Australian public perspectives on genomic newborn screening: which conditions should be included?

BACKGROUND: Implementing genomic sequencing into newborn screening programs allows for significant expansion in the number and scope of conditions detected. We sought to explore public preferences and perspectives on which conditions to include in genomic newborn screening (gNBS). METHODS: We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age, using social media, and invited them to participate in online focus groups. RESULTS: Seventy-five members of the public aged 23-72 participated in one of fifteen focus groups. Participants agreed that if prioritisation of conditions was necessary, childhood-onset conditions were more important to include than later-onset conditions. Despite the purpose of the focus groups being to elicit public preferences, participants wanted to defer to others, such as health professionals or those with a lived experience of each condition, to make decisions about which conditions to include. Many participants saw benefit in including conditions with no available treatment. Participants agreed that gNBS should be fully publicly funded. CONCLUSION: How many and which conditions are included in a gNBS program will be a complex decision requiring detailed assessment of benefits and costs alongside public and professional engagement. Our study provides support for implementing gNBS for treatable childhood-onset conditions.

Prospective cohort study of genomic newborn screening: BabyScreen+ pilot study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is a highly successful public health programme that uses biochemical and other assays to screen for severe but treatable childhood-onset conditions. Introducing genomic sequencing into NBS programmes increases the range of detectable conditions but raises practical and ethical issues. Evidence from prospectively ascertained cohorts is required to guide policy and future implementation. This study aims to develop, implement and evaluate a genomic NBS (gNBS) pilot programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The BabyScreen+ study will pilot gNBS in three phases. In the preimplementation phase, study materials, including education resources, decision support and data collection tools, will be designed. Focus groups and key informant interviews will also be undertaken to inform delivery of the study and future gNBS programmes. During the implementation phase, we will prospectively recruit birth parents in Victoria, Australia, to screen 1000 newborns for over 600 severe, treatable, childhood-onset conditions. Clinically accredited whole genome sequencing will be performed following standard NBS using the same sample. High chance results will be returned by genetic healthcare professionals, with follow-on genetic and other confirmatory testing and referral to specialist services as required. The postimplementation phase will evaluate the feasibility of gNBS as the primary aim, and assess ethical, implementation, psychosocial and health economic factors to inform future service delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project received ethics approval from the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne Research Ethics Committee: HREC/91500/RCHM-2023, HREC/90929/RCHM-2022 and HREC/91392/RCHM-2022. Findings will be disseminated to policy-makers, and through peer-reviewed journals and conferences.

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.

Gene selection for genomic newborn screening: Moving toward consensus?

PURPOSE: Gene selection for genomic newborn screening (gNBS) underpins the validity, acceptability, and ethical application of this technology. Existing gNBS gene lists are highly variable despite being based on shared principles of gene-disease validity, treatability, and age of onset. This study aimed to curate a gNBS gene list that builds upon existing efforts and provide a core consensus list of gene-disease pairs assessed by multiple expert groups worldwide. METHODS: Our multidisciplinary expert team curated a gene list using an open platform and multiple existing curated resources. We included severe treatable disorders with age of disease onset <5 years with established gene-disease associations and reliable variant detection. We compared the final list with published lists from 5 other gNBS projects to determine consensus genes and to identify areas of discrepancy. RESULTS: We reviewed 1279 genes and 604 met our inclusion criteria. Metabolic conditions comprised the largest group (25%), followed by immunodeficiencies (21%) and endocrine disorders (15%). We identified 55 consensus genes included by all 6 gNBS research projects. Common reasons for discrepancy included variable definitions of treatability and strength of gene-disease association. CONCLUSION: We have identified a consensus gene list for gNBS that can be used as a basis for systematic harmonization efforts internationally.

Insight and Recommendations for Fragile X-Premutation-Associated Conditions from the Fifth International Conference on FMR1 Premutation.

