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.

Personalising genetic counselling (POETIC) trial: Protocol for a hybrid type II effectiveness-implementation randomised clinical trial of a patient screening tool to improve patient empowerment after cancer genetic counselling.

BACKGROUND: Genetic counselling aims to identify, and address, patient needs while facilitating informed decision-making about genetic testing and promoting empowerment and adaptation to genetic information. Increasing demand for cancer genetic testing and genetic counsellor workforce capacity limitations may impact the quality of genetic counselling provided. The use of a validated genetic-specific screening tool, the Genetic Psychosocial Risk Instrument (GPRI), may facilitate patient-centred genetic counselling. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness and implementation of using the GPRI in improving patient outcomes after genetic counselling and testing for an inherited cancer predisposition. METHODS: The PersOnalising gEneTIc Counselling (POETIC) trial is a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial using a randomised control trial to assess the effectiveness of the GPRI in improving patient empowerment (primary outcome), while also assessing implementation from the perspective of clinicians and the healthcare service. Patients referred for a cancer risk assessment to the conjoint clinical genetics service of two metropolitan hospitals in Victoria, Australia, who meet the eligibility criteria and consent to POETIC will be randomised to the usual care or intervention group. Those in the intervention group will complete the GPRI prior to their appointment with the screening results available for the clinicians' use during the appointment. Appointment audio recordings, clinician-reported information about the appointment, patient-reported outcome measures, and clinical data will be used to examine the effectiveness of using the GPRI. Appointment audio recordings, health economic information, and structured interviews will be used to examine the implementation of the GPRI. DISCUSSION: The POETIC trial takes a pragmatic approach by deploying the GPRI as an intervention in the routine clinical practice of a cancer-specific clinical genetics service that is staffed by a multidisciplinary team of genetics and oncology clinicians. Therefore, the effectiveness and implementation evidence generated from this real-world health service setting aims to optimise the relevance of the outcomes of this trial to the practice of genetic counselling while enhancing the operationalisation of the screening tool in routine practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry registration number 12621001582842p. Date of registration: 19th November 2021.

Becoming and being a parent with an inherited predisposition to diffuse gastric cancer: A qualitative study of young adults with a CDH1 pathogenic variant.

PURPOSE: This study explored the experiences of young people with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC), an inherited cancer predisposition syndrome, as they navigate becoming and being a parent. DESIGN: We used interpretive description and conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 young Australians (18-39 years) with a CDH1 pathogenic variant (PV). Data were analyzed using team-based, reflexive thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Participants' reproductive decisions centered on the perceived manageability of HDGC, namely via gastrectomy, and timing of their genetic testing. Participants yet to have children and those with challenging gastrectomy experiences favored using reproductive technologies to prevent passing on their PV. Parents who had children before genetic testing described complicated decisions about having more children. Gastrectomy was considered a parental responsibility but recovery diminished parenting abilities. CONCLUSION: Young people with HDGC face unique challenges navigating reproductive decision-making and parenting with gastrectomy. Findings lend credence to calls for longitudinal, developmentally sensitive genetic counseling services.

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.

The Clinical and Psychosocial Outcomes for Women Who Received Unexpected Clinically Actionable Germline Information Identified through Research: An Exploratory Sequential Mixed-Methods Comparative Study.

Background Research identifying and returning clinically actionable germline variants offer a new avenue of access to genetic information. The psychosocial and clinical outcomes for women who have received this 'genome-first care' delivering hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk information outside of clinical genetics services are unknown. Methods: An exploratory sequential mixed-methods case-control study compared outcomes between women who did (cases; group 1) and did not (controls; group 2) receive clinically actionable genetic information from a research cohort in Victoria, Australia. Participants completed an online survey examining cancer risk perception and worry, and group 1 also completed distress and adaptation measures. Group 1 participants subsequently completed a semi structured interview. Results: Forty-five participants (group 1) and 96 (group 2) completed the online survey, and 31 group 1 participants were interviewed. There were no demographic differences between groups 1 and 2, although more of group 1 participants had children (p = 0.03). Group 1 reported significantly higher breast cancer risk perception (p < 0.001) compared to group 2, and higher cancer worry than group 2 (p < 0.001). Some group 1 participants described how receiving their genetic information heightened their cancer risk perception and exacerbated their cancer worry while waiting for risk-reducing surgery. Group 1 participants reported a MICRA mean score of 27.4 (SD 11.8, range 9−56; possible range 0−95), and an adaptation score of 2.9 (SD = 1.1). Conclusion: There were no adverse psychological outcomes amongst women who received clinically actionable germline information through a model of 'genome-first' care compared to those who did not. These findings support the return of clinically actionable research results to research participants.

