The premutation of the fragile X messenger ribonucleoprotein 1 (FMR1) gene is characterized by an expansion of the CGG trinucleotide repeats (55 to 200 CGGs) in the 5’ untranslated region and increased levels of FMR1 mRNA. Molecular mechanisms leading to fragile X-premutation-associated conditions (FXPAC) include cotranscriptional R-loop formations, FMR1 mRNA toxicity through both RNA gelation into nuclear foci and sequestration of various CGG-repeat-binding proteins, and the repeat-associated non-AUG (RAN)-initiated translation of potentially toxic proteins. Such molecular mechanisms contribute to subsequent consequences, including mitochondrial dysfunction and neuronal death. Clinically, premutation carriers may exhibit a wide range of symptoms and phenotypes. Any of the problems associated with the premutation can appropriately be called FXPAC. Fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS), fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency (FXPOI), and fragile X-associated neuropsychiatric disorders (FXAND) can fall under FXPAC. Understanding the molecular and clinical aspects of the premutation of the FMR1 gene is crucial for the accurate diagnosis, genetic counseling, and appropriate management of affected individuals and families. This paper summarizes all the known problems associated with the premutation and documents the presentations and discussions that occurred at the International Premutation Conference, which took place in New Zealand in 2023.

Genomic sequencing technology allows for identification of reproductive couples with an increased chance, as compared with that in the general population, of having a child with an autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic condition. We investigated the feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of a nationwide, couple-based genetic carrier screening program in Australia as part of the Mackenzie's Mission project. Health care providers offered screening to persons before pregnancy or early in pregnancy. The results obtained from testing at least 1281 genes were provided to the reproductive couples. We aimed to ascertain the psychosocial effects on participants, the acceptability of screening to all participants, and the reproductive choices of persons identified as having an increased chance of having a child with a condition for which we screened. Among 10,038 reproductive couples enrolled in the study, 9107 (90.7%) completed screening, and 175 (1.9%) were newly identified as having an increased chance of having a child with a genetic condition for which we screened. These conditions involved pathogenic variants in 90 different genes; 74.3% of the conditions were autosomal recessive. Three months after receiving the results, 76.6% of the couples with a newly identified increased chance had used or planned to use reproductive interventions to avoid having an affected child. Those newly identified as having an increased chance had greater anxiety than those with a low chance. The median level of decisional regret was low in all result groups, and 98.9% of participants perceived screening to be acceptable. Couple-based reproductive genetic carrier screening was largely acceptable to participants and was used to inform reproductive decision making. The delivery of screening to a diverse and geographically dispersed population was feasible. (Funded by the Medical Research Future Fund of the Australian government; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04157595.).

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) provides people with information about their chance of having children with autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic conditions, enabling informed reproductive decision-making. RGCS is recommended to be offered to all couples during preconception or in early pregnancy. However, cost and a lack of awareness may prevent access. To address this, the Australian Government funded Mackenzie’s Mission—the Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project. Mackenzie’s Mission aims to assess the acceptability and feasibility of an easily accessible RGCS program, provided free of charge to the participant. In study Phase 1, implementation needs were mapped, and key study elements were developed. In Phase 2, RGCS is being offered by healthcare providers educated by the study team. Reproductive couples who provide consent are screened for over 1200 genes associated with >750 serious, childhood-onset genetic conditions. Those with an increased chance result are provided comprehensive genetic counseling support. Reproductive couples, recruiting healthcare providers, and study team members are also invited to complete surveys and/or interviews. In Phase 3, a mixed-methods analysis will be undertaken to assess the program outcomes, psychosocial implications and implementation considerations alongside an ongoing bioethical analysis and a health economic evaluation. Findings will inform the implementation of an ethically robust RGCS program.

Recent dramatic reductions in the timeframe in which genomic sequencing can deliver results means its application in time-sensitive screening programs such as newborn screening (NBS) is becoming a reality. As genomic NBS (gNBS) programs are developed around the world, there is an increasing need to address the ethical and social issues that such initiatives raise. This study therefore aimed to explore the Australian public’s perspectives and values regarding key gNBS characteristics and preferences for service delivery. We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age via social media; 75 people aged 23–72 participated in 1 of 15 focus groups. Participants were generally supportive of introducing genomic sequencing into newborn screening, with several stating that the adoption of such revolutionary and beneficial technology was a moral obligation. Participants consistently highlighted receiving an early diagnosis as the leading benefit, which was frequently linked to the potential for early treatment and intervention, or access to other forms of assistance, such as peer support. Informing parents about the test during pregnancy was considered important. This study provides insights into the Australian public’s views and preferences to inform the delivery of a gNBS program in the Australian context.

As interest in reproductive genetic carrier screening rises, with increased availability, the role of healthcare practitioners is central in guiding uptake aligned with a couples’ values and beliefs. Therefore, practitioners’ views on implementation are critical to the success of any reproductive genetic carrier screening programme. To explore healthcare practitioners’ perceptions of the barriers and enablers to implementation, we undertook a systematic review of the literature searching seven databases using health practitioner, screening and implementation terms, returning 490 articles. Screening led to the inclusion of 26 articles for full‐text review. We found three interconnected themes relating to reproductive genetic carrier screening: i) use and impact, ii) practitioners’ beliefs and expectations and iii) resources. Barriers and enablers to implementation were present within each theme and grouping these determinants by a) community e.g. lack of public interest, b) practitioner e.g. lack of practitioner time, and c) organisation e.g. lack of effective metrics, reveals a preponderance of practitioner barriers and organisational enablers. Linking barriers with potential enablers leaves several barriers unresolved (e.g. costs for couples) implying additional interventions may be required. Future research should draw on the findings from this study to develop and test strategies to facilitate appropriate offering of reproductive genetic carrier screening by healthcare practitioners.