The premutation of the fragile X messenger ribonucleoprotein 1 (FMR1) gene is characterized by an expansion of the CGG trinucleotide repeats (55 to 200 CGGs) in the 5' untranslated region and increased levels of FMR1 mRNA. Molecular mechanisms leading to fragile X-premutation-associated conditions (FXPAC) include cotranscriptional R-loop formations, FMR1 mRNA toxicity through both RNA gelation into nuclear foci and sequestration of various CGG-repeat-binding proteins, and the repeat-associated non-AUG (RAN)-initiated translation of potentially toxic proteins. Such molecular mechanisms contribute to subsequent consequences, including mitochondrial dysfunction and neuronal death. Clinically, premutation carriers may exhibit a wide range of symptoms and phenotypes. Any of the problems associated with the premutation can appropriately be called FXPAC. Fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS), fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency (FXPOI), and fragile X-associated neuropsychiatric disorders (FXAND) can fall under FXPAC. Understanding the molecular and clinical aspects of the premutation of the FMR1 gene is crucial for the accurate diagnosis, genetic counseling, and appropriate management of affected individuals and families. This paper summarizes all the known problems associated with the premutation and documents the presentations and discussions that occurred at the International Premutation Conference, which took place in New Zealand in 2023.

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.

Supporting healthcare professionals to offer reproductive genetic carrier screening: a behaviour change theory approach.

BACKGROUND: As reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) becomes more widely accessible, ensuring uptake by primary healthcare professionals (HCPs) is essential to equitable service provision. This study aimed to identify and prioritise implementation strategies to reduce barriers and support HCPs to routinely offer RGCS in Australia. METHODS: HCPs (n =990) involved in a large national research study, offering couples-based RGCS, were surveyed at three time points: prior to offering RGCS through the study (Survey 1: Barriers); 8+weeks after offering to their patients (Survey 2: Possible supports); and towards the end of the study (Survey 3: Prioritised supports). HCPs were from primary care (e.g. general practice, midwifery) and tertiary care (e.g. fertility, genetics) settings. Results were analysed via a novel approach of using behaviour change theory (Capability, Opportunity and Motivation - COM.B) to align theory to practice. RESULTS: Survey 1 (n =599) identified four barrier themes: time constraints, lack of HCP knowledge and skill, patient receptivity, and HCP's perceived value of RGCS. Survey 2 (n =358) identified 31 supports that could facilitate HCPs offering RGCS. Survey 3 (n =390) was analysed separately by speciality and clinic location. Prioritised supports for primary care HCPs were 'regular continuing professional development activities' and 'a comprehensive website to direct patients for information'. There was general accordance with the perceived importance of the supports, although some difference in relation to funding between professional groups and clinic locations. CONCLUSION: This study identified a range of supports acceptable to HCPs across specialties and geographic locations that policymakers may use to direct efforts to ensure the roll out of RGCS is equitable across Australia.

"It becomes your whole life"-Exploring experiences of reciprocal translocation carriers and their partners.

Reciprocal translocation carriers are often diagnosed when they are experiencing difficulties conceiving or after a pregnancy affected by an unbalanced set of chromosomes inherited from the balanced carrier parent. Having a reciprocal translocation is not uncommon; carriers can benefit from reproductive options to achieve a healthy, chromosomally balanced, pregnancy. The aim of this study was to explore the lived experience of carriers and their partners. We conducted 13 semi-structured telephone interviews. Participants were recruited through Victorian Clinical Genetics Services and interviews took place between May and September 2020. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Reciprocal translocation carriers and their partners described long term emotional and reproductive impacts, with carrier status identified at the time of prenatal diagnosis having marked emotional consequences. Couples facing reproductive challenges found the diagnosis created uncertainty for their future. When considering a pregnancy, couples worried about experiencing a miscarriage; during pregnancy, there was a reluctance to have an invasive diagnostic procedure due to fearing the risk of losing an unaffected pregnancy. Adaptation to their new reality involved having access to accurate information, peer support and maintaining hope. Couples valued having the option to know the carrier status of their children. The complex impacts of carrying a reciprocal translocation highlight the importance of access to specialist genetic counseling services to ensure couples are supported in understanding the implications of their translocation.

How should severity be understood in the context of reproductive genetic carrier screening?

Reproductive genetic carrier screening provides information about people's chance of having children with certain genetic conditions. Severity of genetic conditions is an important criterion for their inclusion in carrier screening programmes. However, the concept of severity is conceptually complex and underspecified. We analyse why severity is an important concept in carrier screening and for reproductive decision-making and show that assessments of severity can also have normative societal implications. While some genetic conditions are unambiguously associated with a high degree of suffering, there are many factors that contribute to how severe a condition is perceived to be, and perspectives will vary. Attempts to classify genetic conditions according to their severity tend to prioritise biomedical information at the expense of incorporating qualitative aspects of the impact of genetic conditions on people's lives. Further complexity arises because some genotypes can present with variable phenotypes and because some conditions are not always experienced in the same way by all people who have them. To acknowledge this complexity, we argue that an understanding of severity needs to distinguish between the severity of a genetic condition-requiring a generalised approach for purposes of policy development and programme design-and the severity of an instance of a genetic condition in a particular person. Families making reproductive decisions also require access to diverse experiences of the qualitative aspects of living with genetic conditions. As a result, reproductive carrier screening programmes must recognise and respond to the complexity inherent in determining the severity of genetic conditions.

