Parents' interest in whole-genome sequencing of newborns

Genetics in Medicine

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 78-84

  Goldenberg, Aaron J ^a   Dodson, Daniel S ^b   Davis, Matthew M ^b,c   Tarini, Beth A ^b  

^a CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

newborn screening; parents; whole genome sequencing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FAMILY DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GENE SEQUENCE; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEWBORN; NEWBORN SCREENING; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PEDIATRICIAN; POINT OF CARE TESTING; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING; YOUNG ADULT;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; DATA COLLECTION; GENETIC TESTING; GENOME, HUMAN; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; NEONATAL SCREENING; PARENTS; PHYSICIANS, PRIMARY CARE; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84893627397     PISSN: 10983600     EISSN: 15300366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2013.76     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. National Newborn Screening and Genetics Resource Center. National newborn screening report. http://genes-r us.uthscsa.edu/resources/newborn/00/ch2- complete.pdf. Accessed 3 December 2012.
2. Paul DB. The history of newborn phenylketonuria screening in the U.S. In: Task Force on Genetic Testing (U.S.), Holtzman NA, Watson MS (eds). Promoting Safe and Effective Genetic Testing in the United States: Final Report of the Task Force on Genetic Testing. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, 1998:xxiv, 186 p.
3. Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children. Recommended Uniform Screening Panel of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children. http://www.hrsa. gov/advisorycommittees/mchbadvisory/heritabledisorders/recommendedpanel/index. html. Accessed 7 December 2012.
4. Chace DH, Kalas TA, Naylor EW. Use of tandem mass spectrometry for multianalyte screening of dried blood specimens from newborns. Clin Chem 2003;49:1797-1817.
5. Comeau AM, Parad RB, Dorkin HL, et al. Population-based newborn screening for genetic disorders when multiple mutation DNA testing is incorporated: a cystic fibrosis newborn screening model demonstrating increased sensitivity but more carrier detections. Pediatrics 2004;113:1573-1581.
6. McCandless SE, Chandrasekar R, Linard S, Kikano S, Rice L. Sequencing from dried blood spots in infants with "false positive" newborn screen for MCAD deficiency. Mol Genet Metab 2013;108:51-55.
7. Solomon BD, Pineda-Alvarez DE, Bear KA, Mullikin JC, Evans JP; NISC Comparative Sequencing Program. Applying genomic analysis to newborn screening. Mol Syndromol 2012;3:59-67.
8. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Newborn screening in the genomic era: setting a research agenda, 2011. https://www.nichd.nih. gov/about/meetings/2010/Pages/121410.aspx. Accessed 25 October 2012.
9. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Genomic Sequencing and and Newborn Screening Disorders, 2012. http://grants.nih. gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HD-13-010.html. Accessed 10 August 2012.
10. Ross LF, Saal HM, David KL, Anderson RR; American Academy of Pediatrics; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Technical report: ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Genet Med 2013;15:234-245.
11. Clayton EW. Currents in contemporary ethics. State run newborn screening in the genomic era, or how to avoid drowning when drinking from a fire hose. J Law Med Ethics 2010;38:697-700.
12. Goldenberg AJ, Sharp RR. The ethical hazards and programmatic challenges of genomic newborn screening. JAMA 2012;307:461-462.
13. Rothstein MA. Currents in contemporary bioethics. J Law Med Ethics 2012;40:682-689.
14. C.S. Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health. http://mottnpch.org/. Accessed 1 December 2012.
15. Tarini BA, Goldenberg A, Singer D, Clark SJ, Butchart A, Davis MM. Not without my permission: parents' willingness to permit use of newborn screening samples for research. Public Health Genomics 2010;13: 125-130.
16. Tarini BA, Singer D, Clark SJ, Davis MM. Parents' interest in predictive genetic testing for their children when a disease has no treatment. Pediatrics 2009;124:e432-e438.
17. Dennis JM. Summary of KnowledgePanel(R) Design, 2010. http://www. knowledgenetworks.com/ganp/reviewer-info.html. Accessed 2 December 2012.
18. Rao JNK, Scott AJ. On chi-squared tests for multiway contingency-tables with cell proportions estimated from survey data. Ann Stat 1984;12(1):46-60.
19. Therrell BL Jr, Hannon WH, Bailey DB Jr, et al. Committee report: considerations and recommendations for national guidance regarding the retention and use of residual dried blood spot specimens after newborn screening. Genet Med 2011;13:621-624.
20. Beleno v Texas Dept. of State Health Serv. Case 5:2009cv00188. U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in San Antonio, 3 March 2009.
21. Bearder, et al v State of Minnesota, et al. Fourth Judicial Circuit, County of Hennepin District Court; 24 November 2009.
22. Tarini BA. Storage and use of residual newborn screening blood spots: a public policy emergency. Genet Med 2011;13:619-620.