TRACEBACK: Testing of Historical Tubo-Ovarian Cancer Patients for Hereditary Risk Genes as a Cancer Prevention Strategy in Family Members.

PURPOSE: Tubo-ovarian cancer (TOC) is a sentinel cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants (PVs). Identification of a PV in the first member of a family at increased genetic risk (the proband) provides opportunities for cancer prevention in other at-risk family members. Although Australian testing rates are now high, PVs in patients with TOC whose diagnosis predated revised testing guidelines might have been missed. We assessed the feasibility of detecting PVs in this population to enable genetic risk reduction in relatives. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this pilot study, deceased probands were ascertained from research cohort studies, identification by a relative, and gynecologic oncology clinics. DNA was extracted from archival tissue or stored blood for panel sequencing of 10 risk-associated genes. Testing of deceased probands ascertained through clinic records was performed with a consent waiver. RESULTS: We identified 85 PVs in 84 of 787 (11%) probands. Familial contacts of 39 of 60 (65%) deceased probands with an identified recipient (60 of 84; 71%) have received a written notification of results, with follow-up verbal contact made in 85% (33 of 39). A minority of families (n = 4) were already aware of the PV. For many (29 of 33; 88%), the genetic result provided new information and referral to a genetic service was accepted in most cases (66%; 19 of 29). Those who declined referral (4 of 29) were all male next of kin whose family member had died more than 10 years before. CONCLUSION: We overcame ethical and logistic challenges to demonstrate that retrospective genetic testing to identify PVs in previously untested deceased probands with TOC is feasible. Understanding reasons for a family member's decision to accept or decline a referral will be important for guiding future TRACEBACK projects.

Young people's experiences of a CDH1 pathogenic variant: Decision-making about gastric cancer risk management.

The most effective option for gastric cancer risk management in individuals with a CDH1 germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (PV) in Australia is prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG). There is, however, increasing confidence in endoscopic surveillance as a risk management strategy thus affording individuals with a CDH1 PV with challenging decisions regarding their gastric cancer risk management. For young people, this decision-making comes at a complex development stage of emerging and young adulthood. This study aims to explore the factors that influence young people's decision-making about their gastric cancer risk management due to a CDH1 PV. Potential participants were identified and approached through the Parkville Familial Cancer Centre in Melbourne, Australia. Thematic analysis was used to interpret and analyze the data. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 13 people with a CDH1 PV aged 18 to 39 years, inclusive. The interviews found that participants' familial and shared experiences of cancer and risk management, perceived tolerance of uncertainty, and desire for control over their cancer risk were fundamental in their decision-making about their gastric cancer risk management. The participants' young adult life stage was also deemed particularly important in decisions about the timing of PTG. The findings of this study are vital to inform decisional counseling discussions with this unique population.

Unselected Women's Experiences of Receiving Genetic Research Results for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Although there is growing consensus that clinically actionable genetic research results should be returned to participants, research on recipients' experiences and best practices for return of research results is scarce. Objective: This study explored how women in a population-based study (lifepool) experience receiving research results about actionable pathogenic variants (PVs) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) using a two-step notification process with telephone genetic counseling (TGC) support. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with lifepool participants with an HBOC PV. We used team-based codebook thematic analysis to develop findings. Findings: Thirty-one women participated (mean age 62.5 years) on average 2.3 years (range 0.3-5.1 years) after result notification. Notification was unexpected but not traumatic and TGC support helped meet women's information and support needs. Notification with referral to a local genetics service empowered women to make informed decisions about personal and familial health. Adaptation to results over time was facilitated by three main processes: seeking information, family communication, and undertaking risk management and/or risk-reducing strategies. Conclusion: Using a two-step notification process to return clinically actionable HBOC PVs from research was well received by women in a population-based study of breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility. Having genetic counseling support with referral to local genetics services in the notification process facilitated women's feelings of empowerment and adaptation to their genetic information over time. These findings build the basis for future methods for the return of actionable genetic research results and population screening.

