RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Exploring the feasibility, acceptability and impact of genomic newborn screening for rare diseases in England: A study protocol for the Generation Study - Process and Impact Evaluation
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.05.14.24307295
DO 10.1101/2024.05.14.24307295
A1 Lewis, Celine
A1 Boardman, Felicity
A1 Buchanan, James
A1 Clark, Sigrún
A1 Gilchrist, Katie
A1 Hardelid, Pia
A1 Hunter, Amy
A1 Jones, Jennifer
A1 Leeson-Beevers, Kerry
A1 Stafford-Smith, Bethany
A1 Vindrola-Padros, Cecilia
A1 Vu, Martin
A1 Wu, Wing Han
A1 Zylbersztejn, Ania
A1 Hill, Melissa
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/14/2024.05.14.24307295.abstract
AB The role of genomics in healthcare is expanding rapidly and many countries are set to explore the possibility of using genomic sequencing to expand current newborn screening programmes. Offering routine genomic newborn screening (gNBS) would allow newborn screening to include a much broader range of rare conditions, but there are many technical, practical, psychosocial, ethical and economic challenges to be addressed. Genomics England and NHS England have established the Generation Study to deliver gNBS for 100,000 births in 2024/5 to explore the benefits, challenges, and practicalities of offering gNBS to parents in England. Here we describe the study protocol for the Generation Study - Process and Impact Evaluation, an independent mixed-methods evaluation of the Generation Study. The evaluation will have oversight from a Study Advisory Group that includes academic, clinical and patient representatives and a Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) Advisory Group that includes members from parent and patient organisations and parents with relevant experiences. The Process and Impact Evaluation will examine whether offering gNBS in routine care is feasible and acceptable and inform our understanding of the clinical utility and cost effectiveness of gNBS in England. Through surveys and interviews we will explore the attitudes and experiences of parents, professionals and patient organisations. We will also consider the clinical, psychosocial and health economic impacts, both positive and negative. The results will be presented at national and international conferences and submitted for peer review and publication.Competing Interest StatementJames Buchanan has received travel support from Illumina and consulting fees from Genomics England. Martin Vu has received a PhD scholarship from Illumina under the University of Melbourne/Illumina partnership. Amy Hunter and Jennifer Jones are employees of Genetic Alliance UK. Genetic Alliance UK runs Rare Disease UK, which is a campaign for people with rare diseases and all who support them. Rare Disease UK receives financial support from a range of companies developing therapeutics for rare conditions. All other authors have declared no competing interest. Funding StatementThis manuscript presents independent research commissioned by Genomics England. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Genomics England, the NHS or the UK Department of Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Health Research Authority (HRA) and the East of England Cambridge Central NHS Research Ethics Committee gave ethical approval for this work (23/EE/0044).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesNo data are associated with this manuscript as it is a study protocol.