Implementing genomic newborn screening as an effective public health intervention: sidestepping the hype and criticism

Introduction

The development and implementation of population-based newborn screening was one of the most successful public health interventions of the twentieth century. Newborn screening is now routinely provided to almost all infants in many jurisdictions and usually includes a number of Mendelian diseases as well as some other treatable conditions of infancy. Genome-wide sequencing of the DNA that can be obtained from a small drop of an infant’s blood would permit the identification of genomic variants that are predictive of thousands of additional genetic diseases and provide the opportunity to treat many more healthy-appearing babies with childhood-onset disorders. Newborn genomic sequencing could also give parents information about genetic variants associated with conditions for which there is currently no treatment, that do not have onset until much later in life, or that only raise concern in relatives of the infant. However, our knowledge of the penetrance, natural history, and variability of most rare genetic diseases is limited, the clinical validity and utility of genomic diagnosis for many of these conditions have not yet been established, and the value of presymptomatic treatment is often unclear. As a consequence, much of the information obtained through newborn genomic screening may be of no benefit to, or could even harm, a baby. Genomic sequencing data might be stored indefinitely in an infant’s electronic health record, a prospect that raises serious ethical, legal, privacy, and social concerns. Implementing universal genomic newborn screening in accordance with widely-accepted public health disease screening criteria would sidestep most the concerns that have been raised.

Potential benefits and harms of genomic newborn screening

Universal newborn screening programs are usually designed to detect serious conditions in asymptomatic infants in order to provide treatment that can greatly ameliorate a disease or even prevent it from occurring. The medical, financial, and social costs and benefits of such programs can be evaluated using standard public health criteria1,2, and recent commentaries3,4 present a strong case for why we need to collect large-scale trial data that will enable us to do such evaluations.

Discussions of genomic newborn screening often focus on sequencing all of the protein-coding genes, but the function of most human genes is unknown, and sequencing these genes would be of no immediate value. Almost all concrete proposals and pilot projects for genomic newborn screening actually involve bioinformatics analysis of only a panel of genes, usually, just a few hundred, that are known to be associated with serious mendelian diseases that occur in young children and are clinically “actionable”. However, genome sequencing also provides information on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), the genetic markers that are used in most studies of common adult-onset diseases as well as of traits like IQ, height, and ancestry. The fact that population-based genome sequencing would provide information on thousands of genes that are not the targets of newborn screening and on millions of SNPs in every infant has led to suggestions that genomic newborn screening might be valuable for many purposes beyond detecting potentially treatable childhood-onset genetic diseases in healthy-appearing babies. These “additional benefits” might include shortening the diagnostic odyssey in children who subsequently develop symptoms of a genetic disease or informing a family of the likelihood that an infant will develop a genetic disease for which no effective treatment currently exists. Genomic data could also be used to provide risk stratification for common diseases of later life, pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing, or heterozygous carrier status for thousands of recessive diseases. In addition, genomic screening of newborn infants could provide information for parents and other family members regarding their own risks for developing a serious genetic disease or for having a child with such a disease.

The costs and benefits of using genomic data for purposes other than screening for serious diseases that can be effectively prevented or treated in infancy cannot be evaluated using the public health criteria that justify conventional newborn screening3,4. Routine genome sequencing for any purpose has the potential to harm some of the infants who are screened5,6, and there is usually no laboratory test or imaging study that can reliably establish the clinical diagnosis of a genetic disease in an asymptomatic child. Thus, it may be necessary to follow children clinically for many years to recognize false positive and false negative newborn screening results for many genetic diseases.

One of the most important reasons that many conventional newborn screening programs have been successful is that they are universal – almost every baby born within the jurisdiction receives newborn screening7,8. An important factor in achieving such inclusive coverage is thought to be the use of implied consent – all parents are assumed to want this screening because of the severity of the diseases included and the urgency and effectiveness of available treatments for the baby7,8. The assumption of potential benefit for all infants may also apply to newborn screening for other genetic diseases that meet standard public health disease screening criteria1,2, and implied consent may also suffice for these conditions. However, genomic newborn screening to achieve additional potential benefits like those listed above is very likely to require explicit parental consent for screening7,8,9. Moreover, many of these additional benefits cannot be achieved without long-term storage of the baby’s genomic data, which would require explicit parental consent in most jurisdictions10.

