Megan Allyse1, Umut Aypar2, Natasha Bonhomme3, Sandra Darilek4, Michael Dougherty5, Ruth Farrell6, Wayne Grody7, W Edward Highsmith2, Marsha Michie8, Mark Nunes9,10, Laura Otto11, Rebecca Pabst12, Glenn Palomaki13, Cassandra Runke2, Richard R Sharp1, Brian Skotko14,15, Katie Stoll16, Myra Wick11. 1. 1 Biomedical Ethics Program, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota. 2. 2 Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota. 3. 3 Expecting Health, Genetic Alliance , Washington, District of Columbia. 4. 4 Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine , Houston, Texas. 5. 5 American Society of Human Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado School of Medicine , Aurora, Colorado. 6. 6 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, Ohio. 7. 7 Divisions of Medical Genetics and Molecular Diagnostics, Departments of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Pediatrics, and Human Genetics, UCLA School of Medicine , Los Angeles, California. 8. 8 Institute for Health and Aging, University of California , San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 9. 9 Department of Pediatrics, University of California , San Diego, San Diego, California. 10. 10 Department of Medical Genetics, Kaiser Permanente , San Diego, San Diego, California. 11. 11 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota. 12. 12 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gundersen Health System , La Crosse, Wisconsin. 13. 13 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Women and Infants Hospital, Alpert Medical School, Brown University , Providence, Rhode Island. 14. 14 Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Massachusetts General Hospital , Boston, Massachusetts. 15. 15 Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School , Boston, Massachusetts. 16. 16 Genetic Support Foundation , Olympia, Washington.
Abstract
AIMS: In September, 2015, Mayo Clinic convened a panel of national thought leaders on prenatal screening, medical genetics, and obstetrics and gynecology practice. RESULTS: During the 2-day symposium, participants discussed the implications of the shift toward broader prenatal screening using cell-free placental DNA in maternal serum (cfDNA screening). Key topics included challenges around the pace of change in the prenatal screening market, uncertainty around reimbursement, meeting the need for patient counseling, and potential challenges in interpreting and returning cfDNA screening results. INNOVATION: Here, we describe the challenges discussed and offer clinical recommendations for practices who are working to meet them. CONCLUSION: As the spread of prenatal genetic screening continues, providers will increasingly need to update their practice to accommodate new screening modalities.
AIMS: In September, 2015, Mayo Clinic convened a panel of national thought leaders on prenatal screening, medical genetics, and obstetrics and gynecology practice. RESULTS: During the 2-day symposium, participants discussed the implications of the shift toward broader prenatal screening using cell-free placental DNA in maternal serum (cfDNA screening). Key topics included challenges around the pace of change in the prenatal screening market, uncertainty around reimbursement, meeting the need for patient counseling, and potential challenges in interpreting and returning cfDNA screening results. INNOVATION: Here, we describe the challenges discussed and offer clinical recommendations for practices who are working to meet them. CONCLUSION: As the spread of prenatal genetic screening continues, providers will increasingly need to update their practice to accommodate new screening modalities.