Performance of a cell-free DNA prenatal screening test, choice of prenatal procedure, and chromosome conditions identified during pregnancy after low-risk cell-free DNA screening.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for common fetal aneuploidies, choice of prenatal procedure, and chromosome conditions identified during pregnancy after low-risk cfDNA screening. METHOD: A single-center prenatal cfDNA screening test was employed to detect trisomies 21, 18, and 13 (T21, T18, T13) and sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs). Test performance, choice of prenatal procedure, and cytogenetic results in pregnancies with low-risk cfDNA screening were reviewed. RESULTS: CfDNA screening of 38,289 consecutive samples identified 720 (1.9%) pregnancies at increased risk for aneuploidy. Positive predictive values (PPVs) for high-risk singleton pregnancies were 98.5% (T21), 92.5% (T18) and 55.2% (T13). PPVs for SCAs ranged from 30.6% to 95.2%. Most women elected chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis of T21, T18 and T13; amniocentesis and/or postnatal testing were commonly chosen for SCAs. Cytogenetic tests from 616 screen-negative pregnancies identified 64 cases (12.7%) with chromosome conditions not detected by cfDNA screening, including triploidy (n = 30) and pathogenic and likely pathogenic copy number variants (n = 34). A further 15 (0.04%) false-negative common aneuploidy results were identified. CONCLUSIONS: CfDNA screening was highly accurate for detecting fetal aneuploidy in this general-risk obstetric population. Fetal ultrasound and prenatal diagnostic testing were important in identifying chromosome conditions in pregnancies screened as low-risk.

The more you do it, the easier it gets: using behaviour change theory to support health care professionals offering reproductive genetic carrier screening.

Recent advances in genomic sequencing have improved the accessibility of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). As awareness and interest grows, non-genetic health care professionals are increasingly offering RGCS to consumers. We conducted a qualitative interview study informed by behaviour change theory to identify influences on health care professionals considered as 'early adopters' offering RGCS through Mackenzie's Mission, an Australian national research study investigating the implementation of free RGCS to couple's preconception or in early pregnancy. Interviews were deductively analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework to examine barriers and enabling factors. In total, we interviewed 31 health care professionals, who were primarily general practitioners (n = 23) offering RGCS through Mackenzie's Mission. Upon analysis, 15 barriers and 44 enablers to implementation were identified and categorised across three health care professional target behaviours 1. Engaging with RGCS, 2. Identifying eligible patients, and 3. Offering RGCS. Whilst all Theoretical Domains Framework domains were present, barriers were predominantly categorised as 'Environmental Context and Resources' e.g., lack of time, followed by 'Knowledge' e.g., lack of understanding about genetics and 'Beliefs about Capabilities' e.g., concern about giving high risk results to patients. Although health care professionals expressed a preference for offering RGCS through a comprehensive and supported model of care, such as Mackenzie's Mission, barriers remain. By understanding what drives current health care professionals' behaviour towards offering RGCS, behaviour change theory provides an avenue to direct future efforts based on evidence and improve service delivery.

Experiences of receiving an increased chance of sex chromosome aneuploidy result from non-invasive prenatal testing in Australia: "A more complicated scenario than what I had ever realized".

Many non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) platforms screen for sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA) and SCA analysis is generally included in Australia where NIPT is available as a self-funded test. Little is known about the experience of receiving an NIPT result indicating an increased chance of SCA. This study aimed to explore the experiences of people who received this result and their perspectives on the information, care, and support they received from healthcare practitioners (HCPs). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people who received an NIPT result indicating an increased chance of SCA and continued their pregnancy. Most participants only had contact with a genetic counselor after receiving their result. Transcribed data were analyzed using rigorous thematic analysis to identify important patterns and themes. Participants (18 women, 2 male partners) described embarking on NIPT, primarily based on advice from their HCP and without much consideration. Consequently, participants expressed feeling unprepared for the unanticipated complexity of their NIPT result and were faced with making a time-sensitive decision about a condition they had not previously considered. While more pre-test information was desired, timely access to genetic counseling post-test assisted with adjustment to the result. These findings suggest that routinization of NIPT may be compromising informed decision-making, resulting in unpreparedness for an increased chance result. Given the increasing uptake and expanding scope of NIPT, resources should be dedicated to educating HCPs offering NIPT and ensuring timely access to genetic counseling post-result. With appropriate funding, genetics services may be able to play a central role in offering information and support to both people who undertake NIPT and their HCPs ordering the testing. Implementing a publicly funded screening program in Australia could assist with standardizing prenatal screening care pathways and consequently better access to appropriate resources.

The Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project (Mackenzie's Mission): Design and Implementation.

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) provides people with information about their chance of having children with autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic conditions, enabling informed reproductive decision-making. RGCS is recommended to be offered to all couples during preconception or in early pregnancy. However, cost and a lack of awareness may prevent access. To address this, the Australian Government funded Mackenzie's Mission­the Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project. Mackenzie's Mission aims to assess the acceptability and feasibility of an easily accessible RGCS program, provided free of charge to the participant. In study Phase 1, implementation needs were mapped, and key study elements were developed. In Phase 2, RGCS is being offered by healthcare providers educated by the study team. Reproductive couples who provide consent are screened for over 1200 genes associated with >750 serious, childhood-onset genetic conditions. Those with an increased chance result are provided comprehensive genetic counseling support. Reproductive couples, recruiting healthcare providers, and study team members are also invited to complete surveys and/or interviews. In Phase 3, a mixed-methods analysis will be undertaken to assess the program outcomes, psychosocial implications and implementation considerations alongside an ongoing bioethical analysis and a health economic evaluation. Findings will inform the implementation of an ethically robust RGCS program.

Reproductive genetic carrier screening for cystic fibrosis, fragile X syndrome and spinal muscular atrophy: patterns of community and healthcare provider participation in a Victorian screening program.

BACKGROUND: The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and The Royal Australian College of General Practice recommend that information on carrier screening for at least the most common inherited genetic conditions in our population, that is, thalassaemia, cystic fibrosis (CF), spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), and fragile X syndrome (FXS), should be offered to all women planning pregnancy or in early pregnancy regardless of family history or ethnicity. The aim of this study was to investigate patterns of participation by healthcare providers (HCP) and the community in screening. METHODS: Participation in a Victorian program screening for CF, SMA and FXS between September 2013 and October 2018 was analysed. Requesting HCP and patient data were extracted from screening request forms. Data were analysed with respect to profession of requesting HCP, and characteristics of women screened (age, pregnancy status, socioeconomic status, geographic location, and family history of CF, SMA or FXS). In total, 21 172 women and 1288 HCPs participated in the program over this period. RESULTS: There was a steep socioeconomic gradient in screening uptake, with nearly half the women screened (10 349) being in the highest socioeconomic quintile. The screening rate was much higher in metropolitan areas than in regional areas. Obstetricians made most of the requests for screening, whereas 20% of requests were by GPs. Most participating GPs only made a single screening request (78%) and very few GPs made >100 screening requests compared with obstetricians (0.2% vs 17%). GPs were more likely to screen women before pregnancy compared with obstetricians (47% vs 11%). Approximately 1.5% of Victorian women of child-bearing age and 3% of pregnant Victorian women were screened by this program over the period of this study. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the translation gap between recommendations and practice, with marked inequity of access to reproductive genetic carrier screening in relation to socioeconomic status and geography. Increased participation by GPs could improve community access to reproductive genetic carrier screening, particularly access to preconception screening. Addressing the causes of inequity of access will allow more women and couples the opportunity to make informed choices about participation in screening.

Development and use of the Australian reproductive genetic carrier screening decision aid.

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) may be offered to all individuals and couples, regardless of family history or ethnicity. "Mackenzie's Mission" (MM) is an Australian RGCS pilot study, evaluating the offer of couple-based screening for ~1300 genes associated with around 750 autosomal and X-linked recessive childhood-onset conditions. Each member of the couple makes an individual decision about RGCS and provides consent. We developed a decision aid (RGCS-DA) to support informed decision-making in MM, suitable for couples who were either non-pregnant or in early pregnancy. A Delphi approach invited experts to review values statements related to various concepts of RGCS. Three review rounds were completed, seeking consensus for relevance and clarity of statements, incorporating recommended modifications in subsequent iterations. The final RGCS-DA contains 14 statements that achieved Delphi consensus plus the attitude scale of the measure of informed choice. This was then evaluated in cognitive talk aloud interviews with potential users to assess face and content validity. Minimal wording changes were required at this stage. After this process, the RGCS-DA was piloted with 15 couples participating in MM who were then interviewed about their decision-making. The RGCS-DA prompted discussion within couples and facilitated in depth consideration of screening. There was reassurance when values aligned and a sense of shared decision-making within the couple. This RGCS-DA may become a very useful tool in supporting couples' decision making and contribute to RGCS being feasible for scaled-up implementation.

