Lilian Downie1,2,3,4, Jane Halliday2,4, Sharon Lewis2,4, Sebastian Lunke1,2,4, Elly Lynch1,2,5, Melissa Martyn2,4,5, Clara Gaff4,5, Anna Jarmolowicz1,2, David J Amor6,7,8,9. 1. Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia. 2. Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia. 3. Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. 4. Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. 5. Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, Australia. 6. Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Australia. david.amor@mcri.edu.au. 7. Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia. david.amor@mcri.edu.au. 8. Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. david.amor@mcri.edu.au. 9. Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. david.amor@mcri.edu.au.
Abstract
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.
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.