Page 18 - Read Online
P. 18

Page 12 of 15          Magnifico et al. Rare Dis Orphan Drugs J 2023;2:16  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/rdodj.2023.17

               Considering how fast today’s society evolves and how complex and sensitive this field is - more frequent
               societal consultations are key to understanding whether there is a community consensus.

               Governance
               The psychological distress and worry around using GS in NBS bring governance and policy consequences
               that must be taken into consideration. For example, parental worry could cause follow-up visits, tests, and
                                                    [36]
               services that may not be medically indicated .
               Moreover, when clinicians or other healthcare professionals have the role of returning results to patients,
               time management is a concern, since counseling parents and educating them on procedures and next steps
               will be time- and energy-consuming and, therefore, costly. It has to be taken into consideration that all
               positive screen results will need follow-up care, confirmatory testing, and monitoring, ensuing even more
               time and costs to the healthcare system .
                                                [34]

               Genetics professionals surveyed by Ulm et al. think that the complexity implied in the use of GS in NBS
               should lead to a new counseling paradigm, forcing a non-mandatory program that envisages consent and
                                                                                     [32]
               the  option  to  opt  out  in  a  setting  where  genetic  discrimination  is  prevented .  These  changes  and
               challenges should thus require a new setting and an infrastructure boosting education and training of the
               workforce involved .
                                [35]
               On the same line, two papers [9,38]  analyzed the US legal framework with respect to the introduction of GS in
               NBS programs. Both concluded that the current “constitutional boundaries” do not allow the introduction
               of mandatory neonatal screening programs using GS. The first argument is that mandatory screening is
               based on two fundamental legal bases:


               (1) Police power that allows the state to intervene in order to protect the health and safety of citizens AND

               (2) Parens patrie that allows public authority to make decisions in the best interest of the children despite
               the opinion of the parents.

               Both principles do not seem to be applicable to genomic screening unless it is limited to a strict number of
               genes (and variants on those genes) that cause severe but treatable conditions with an almost certain
               pediatric onset [9,38,39] .

               From a health policy perspective, there is a consensus regarding the introduction of GS-based NBS
               programs which should not substitute the current conventional NBS programs, meaning that the costs for
                                                                                       [39]
               implementing the new program are on top of the existing one with limited overlap . Another important
               aspect considered by all the three papers [9,38,39]  is equity: despite being subject to consent from the parents,
               once introduced, GS-based NBS should be equally accessible to all newborns. An interesting concept linked
               with equity concerns is the possibility for the families to have raw data from GS analyzed and interpreted
               independently; if families can get access to raw data, some of them, the wealthier and more educated, could
               look for deeper analysis and interpretation even for a portion of the genome not included in the NBS
               program. Is that ethical? Is that fair, considering that other families will not have that possibility? [9]

               LIMITATIONS
               The rapid evolution of the field and the increasing number of pilot programs using GS for NBS make it
               difficult to give a snapshot without the risk of missing the most recently published evidence. To make an
   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23