Paternal retraction of a fragile X allele to normal size, showing normal function over two generations.

The FMR1 premutation (PM:55-199 CGG) is associated with fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS) and when maternally transmitted is at risk of expansion to a hypermethylated full mutation (FM: ≥ 200 CGG) that causes fragile X syndrome (FXS). We describe a maternally transmitted PM (77 CGG) that was passed to a son (103 CGG), and to a daughter (220-1822 CGG), who were affected with FXTAS and FXS, respectively. The male with the PM showed low-level mosaicism for normal size of 30 and 37 CGG. This male had two offspring: one female mosaic for PM and FM (56, 157, >200 CGG) and another with only a 37 CGG allele detected in multiple tissues, neither with a clinical phenotype. The female with the 37 CGG allele showed normal levels of FMR1 methylation and mRNA and passed this 37 CGG allele to one of her daughters, who was also unaffected. These findings show that post-zygotic paternal retraction can lead to low-level mosaicism for normal size alleles, with these normal alleles being functional when passed over two generations.

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.

Standardized practices for RNA diagnostics using clinically accessible specimens reclassifies 75% of putative splicing variants.

PURPOSE: Genetic variants causing aberrant premessenger RNA splicing are increasingly being recognized as causal variants in genetic disorders. In this study, we devise standardized practices for polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based RNA diagnostics using clinically accessible specimens (blood, fibroblasts, urothelia, biopsy). METHODS: A total of 74 families with diverse monogenic conditions (31% prenatal-congenital onset, 47% early childhood, and 22% teenage-adult onset) were triaged into PCR-based RNA testing, with comparative RNA sequencing for 19 cases. RESULTS: Informative RNA assay data were obtained for 96% of cases, enabling variant reclassification for 75% variants that can be used for genetic counseling (71%), to inform clinical care (32%) and prenatal counseling (41%). Variant-associated mis-splicing was highly reproducible for 28 cases with samples from ≥2 affected individuals or heterozygotes and 10 cases with ≥2 biospecimens. PCR amplicons encompassing another segregated heterozygous variant was vital for clinical interpretation of 22 of 79 variants to phase RNA splicing events and discern complete from partial mis-splicing. CONCLUSION: RNA diagnostics enabled provision of a genetic diagnosis for 64% of recruited cases. PCR-based RNA diagnostics has capacity to analyze 81.3% of clinically significant genes, with long amplicons providing an advantage over RNA sequencing to phase RNA splicing events. The Australasian Consortium for RNA Diagnostics (SpliceACORD) provide clinically-endorsed, standardized protocols and recommendations for interpreting RNA assay data.

Health practitioners' perceptions of the barriers and enablers to the implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: As interest in reproductive genetic carrier screening rises, with increased availability, the role of healthcare practitioners is central in guiding uptake aligned with a couples' values and beliefs. Therefore, practitioners' views on implementation are critical to the success of any reproductive genetic carrier screening programme. AIM: To explore healthcare practitioners' perceptions of the barriers and enablers to implementation. MATERIALS & METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of the literature searching seven databases using health practitioner, screening and implementation terms returning 490 articles. RESULTS: Screening led to the inclusion of 26 articles for full-text review. We found three interconnected themes relating to reproductive genetic carrier screening: (i) use and impact, (ii) practitioners' beliefs and expectations and (iii) resources. DISCUSSION: Barriers and enablers to implementation were present within each theme and grouping these determinants by (a) community for example lack of public interest, (b) practitioner for example lack of practitioner time and (c) organisation for example lack of effective metrics, reveals a preponderance of practitioner barriers and organisational enablers. Linking barriers with potential enablers leaves several barriers unresolved (e.g., costs for couples) implying additional interventions may be required. CONCLUSION: Future research should draw on the findings from this study to develop and test strategies to facilitate appropriate offering of reproductive genetic carrier screening by healthcare practitioners.