基因组测序在新生儿筛查中的实际应用系统综述

Giuditta Magnifico, I. Artuso, S. Benvenuti
{"title":"基因组测序在新生儿筛查中的实际应用系统综述","authors":"Giuditta Magnifico, I. Artuso, S. Benvenuti","doi":"10.20517/rdodj.2023.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: With the costs of genomic sequencing falling quickly and an ever-increasing number of clinical laboratories equipped with new-generation sequencing machines, healthcare systems around the world are getting ready to enter the era of genomic newborn screening (NBS). However, the adoption of Genomic Sequencing (GS), encompassing whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS), in NBS programs raises a number of clinical, ethical, and legal questions as well as organizational and economic challenges. This systematic review is part of a feasibility study to assess the introduction of WGS for NBS in Lombardy region with the specific aim of gathering evidence from existing pilots in the field whose results have been published. \n Methods: Three different sources were identified for the selection of articles in order to obtain a various and unbiased set of publications. 33 articles were retained for analysis to answer the following questions: 1. Clinical: Does genomic sequencing demonstrate clinical utility in the context of NBS? What are the limitations of these kind of programs? 2. Societal: What are the social, ethical and psychological implications of using GS for NBS? 3. Governance: What are the legal, economic, and organizational challenges for GS-based NBS programs? \n Results: There is a general consensus in the literature on the key principles that should guide the adoption of GS in NBS, such as the inclusion of actionable genes only, the need for informed consent from the parents, the right of the newborn to an open future, which means the exclusion of late-onset diseases even when those are considered treatable. However, there are still several differences in how these principles are detailed and applied. \n Conclusion: Real-world evidence from a handful of pilot projects (namely BabySeq and NC-Nexus, both carried out in the USA) have been published recently; however, this evidence is not yet sufficient to put an end to the broad and animated debate on the use of GS for NBS. Ethical, legal, and social issues still constitute great challenges and major barriers to wide and uniform adoption of GS in NBS. On the clinical side, a number of issues remain unaddressed, such as the benefits and limitations of the different approaches (targeted sequencing, GS only versus GS+standard NBS), the genes/diseases to include and the frequency of incidental findings, identification of carrier status, and variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Further pilots and consultations with involved stakeholders will be necessary before GS-based NBS can be accepted and systematically implemented in national healthcare programs.","PeriodicalId":74638,"journal":{"name":"Rare disease and orphan drugs journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review of real-world applications of genome sequencing for newborn screening\",\"authors\":\"Giuditta Magnifico, I. Artuso, S. Benvenuti\",\"doi\":\"10.20517/rdodj.2023.17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: With the costs of genomic sequencing falling quickly and an ever-increasing number of clinical laboratories equipped with new-generation sequencing machines, healthcare systems around the world are getting ready to enter the era of genomic newborn screening (NBS). However, the adoption of Genomic Sequencing (GS), encompassing whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS), in NBS programs raises a number of clinical, ethical, and legal questions as well as organizational and economic challenges. This systematic review is part of a feasibility study to assess the introduction of WGS for NBS in Lombardy region with the specific aim of gathering evidence from existing pilots in the field whose results have been published. \\n Methods: Three different sources were identified for the selection of articles in order to obtain a various and unbiased set of publications. 33 articles were retained for analysis to answer the following questions: 1. Clinical: Does genomic sequencing demonstrate clinical utility in the context of NBS? What are the limitations of these kind of programs? 2. Societal: What are the social, ethical and psychological implications of using GS for NBS? 3. Governance: What are the legal, economic, and organizational challenges for GS-based NBS programs? \\n Results: There is a general consensus in the literature on the key principles that should guide the adoption of GS in NBS, such as the inclusion of actionable genes only, the need for informed consent from the parents, the right of the newborn to an open future, which means the exclusion of late-onset diseases even when those are considered treatable. However, there are still several differences in how these principles are detailed and applied. \\n Conclusion: Real-world evidence from a handful of pilot projects (namely BabySeq and NC-Nexus, both carried out in the USA) have been published recently; however, this evidence is not yet sufficient to put an end to the broad and animated debate on the use of GS for