Personal utility of genomic sequencing for infants with congenital deafness.

Decisions about genetic testing have traditionally been based on clinical utility and cost, but personal utility is increasingly recognized when assessing the value of testing. Whole exome sequencing (WES) was offered to a population cohort of 106 infants diagnosed with congenital hearing loss. Parents could choose to receive results relating to hearing loss only or also learn additional information about childhood-onset conditions (medically nonactionable and/or actionable). This study aimed to quantify the personal utility of WES for parents after a diagnosis of hearing loss in their child. Parents completed surveys pretest (63/106), after hearing loss results (52/106) and after receiving additional information (47/72). Open-ended responses from all three surveys (N = 67) were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Answers to questions regarding the value of sequencing to parents were analyzed and collated. Parents placed high value on diagnostic WES for hearing loss but had different perspectives on the personal utility of additional information. Diagnostic results provided certainty while the choice to learn additional information about childhood-onset disorders was associated with empowerment. WES also represented an opportunity to promote their child's best interests. Results provide insights into the utility of WES for the indication of congenital deafness and for genomic newborn screening broadly.

The expectations and realities of nutrigenomic testing in australia: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Consumer genomic testing for nutrition and wellness, (nutritional genomics), is becoming increasingly popular. Concurrently, health-care practitioners (HPs) working in private practice (including doctors interested in integrative medicine, private genetic counsellors, pharmacists, dieticians, naturopaths and nutritionists) are involved as test facilitators or interpreters. OBJECTIVE: To explore Australian consumers' and HPs' experiences with nutrigenomic testing. METHOD: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted using predominantly purposive sampling. The two data sets were analysed individually, then combined, using a constant comparative, thematic approach. RESULTS: Overall, 45 interviews were conducted with consumers (n = 18) and HPs (n = 27). Many of the consumer interviewees experienced chronic ill-health. Nutrigenomic testing was perceived as empowering and a source of hope for answers. While most made changes to their diet/supplements post-test, self-reported health improvements were small. A positive relationship with their HP appeared to minimize disappointment. HPs' adoption and views of nutrigenomic testing varied. Those enthusiastic about testing saw the possibilities it could offer. However, many felt nutrigenomic testing was not the only 'tool' to utilize when offering health care. DISCUSSION: This research highlights the important role HPs play in consumers' experiences of nutrigenomics. The varied practice suggests relevant HPs require upskilling in this area to at least support their patients/clients, even if nutrigenomic testing is not part of their practice. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Advisory group included patient/public group representatives who informed study design; focus group participants gave feedback on the survey from which consumer interviewees were sourced. This informed the HP data set design. Interviewees from HP data set assisted with snowball sampling.

The art and science of recruitment to a cancer rapid autopsy programme: A qualitative study exploring patient and clinician experiences.

BACKGROUND: CASCADE is a successful, Australia-first cancer rapid autopsy programme. Patients are recruited to the programme by their clinician once they understand that further treatment has only palliative intent. Despite its value, rapid autopsy is a rare research method owing partly to recruitment challenges. AIM: This research aimed to explore (1) how, in practice, clinicians select and recruit patients to the programme and (2) patient experiences of this process. DESIGN: This was a qualitative study grounded in phenomenology. CASCADE team members (clinicians and researchers) and patients participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using an inductive, team-based approach to thematic analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with 31 participants (11 patients and 20 CASCADE team members). RESULTS: Patient selection and recruitment to a rapid autopsy programme is both an art and science. In practice, patient selection is a subjective process that involves assessing a patient's psychosocial suitability for the programme. Trust and rapport are necessary for informing this assessment and to create an environment conducive to discussing rapid autopsy. Clinicians have also crafted their own ways of delivering information about CASCADE, with both clinicians and patients acknowledging that, if not handled sensitively, recruitment could cause distress. Overall, patients were satisfied with the way in which they were recruited. CONCLUSION: Findings provide insight into how clinicians successfully select and recruit patients to a rapid autopsy programme and suggests that discussing such topics are acceptable to end-of-life patients. This research also raises thought-provoking questions about the 'gatekeeping' role of clinicians in recruitment.

