBS. Yet, the perspectives of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Australia on the ethical and practical issues associated with the implementation of genomic newborn screening (GNBS) are underexplored. To address this, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 Australian HCPs with clinical or policy experience in NBS and/or GS to explore their perspectives on the ethical, social, and practical issues raised by integrating GS into NBS. Interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis. When asked whether GS should be incorporated into NBS, HCPs did not feel it was currently appropriate but there was a strong consensus it may be implemented within the next decade. However, HCPs had differing perspectives on what conditions should be included and how to best handle the volume of data generated from GNBS. Our findings have important implications for determining at what point and how genomics can be integrated into NBS. The differing views expressed amongst HCPs suggest that further research is needed to explore the reasons behind this. Importantly, our participants highlighted a potential role for genetic counselors in the implementation of GNBS on a larger scale by developing educational resources to facilitate obtaining informed consent and return of results.

Current Status of Newborn Screening in Southeastern Europe

Significant part of Southeastern Europe (with a population of 76 million) has newborn screening (NBS) programs non-harmonized with developed European countries. Initial survey was conducted in 2013/2014 among 11 countries from the region (Albania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BIH), Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, and Slovenia) to assess the main characteristics of their NBS programs and their future plans. Their cumulative population at that time was ~52,5 million. At that time, none of the countries had an expanded NBS program, while phenylketonuria screening was not introduced in four and congenital hypothyroidism in three of 11 countries. We repeated the survey in 2020 inviting the same 11 countries, adding Cyprus, Greece, Hungary, and Malta (due to their geographical position in the wider region). The aims were to assess the current state, to evaluate the change in the period, and to identify the main obstacles impacting the implementation of expanded NBS and/or reaching a wider population. Responses were collected from 12 countries (BIH-Federation of BIH, BIH-Republic of Srpska, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Malta, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia) with a population of 68.5 million. The results of the survey showed that the regional situation regarding NBS only modestly improved in this period. All of the surveyed countries except Kosovo screened for at least congenital hypothyroidism, while phenylketonuria was not screened in four of 12 countries. Croatia and Slovenia implemented an expanded NBS program using tandem mass spectrometry from the time of last survey. In conclusion, the current status of NBS programs in Southeastern Europe is very variable and is still underdeveloped (or even non-existent) in some of the countries. We suggest establishing an international task-force to assist with implementation and harmonization of basic NBS services where needed.

Exome sequencing in newborns with congenital deafness as a model for genomic newborn screening: the Baby Beyond Hearing project

PURPOSE

Genomic newborn screening raises practical and ethical issues. Evidence is required to build a framework to introduce this technology safely and effectively. We investigated the choices made by a diverse group of parents with newborns when offered tiered genomic information from exome sequencing.

METHODS

This population-derived cohort comprised infants with congenital deafness. Parents were offered exome sequencing and choice regarding the scope of analysis. Options were choice A, diagnostic analysis only; choice B, diagnostic analysis plus childhood-onset diseases with medical actionability; or choice C, diagnostic analysis plus childhood-onset diseases with or without medical actionability.

RESULTS

Of the 106 participants, 72 (68%) consented to receive additional findings with 29 (27.4%) selecting choice B and 43 (40.6%) opting for choice C. Family size, ethnicity, and age of infant at time of recruitment were the significant predictors of choice. Parents who opted to have additional findings analysis demonstrated less anxiety and decisional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide evidence from a culturally diverse population that choice around additional findings is important and the age of the infant when this choice is offered impacts on their decision. We found no evidence that offering different levels of genomic information to parents of newborns has a negative psychological impact.