Long-term storage of genomic data raises a number of legal, ethical, and privacy concerns9,11,12. The benefit of maintaining an electronic record of an individual’s genome sequence is predicated on the assumption that genome sequencing is difficult to obtain and very expensive. This is no longer true, and if genome sequencing were cheap enough for universal genomic newborn screening to be practical, repeat sequencing would probably be less expensive and more informative than storing a person’s genomic data securely for many years. Resequencing a stored newborn screening blood spot or sequencing a sample from concerned individuals or family members when they need or desire the information could provide most, if not all, of the additional benefits suggested for genomic newborn screening without the need for long-term storage of the baby’s sequence data.

Use of standard public health disease screening criteria would sidestep most concerns about genomic newborn screening

Most of the concerns that have been raised can be avoided by implementing genomic newborn screening in a manner that meets standard public health guidelines for disease screening1,2. This can be done by (1) limiting the program to a panel of genes for high-penetrance genetic diseases that have been shown to be effectively preventable or treatable in early life, (2) not storing any genomic data beyond the standard newborn screening report in the infant’s electronic health record, and (3) assuring the universality of screening, follow-up disease confirmation, and treatment (if indicated) for all “screen positive” infants1,2.

Even if this were done, implementing genome sequencing in every newborn infant would still raise some important health policy issues. One is that a screening test, no matter what it is, is only a small part of a newborn screening program. Once “screen positive” infants are found, the family (or in some programs, the responsible healthcare professional) must be notified and the child recalled for further evaluation, which may require additional testing and specialist assessments that differ for each disease. The infant must then be treated if necessary and followed clinically to determine disease onset or progression, observe for complications and beneficial or adverse effects of treatment, and provide other necessary services such as genetic counseling for the family8,13. It is important to note that the testing, follow-up, and treatment needed for genomic newborn screening would largely be in addition to services that are currently in place for other forms of newborn screening, so universal genome sequencing would constitute a substantial increase in the overall cost of a jurisdiction’s newborn screening program, even if the genomic testing itself were inexpensive6,9,14,15.

Cost-effectiveness, which is an important consideration for all public health interventions, has not yet been demonstrated for genomic newborn screening for any disease. Implementation of genomic newborn screening before it has been shown to be cost-effective and to meet other standard public health criteria risks damaging the current widespread public and political support for conventional newborn screening, thus harming the babies who benefit from existing universal screening programs6,15. Several large-scale pilot studies of genomic newborn screening are currently underway, and it is important that the results of these studies be obtained and analyzed in a manner that permits accurate assessment of the sensitivity and specificity of genomic newborn screening for serious genetic diseases, the clinical utility of pre-symptomatic diagnosis and intervention, cost-effectiveness, and the overall net benefit to children3,4.

Conclusion

Most of the serious ethical, legal, privacy, and social concerns raised by genome sequencing of all infants can be avoided by implementing genomic newborn screening in accordance with widely-accepted public health criteria.

Related Articles

Probabilistic machine learning for battery health diagnostics and prognostics—review and perspectives

Diagnosing lithium-ion battery health and predicting future degradation is essential for driving design improvements in the laboratory and ensuring safe and reliable operation over a product’s expected lifetime. However, accurate battery health diagnostics and prognostics is challenging due to the unavoidable influence of cell-to-cell manufacturing variability and time-varying operating circumstances experienced in the field. Machine learning approaches informed by simulation, experiment, and field data show enormous promise to predict the evolution of battery health with use; however, until recently, the research community has focused on deterministic modeling methods, largely ignoring the cell-to-cell performance and aging variability inherent to all batteries. To truly make informed decisions regarding battery design in the lab or control strategies for the field, it is critical to characterize the uncertainty in a model’s predictions. After providing an overview of lithium-ion battery degradation, this paper reviews the current state-of-the-art probabilistic machine learning models for health diagnostics and prognostics. Details of the various methods, their advantages, and limitations are discussed in detail with a primary focus on probabilistic machine learning and uncertainty quantification. Last, future trends and opportunities for research and development are discussed.