Evaluation of telephone genetic counselling to facilitate germline BRCA1/2 testing in women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

Systemic healthcare issues and geographical challenges restrict women's access to BRCA1/2 testing to inform the use of tailored treatments for high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Consequently, BRCA1/2 testing in this population is low and improved testing pathways are urgently needed. This study aimed to determine the acceptability and feasibility of telephone genetic counselling (TGC) to facilitate treatment-focused BRCA1/2 testing in Australia for women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Women who received TGC were invited to complete a survey examining their experiences of the service. A cost analysis was conducted to compare the service to standard, in-person genetic counselling. One hundred and seven women responded (48% response rate); 8 had a BRCA1/2 variant affecting function. Geographical barriers prevented women from accessing genetic services in the past. All participants had a positive attitude towards testing, and regret following testing was minimal. While the impact of testing was greater for those with a positive test result, overall, genetic testing did not put the additional psychosocial burden on the participants. Participant's evaluations of the telephone interactions with the genetic counsellors were highly satisfactory. The service was also found to be cost-effective. This model of telephone genetic counselling was an acceptable and effective way to reduce barriers to BRCA1/2 testing for women with ovarian cancer.

Personal genomic testing for nutrition and wellness in Australia: A content analysis of online information.

AIM: Personal genomic testing for nutrition and wellness (PGT-NG) offers a new service delivery model to nutritionists and dietitians. However, research indicates that this type of testing currently lacks sufficient clinical validity and utility to be commercially available. Despite Australian guidelines to the contrary, healthcare professionals are currently offering testing to clients, and promoting these services online. Thus, it is important to understand how PGT-NG is currently framed online to the public. METHODS: A mixed methods content analysis was conducted to assess the content, quality and marketing approaches of websites offering PGT-NG to Australians. Websites were identified using popular search engines to mimic the behaviour of a consumer. A novel framework was developed for the purposes of the analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-nine websites were analysed, comprising four nutritional genomic testing company websites and 35 healthcare provider websites. Healthcare providers relied on information from the testing companies. The content was emotive, and little attention was given to the scientific and ethical aspects of personal genomic testing. Websites appealed to consumer empowerment and framed testing as an essential and superior tool for optimising health. CONCLUSIONS: Websites lacked the transparency necessary for informed consent. A basic checklist of key information was developed to aid healthcare providers when informing potential clients of PGT-NG online.

Australians' perspectives on support around use of personal genomic testing: Findings from the Genioz study.

Personal genomic testing using direct-to-consumer and consumer-directed models, with or without involvement of healthcare providers, is increasing internationally, including in Australia. This study forms a sub-set of the Genioz study - Genomics: National Insights of Australians. We aimed to explore Australians' experiences with these types of tests, especially online DNA tests, and their views regarding whom they would seek support from around understanding test results. The study used a mixed methods approach, employing an exploratory quantitative online survey and follow-up qualitative semi-structured interviews. Between May 2016 and May 2017, 2841 Australians responded to the survey. Interviews were conducted with 63 purposively sampled respondents, including 45 who had a genetic test and 18 who had not. Of 571 respondents who had any type of genetic test, 322 had a personal genomic test using criteria defined by the researchers. Testing for ancestry/genealogy was the most common, reported by 267 participants, reflecting the increased advertising of these tests in Australia. Some respondents described downloading their raw data for further interpretation through third party websites for genealogical as well as health related information. Carrier testing, testing for serious and preventable conditions and nutrition and/or wellness were the most common health related tests reported by respondents. Participants generally preferred to seek support from general practitioners (GPs), medical specialists with relevant expertise and independent genetics specialists, although another important preference for non-health information was online forums and networks. There was less preference for seeking support from employees associated with the testing companies. Generally, of those who had a health related PGT, the most common actions were seeking medical advice or doing nothing with the information, while more of those who had a personal genomic test for nutrition and/or wellness sought advice from complementary/alternative health practitioners (eg naturopaths) and integrative GPs, and 60% reported they had changed their diet. As awareness of personal genomic testing increases, publicly funded clinical genetics services may be less inclined to discuss results from personal genomic testing. Genetic counsellors could play an important role in providing this support, both pre-test and post-test, through opportunities for private practice but independent from testing companies.