NBS. Ethical, legal, and social issues still constitute great challenges and major barriers to wide and uniform adoption of GS in NBS. On the clinical side, a number of issues remain unaddressed, such as the benefits and limitations of the different approaches (targeted sequencing, GS only versus GS+standard NBS), the genes/diseases to include and the frequency of incidental findings, identification of carrier status, and variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Further pilots and consultations with involved stakeholders will be necessary before GS-based NBS can be accepted and systematically implemented in national healthcare programs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74638,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rare disease and orphan drugs journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rare disease and orphan drugs journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20517/rdodj.2023.17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rare disease and orphan drugs journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/rdodj.2023.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:随着基因组测序成本的快速下降和配备新一代测序机的临床实验室数量的不断增加,世界各地的医疗系统正准备进入基因组新生儿筛查(NBS)时代。然而,在国家统计局项目中采用基因组测序(GS),包括全外显子组测序(WES)和全基因组测序(WGS),引发了许多临床、伦理和法律问题以及组织和经济挑战。这项系统审查是可行性研究的一部分,该研究旨在评估在伦巴第地区为NBS引入WGS的情况,其具体目的是从该领域已公布结果的现有试点中收集证据。方法:确定三个不同的来源来选择文章,以获得一套不同的、公正的出版物。保留了33篇文章进行分析,以回答以下问题:1。临床:基因组测序在NBS背景下是否证明了临床实用性?这些程序的局限性是什么?2.社会:国家统计局使用GS的社会、伦理和心理影响是什么?3.治理:基于GS的NBS项目在法律、经济和组织方面面临哪些挑战?结果:文献中对指导在NBS中采用GS的关键原则达成了普遍共识,例如仅包含可操作的基因,需要父母的知情同意,新生儿有权拥有开放的未来,这意味着即使晚发性疾病被认为是可治疗的,也要排除这些疾病。然而,在如何详细说明和应用这些原则方面仍然存在一些差异。结论:最近公布了一些试点项目(即BabySeq和NC Nexus,均在美国开展)的真实世界证据;然而,这一证据还不足以结束关于国家统计局使用GS的广泛而激烈的辩论。伦理、法律和社会问题仍然是国家统计局广泛统一采用GS的巨大挑战和主要障碍。在临床方面,许多问题仍未得到解决,例如不同方法的益处和局限性(靶向测序,仅GS与GS+标准NBS),包括的基因/疾病和偶然发现的频率,携带者状态的识别,以及不确定意义的变异(VUS)。在接受基于GS的NBS并在国家医疗保健计划中系统实施之前,有必要与相关利益相关者进行进一步的试点和协商。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A systematic review of real-world applications of genome sequencing for newborn screening
Aim: With the costs of genomic sequencing falling quickly and an ever-increasing number of clinical laboratories equipped with new-generation sequencing machines, healthcare systems around the world are getting ready to enter the era of genomic newborn screening (NBS). However, the adoption of Genomic Sequencing (GS), encompassing whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS), in NBS programs raises a number of clinical, ethical, and legal questions as well as organizational and economic challenges. This systematic review is part of a feasibility study to assess the introduction of WGS for NBS in Lombardy region with the specific aim of gathering evidence from existing pilots in the field whose results have been published. Methods: Three different sources were identified for the selection of articles in order to obtain a various and unbiased set of publications. 33 articles were retained for analysis to answer the following questions: 1. Clinical: Does genomic sequencing demonstrate clinical utility in the context of NBS? What are the limitations of these kind of programs? 2. Societal: What are the social, ethical and psychological implications of using GS for NBS? 3. Governance: What are the legal, economic, and organizational challenges for GS-based NBS programs? Results: There is a general consensus in the literature on the key principles that should guide the adoption of GS in NBS, such as the inclusion of actionable genes only, the need for informed consent from the parents, the right of the newborn to an open future, which means the exclusion of late-onset diseases even when those are considered treatable. However, there are still several differences in how these principles are detailed and applied. Conclusion: Real-world evidence from a handful of pilot projects (namely BabySeq and NC-Nexus, both carried out in the USA) have been published recently; however, this evidence is not yet sufficient to put an end to the broad and animated debate on the use of GS for NBS. Ethical, legal, and social issues still constitute great challenges and major barriers to wide and uniform adoption of GS in NBS. On the clinical side, a number of issues remain unaddressed, such as the benefits and limitations of the different approaches (targeted sequencing, GS only versus GS+standard NBS), the genes/diseases to include and the frequency of incidental findings, identification of carrier status, and variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Further pilots and consultations with involved stakeholders will be necessary before GS-based NBS can be accepted and systematically implemented in national healthcare programs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fabry nephropathy: a treatable cause of chronic kidney disease Gene therapy for Dravet syndrome: promises and impact on disease trigger and secondary modifications Neuropathy and pain in Fabry disease The division of rare diseases research innovation at the national center for advancing translational sciences, NIH: mission, history, and current research activities Long-term treatment with insulin-like growth factor-1 in Phelan-McDermid syndrome: a case report
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1