Iron homeostasis and ferroptosis in muscle diseases and disorders: mechanisms and therapeutic prospects

The muscular system plays a critical role in the human body by governing skeletal movement, cardiovascular function, and the activities of digestive organs. Additionally, muscle tissues serve an endocrine function by secreting myogenic cytokines, thereby regulating metabolism throughout the entire body. Maintaining muscle function requires iron homeostasis. Recent studies suggest that disruptions in iron metabolism and ferroptosis, a form of iron-dependent cell death, are essential contributors to the progression of a wide range of muscle diseases and disorders, including sarcopenia, cardiomyopathy, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Thus, a comprehensive overview of the mechanisms regulating iron metabolism and ferroptosis in these conditions is crucial for identifying potential therapeutic targets and developing new strategies for disease treatment and/or prevention. This review aims to summarize recent advances in understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying ferroptosis in the context of muscle injury, as well as associated muscle diseases and disorders. Moreover, we discuss potential targets within the ferroptosis pathway and possible strategies for managing muscle disorders. Finally, we shed new light on current limitations and future prospects for therapeutic interventions targeting ferroptosis.

Emerging insights in senescence: pathways from preclinical models to therapeutic innovations

Senescence is a crucial hallmark of ageing and a significant contributor to the pathology of age-related disorders. As committee members of the young International Cell Senescence Association (yICSA), we aim to synthesise recent advancements in the identification, characterisation, and therapeutic targeting of senescence for clinical translation. We explore novel molecular techniques that have enhanced our understanding of senescent cell heterogeneity and their roles in tissue regeneration and pathology. Additionally, we delve into in vivo models of senescence, both non-mammalian and mammalian, to highlight tools available for advancing the contextual understanding of in vivo senescence. Furthermore, we discuss innovative diagnostic tools and senotherapeutic approaches, emphasising their potential for clinical application. Future directions of senescence research are explored, underscoring the need for precise, context-specific senescence classification and the integration of advanced technologies such as machine learning, long-read sequencing, and multifunctional senoprobes and senolytics. The dual role of senescence in promoting tissue homoeostasis and contributing to chronic diseases highlights the complexity of targeting these cells for improved clinical outcomes.

Analysis of microbial composition and sharing in low-biomass human milk samples: a comparison of DNA isolation and sequencing techniques

Human milk microbiome studies are currently hindered by low milk bacterial/human cell ratios and often rely on 16S rRNA gene sequencing, which limits downstream analyses. Here, we aimed to find a method to study milk bacteria and assess bacterial sharing between maternal and infant microbiota. We tested four DNA isolation methods, two bacterial enrichment methods and three sequencing methods on mock communities, milk samples and negative controls. Of the four DNA isolation kits, the DNeasy PowerSoil Pro (PS) and MagMAX Total Nucleic Acid Isolation (MX) kits provided consistent 16S rRNA gene sequencing results with low contamination. Neither enrichment method substantially decreased the human metagenomic sequencing read-depth. Long-read 16S-ITS-23S rRNA gene sequencing biased the mock community composition but provided consistent results for milk samples, with little contamination. In contrast to 16S rRNA gene sequencing, 16S-ITS-23S rRNA gene sequencing of milk, infant oral, infant faecal and maternal faecal DNA from 14 mother-infant pairs provided sufficient resolution to detect significantly more frequent sharing of bacteria between related pairs compared to unrelated pairs. In conclusion, PS or MX kit-DNA isolation followed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing reliably characterises human milk microbiota, and 16S-ITS-23S rRNA gene sequencing enables studies of bacterial transmission in low-biomass samples.

Rapid brain tumor classification from sparse epigenomic data

Although the intraoperative molecular diagnosis of the approximately 100 known brain tumor entities described to date has been a goal of neuropathology for the past decade, achieving this within a clinically relevant timeframe of under 1 h after biopsy collection remains elusive. Advances in third-generation sequencing have brought this goal closer, but established machine learning techniques rely on computationally intensive methods, making them impractical for live diagnostic workflows in clinical applications. Here we present MethyLYZR, a naive Bayesian framework enabling fully tractable, live classification of cancer epigenomes. For evaluation, we used nanopore sequencing to classify over 200 brain tumor samples, including 10 sequenced in a clinical setting next to the operating room, achieving highly accurate results within 15 min of sequencing. MethyLYZR can be run in parallel with an ongoing nanopore experiment with negligible computational overhead. Therefore, the only limiting factors for even faster time to results are DNA extraction time and the nanopore sequencer’s maximum parallel throughput. Although more evidence from prospective studies is needed, our study suggests the potential applicability of MethyLYZR for live molecular classification of nervous system malignancies using nanopore sequencing not only for the neurosurgical intraoperative use case but also for other oncologic indications and the classification of tumors from cell-free DNA in liquid biopsies.

Responses

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *