"It's hard to wait": Provider perspectives on current genomic care in safety-net NICUs.

PURPOSE: Critically ill infants from marginalized populations disproportionately receive care in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) that lack access to state-of-the-art genomic care, leading to inequitable outcomes. We sought provider perspectives to inform our implementation study (VIGOR) providing rapid genomic sequencing within these settings. METHODS: We conducted semistructured focus groups with neonatal and genetics providers at 6 NICUs at safety-net hospitals, informed by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, which incorporates evidence, context, and facilitation domains. We iteratively developed codes and themes until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: Regarding evidence, providers felt that genetic testing benefits infants and families. Regarding context, the major barriers identified to genomic care were genetic testing cost, lack of genetics expertise for disclosure and follow-up, and navigating the complexity of selecting and ordering genetic tests. Providers had negative feelings about the current status quo and inequity in genomic care across NICUs. Regarding facilitation, providers felt that a virtual support model such as VIGOR would address major barriers and foster family-centered care and collaboration. CONCLUSION: NICU providers at safety-net hospitals believe that access to state-of-the-art genomic care is critical for optimizing infant outcomes; yet, substantial barriers exist that the VIGOR study may address.

High number of candidate gene variants are identified as disease-causing in a period of 4 years.

Advances in bioinformatic tools paired with the ongoing accumulation of genetic knowledge and periodic reanalysis of genomic sequencing data have led to an improvement in genetic diagnostic rates. Candidate gene variants (CGVs) identified during sequencing or on reanalysis but not yet implicated in human disease or associated with a phenotypically distinct condition are often not revisited, leading to missed diagnostic opportunities. Here, we revisited 33 such CGVs from our previously published study and determined that 16 of them are indeed disease-causing (novel or phenotype expansion) since their identification. These results emphasize the need to focus on previously identified CGVs during sequencing or reanalysis and the importance of sharing that information with researchers around the world, including relevant functional analysis to establish disease causality.

Implementation of rapid genomic sequencing in safety-net neonatal intensive care units: protocol for the VIrtual GenOme CenteR (VIGOR) proof-of-concept study.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid genomic sequencing (rGS) in critically ill infants with suspected genetic disorders has high diagnostic and clinical utility. However, rGS has primarily been available at large referral centres with the resources and expertise to offer state-of-the-art genomic care. Critically ill infants from racial and ethnic minority and/or low-income populations disproportionately receive care in safety-net and/or community settings lacking access to state-of-the-art genomic care, contributing to unacceptable health equity gaps. VIrtual GenOme CenteR is a 'proof-of-concept' implementation science study of an innovative delivery model for genomic care in safety-net neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We developed a virtual genome centre at a referral centre to remotely support safety-net NICU sites predominantly serving racial and ethnic minority and/or low-income populations and have limited to no access to rGS. Neonatal providers at each site receive basic education about genomic medicine from the study team and identify eligible infants. The study team enrols eligible infants (goal n of 250) and their parents and follows families for 12 months. Enrolled infants receive rGS, the study team creates clinical interpretive reports to guide neonatal providers on interpreting results, and neonatal providers return results to families. Data is collected via (1) medical record abstraction, (2) surveys, interviews and focus groups with neonatal providers and (3) surveys and interviews with families. We aim to examine comprehensive implementation outcomes based on the Proctor Implementation Framework using a mixed methods approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by the institutional review board of Boston Children's Hospital (IRB-P00040496) and participating sites. Participating families are required to provide electronic written informed consent and neonatal provider consent is implied through the completion of surveys. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and data will be made accessible per National Institutes of Health (NIH) policies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05205356/clinicaltrials.gov.