Identifying Perceptions and Preferences of the General Public Concerning Universal Screening of Children for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common genetic disorder that, if untreated, predisposes individuals to premature coronary heart disease. As most individuals with FH remain undiagnosed, new approaches to detection are needed and should be considered a priority in public health genomics. Universal screening of children for FH has been proposed, and this study explores public perspectives on the acceptability of this approach. METHODS: A one-day deliberative public forum was held in Perth, WA, Australia. Thirty randomly selected individuals were recruited, with self-reported sociodemographic characteristics used to obtain discursive representation. Participants were presented with information from a variety of perspectives and asked to discuss the information provided to identify points of consensus and disagreement. The data collected were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Of the 17 participants at the forum, 16 deemed universal screening of children for FH to be acceptable. Fifteen of these 16 believed this was best performed at the time of an immunisation. Participants proposed a number of conditions that should be met to reduce the likelihood of unintended harm resulting from the screening process. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The outcomes of the forum suggest that establishing a universal screening programme for FH in childhood is acceptable to the general public in WA.

Policy Making in Newborn Screening Needs a Structured and Transparent Approach.

PURPOSE: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) programs have expanded significantly in the past years and are expected to expand further with the emergence of genetic technologies. Historically, NBS expansion has often occurred following ad hoc consideration of conditions, instead of a structured and transparent approach. In this review, we explore issues pertinent to NBS policy making, through the lens of the policy cycle: (a) agenda setting, (b) policy advice, (c) policy decision, (d) implementation, and (e) evaluation. METHODS: A literature search was conducted to gather information on the elements specific to NBS and its policy making process. RESULTS: The review highlighted two approaches to nominate a condition: a structured approach through horizon scanning; and an ad hoc process. For assessment of a condition, there was unanimous support for a robust process based on criteria. While the need to assess harms and benefits was a repeated theme in the articles, there is no agreed-upon threshold for benefit in decision-making. Furthermore, the literature was consistent in its recommendation for an overarching, independent, multidisciplinary group providing recommendations to government. An implementation plan focusing on the different levels on which NBS operates and the information needed on each level is essential for successful implementation. Continuously monitoring, and improving a program is vital, particularly following the implementation of screening for a new condition. An advisory committee could advise on implementation, development, review, modification, and cessation of (parts of) NBS. CONCLUSION: The results highlight that there are a wave of issues facing NBS programs that policy makers must take into account when developing policy processes. What conditions to screen, and the technologies used in NBS, are both up for debate.

Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The use of genome-wide (whole genome or exome) sequencing for population-based newborn screening presents an opportunity to detect and treat or prevent many more serious early-onset health conditions than is possible today. METHODS: The Paediatric Task Team of the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health's Regulatory and Ethics Working Group reviewed current understanding and concerns regarding the use of genomic technologies for population-based newborn screening and developed, by consensus, eight recommendations for clinicians, clinical laboratory scientists, and policy makers. RESULTS: Before genome-wide sequencing can be implemented in newborn screening programs, its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness must be demonstrated, and the ability to distinguish disease-causing and benign variants of all genes screened must be established. In addition, each jurisdiction needs to resolve ethical and policy issues regarding the disclosure of incidental or secondary findings to families and ownership, appropriate storage and sharing of genomic data. CONCLUSION: The best interests of children should be the basis for all decisions regarding the implementation of genomic newborn screening.

International differences in the evaluation of conditions for newborn bloodspot screening: a review of scientific literature and policy documents.

Despite international adoption of newborn bloodspot screening (DBS), no two countries' screening programs are the same. This article aims to understand what factors influence DBS decision-making criteria and how conditions are assessed against them. In doing so, it offers unique insights into the international landscape of DBS. A systematic review on DBS criteria in scientific literature was first undertaken. Through this, five topics were identified for consideration when analyzing DBS decision-making. Using these five topics as a template, a side-by-side comparison was conducted on DBS in policy documents of eight countries. Programs are using different approaches to explore the same policy issues, including: the beneficiary of DBS, definition of criteria, the way conditions are assessed, level of evidence required, and recommendations after assessment. These differences have the potential to result in increased disparity across DBS internationally. Ultimately, governments need to decide on their role and develop an approach to DBS decision-making in line with this role. The analyses presented in this article highlight that despite programs' commonalities, no one 'DBS decision-making solution' exists. Understanding the different approaches to decision-making within the literature and policy settings, provides an objective starting point for structured decision-making approaches for DBS programs.