Genomic sequencing is a powerful diagnostic tool in critically ill infants, but performing exome or genome sequencing (ES/GS) in the context of a research study is different from implementing these tests clinically. We investigated the integration of rapid ES into routine clinical care after a pilot research study in a Level IV Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of infants admitted with suspected genetic disorders to the NICU from December 1, 2018 to March 31, 2021 and compared results to those obtained from a previous research study cohort (March 1, 2017 to November 30, 2018). Clinical rapid ES was performed in 80/230 infants (35%) with a suspected genetic disorder and identified a genetic diagnosis in 22/80 infants (28%). The majority of diagnoses acutely impacted clinical management (14/22 (64%)). Compared to the previous research study, clinically integrated rapid ES had a significantly lower diagnostic yield and increased time from NICU admission and genetics consult to ES report, but identified four genetic diagnoses that may have been missed by the research study selection criteria. Compared to other genetic tests, rapid ES had similar or higher diagnostic yield and similar or decreased time to result. Overall, rapid ES was utilized in the NICU after the pilot research study, often as the first-tier sequencing test, and could identify the majority of disease-causing variants, shorten the diagnostic odyssey, and impact clinical care. Based on our experience, we have identified strategies to optimize the clinical implementation of rapid ES in the NICU.

The electronic MEdical Records and GEnomics (eMERGE) consortium will return risk reports pertaining to specific diseases, a key component of which will be polygenic risk scores (PRS), to 25,000 participants, including 5000 children. Understanding comprehension and the perceived value of these PRS-based reports among parents will be critical for effective return of results in children. To address this issue, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 40 African American and Hispanic parents at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Boston Children’s Hospital. Each participant received a hypothetical risk report identifying their child as high risk for either type 2 diabetes or asthma. Participants were assessed on their comprehension of absolute versus relative risk framing, likelihood of following risk-reduction recommendations, perceived value of the information, psychosocial impact, education/support needed, and suggestions to improve the PRS-based report to make it more accessible. Results demonstrated high perceived value in receiving PRS-based reports but also draws attention to important shortfalls in comprehension due to factors including the health of the child, family history, and how the risk was framed. This study provides an insight into implementing the return of genomic risk scores in a pediatric setting.

There is growing international interest in using genomic sequencing to screen newborns and children for treatable genomic conditions. Although recent research has demonstrated increasing support for using genomic sequencing to screen newborns and children for treatable genomic conditions among various stakeholders, little is known about the perspectives of genetic counselors (GCs) in the United States, who are frequently engaged in the disclosure of positive newborn screening results and coordination of follow-up testing and management. This study utilized a cross-sectional 3-section survey to explore GCs' perspectives on the benefits, limitations, and ethical and practical considerations of genomic sequencing in newborns as an adjunct screen to standard newborn screening (NBS). Additionally, we evaluated GCs' views on specific genes that could be added to NBS via sequencing. Of 176 GCs who participated in the study, most endorsed the addition of NBSeq for conditions that typically manifest in childhood and have a well-defined treatment or management protocol. Some perspectives, such as attitudes toward health inequity, varied by practice region. Most respondents endorsed 13 of 25 specific genetic conditions for inclusion in NBSeq. Our findings demonstrate GCs' support for the expansion of NBS using genomic sequencing in the United States and the need for ongoing investigation of ethical and practical concerns related to its implementation.

Purpose: It is essential that studies of genomic sequencing (GS) in newborns and children include individuals from under-represented racial and ethnic groups (URG) to ensure future applications are equitably implemented. We conducted interviews with parents from URG to better understand their perspectives on GS research, develop strategies to reduce barriers to enrollment, and facilitate research participation. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with 50 parents from URG. Results: Nearly all parents (44) said they would be interested in participating in an infant GS study. Parents were interested in participating in GS research for reasons including clinical utility, personal utility, and/or family health benefits. Deterrents to enrollment cited by parents were discomfort with enrollment procedures (e.g., not wanting a heel stick), limited emotional bandwidth, unfavorable perceptions of the study, and concerns about potential results. Most parents (35 of 40) said they would want to receive all types of genetic results, including actionable and non-actionable, as well as childhood- and adult-onset. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that parents from URG are interested in participating in GS research. Based upon these findings, we provide recommendations for designing GS studies that are responsive to their concerns.