Literature DB >> 31719124

Ethical Issues in Newborn Sequencing Research: The Case Study of BabySeq.

Lainie Friedman Ross1, Ellen Wright Clayton2.   

Abstract

The BabySeq Project is a study funded by the National Institutes of Health and aimed at exploring the medical, behavioral, and economic impacts of integrating genomic sequencing into the care of both healthy newborns and newborns who are sick. Infants were randomly assigned to receive standard of care or standard of care plus sequencing. The protocol and consent specified that only childhood-onset conditions would be returned. When 1 child was found to carry a BRCA2 mutation despite a negative family history, the research team experienced moral distress about nondisclosure and sought institutional review board permission to disclose. The protocol was then modified to require participants to agree to receive results for adult-onset-only conditions as a precondition to study enrollment. The BabySeq team asserted that their new protocol was in the child's best interest because having one's parents alive and well provides both an individual child benefit and a "family benefit." We begin with a short description of BabySeq and the controversy regarding predictive genetic testing of children for adult-onset conditions. We then examine the ethical problems with (1) the revised BabySeq protocol and (2) the concept of family benefit as a justification for the return of adult-onset-only conditions. We reject family benefit as a moral reason to expand genomic sequencing of children beyond conditions that present in childhood. We also argue that researchers should design their pediatric studies to avoid, when possible, identifying adult-onset-only genetic variants and that parents should not be offered the return of this information if discovered unless relevant for the child's current or imminent health.
Copyright © 2019 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31719124      PMCID: PMC6889970          DOI: 10.1542/peds.2019-1031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  67 in total

1.  Informing study participants of research results: an ethical imperative.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Eric Kodish; Charles Weijer
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2003 May-Jun

Review 2.  When healthcare professionals cannot do the right thing: A systematic review of moral distress and its correlates.

Authors:  Giulia Lamiani; Lidia Borghi; Piergiorgio Argentero
Journal:  J Health Psychol       Date:  2016-07-10

3.  Newborn screening--setting evidence-based policy for protection.

Authors:  Marvin Natowicz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 4.  Points to Consider: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Implications of Genetic Testing in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; John W Belmont; Jonathan S Berg; Benjamin E Berkman; Yvonne Bombard; Ingrid A Holm; Howard P Levy; Kelly E Ormond; Howard M Saal; Nancy B Spinner; Benjamin S Wilfond; Joseph D McInerney
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Clinical and molecular features associated with biallelic mutations in FANCD1/BRCA2.

Authors:  Blanche P Alter; Philip S Rosenberg; Lawrence C Brody
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2006-07-06       Impact factor: 6.318

6.  Reporting genetic results in research studies: summary and recommendations of an NHLBI working group.

Authors:  Ebony B Bookman; Aleisha A Langehorne; John H Eckfeldt; Kathleen C Glass; Gail P Jarvik; Michael Klag; Greg Koski; Arno Motulsky; Benjamin Wilfond; Teri A Manolio; Richard R Fabsitz; Russell V Luepker
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2006-05-15       Impact factor: 2.802

7.  Interpretation of Genomic Sequencing Results in Healthy and Ill Newborns: Results from the BabySeq Project.

Authors:  Ozge Ceyhan-Birsoy; Jaclyn B Murry; Kalotina Machini; Matthew S Lebo; Timothy W Yu; Shawn Fayer; Casie A Genetti; Talia S Schwartz; Pankaj B Agrawal; Richard B Parad; Ingrid A Holm; Amy L McGuire; Robert C Green; Heidi L Rehm; Alan H Beggs
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Parental attitudes, values, and beliefs toward the return of results from exome sequencing in children.

Authors:  J C Sapp; D Dong; C Stark; L E Ivey; G Hooker; L G Biesecker; B B Biesecker
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 4.438

9.  Guidelines for return of research results from pediatric genomic studies: deliberations of the Boston Children's Hospital Gene Partnership Informed Cohort Oversight Board.

Authors:  Ingrid A Holm; Sarah K Savage; Robert C Green; Eric Juengst; Amy McGuire; Susan Kornetsky; Stephanie J Brewster; Steven Joffe; Patrick Taylor
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing.

Authors:  Robert C Green; Jonathan S Berg; Wayne W Grody; Sarah S Kalia; Bruce R Korf; Christa L Martin; Amy L McGuire; Robert L Nussbaum; Julianne M O'Daniel; Kelly E Ormond; Heidi L Rehm; Michael S Watson; Marc S Williams; Leslie G Biesecker
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  10 in total

1.  'We Should View Him as an Individual': The Role of the Child's Future Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making About Unsolicited Findings in Pediatric Exome Sequencing.

Authors:  W Dondorp; I Bolt; A Tibben; G De Wert; M Van Summeren
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2021-01-02

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

Authors:  Vasiliki Rahimzadeh; Jan M Friedman; Guido de Wert; Bartha M Knoppers
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-07-04       Impact factor: 4.772

3.  The case for screening in early life for 'non-treatable' disorders: ethics, evidence and proportionality. A report from the Health Council of the Netherlands.

Authors:  Shona Kalkman; Wybo Dondorp
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 5.351

4.  Are We Ready for Newborn Genetic Screening? A Cross-Sectional Survey of Healthcare Professionals in Southeast China.

Authors:  Xian Wu; Yuqi Yang; Lingna Zhou; Wei Long; Bin Yu
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.569

5.  Newborn Screening: Still Room for Improvement.

Authors:  Klaus-Peter Zimmer
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 6.  The promise of public health ethics for precision medicine: the case of newborn preventive genomic sequencing.

Authors:  Ainsley J Newson
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2021-03-14       Impact factor: 4.132

7.  Rapid Phenotype-Driven Gene Sequencing with the NeoSeq Panel: A Diagnostic Tool for Critically Ill Newborns with Suspected Genetic Disease.

Authors:  María José de Castro; Emiliano González-Vioque; Sofía Barbosa-Gouveia; Enrique Salguero; Segundo Rite; Olalla López-Suárez; Alejandro Pérez-Muñuzuri; María-Luz Couce
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 4.241

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

Authors:  Sabrina N Powell; Grace Byfield; Ashley Bennetone; Annabelle M Frantz; Langston K Harrison; Erin R James-Crook; Heather Osborne; Thomas H Owens; Jonathan L Shaw; Julianne O'Daniel; Laura V Milko
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 4.772

9.  Using the Sankey diagram to visualize article features on the topics of whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) since 2012: Bibliometric analysis.

Authors:  Meng-Ju Li; Tsair-Wei Chien; Kuang-Wen Liao; Feng-Jie Lai
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Principles of Genomic Newborn Screening Programs: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Lilian Downie; Jane Halliday; Sharon Lewis; David J Amor
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-07-01
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.