Improved Diagnosis and Care for Rare Diseases through Implementation of Precision Public Health Framework.

Public health relies on technologies to produce and analyse data, as well as effectively develop and implement policies and practices. An example is the public health practice of epidemiology, which relies on computational technology to monitor the health status of populations, identify disadvantaged or at risk population groups and thereby inform health policy and priority setting. Critical to achieving health improvements for the underserved population of people living with rare diseases is early diagnosis and best care. In the rare diseases field, the vast majority of diseases are caused by destructive but previously difficult to identify protein-coding gene mutations. The reduction in cost of genetic testing and advances in the clinical use of genome sequencing, data science and imaging are converging to provide more precise understandings of the 'person-time-place' triad. That is: who is affected (people); when the disease is occurring (time); and where the disease is occurring (place). Consequently we are witnessing a paradigm shift in public health policy and practice towards 'precision public health'.Patient and stakeholder engagement has informed the need for a national public health policy framework for rare diseases. The engagement approach in different countries has produced highly comparable outcomes and objectives. Knowledge and experience sharing across the international rare diseases networks and partnerships has informed the development of the Western Australian Rare Diseases Strategic Framework 2015-2018 (RD Framework) and Australian government health briefings on the need for a National plan.The RD Framework is guiding the translation of genomic and other technologies into the Western Australian health system, leading to greater precision in diagnostic pathways and care, and is an example of how a precision public health framework can improve health outcomes for the rare diseases population.Five vignettes are used to illustrate how policy decisions provide the scaffolding for translation of new genomics knowledge, and catalyze transformative change in delivery of clinical services. The vignettes presented here are from an Australian perspective and are not intended to be comprehensive, but rather to provide insights into how a new and emerging 'precision public health' paradigm can improve the experiences of patients living with rare diseases, their caregivers and families.The conclusion is that genomic public health is informed by the individual and family needs, and the population health imperatives of an early and accurate diagnosis; which is the portal to best practice care. Knowledge sharing is critical for public health policy development and improving the lives of people living with rare diseases.

Identifying Perceptions and Preferences of the General Public Concerning Universal Screening of Children for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common genetic disorder that, if untreated, predisposes individuals to premature coronary heart disease. As most individuals with FH remain undiagnosed, new approaches to detection are needed and should be considered a priority in public health genomics. Universal screening of children for FH has been proposed, and this study explores public perspectives on the acceptability of this approach. METHODS: A one-day deliberative public forum was held in Perth, WA, Australia. Thirty randomly selected individuals were recruited, with self-reported sociodemographic characteristics used to obtain discursive representation. Participants were presented with information from a variety of perspectives and asked to discuss the information provided to identify points of consensus and disagreement. The data collected were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Of the 17 participants at the forum, 16 deemed universal screening of children for FH to be acceptable. Fifteen of these 16 believed this was best performed at the time of an immunisation. Participants proposed a number of conditions that should be met to reduce the likelihood of unintended harm resulting from the screening process. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The outcomes of the forum suggest that establishing a universal screening programme for FH in childhood is acceptable to the general public in WA.

Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The use of genome-wide (whole genome or exome) sequencing for population-based newborn screening presents an opportunity to detect and treat or prevent many more serious early-onset health conditions than is possible today. METHODS: The Paediatric Task Team of the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health's Regulatory and Ethics Working Group reviewed current understanding and concerns regarding the use of genomic technologies for population-based newborn screening and developed, by consensus, eight recommendations for clinicians, clinical laboratory scientists, and policy makers. RESULTS: Before genome-wide sequencing can be implemented in newborn screening programs, its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness must be demonstrated, and the ability to distinguish disease-causing and benign variants of all genes screened must be established. In addition, each jurisdiction needs to resolve ethical and policy issues regarding the disclosure of incidental or secondary findings to families and ownership, appropriate storage and sharing of genomic data. CONCLUSION: The best interests of children should be the basis for all decisions regarding the implementation of genomic newborn screening.

Policy Making in Newborn Screening Needs a Structured and Transparent Approach.

PURPOSE: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) programs have expanded significantly in the past years and are expected to expand further with the emergence of genetic technologies. Historically, NBS expansion has often occurred following ad hoc consideration of conditions, instead of a structured and transparent approach. In this review, we explore issues pertinent to NBS policy making, through the lens of the policy cycle: (a) agenda setting, (b) policy advice, (c) policy decision, (d) implementation, and (e) evaluation. METHODS: A literature search was conducted to gather information on the elements specific to NBS and its policy making process. RESULTS: The review highlighted two approaches to nominate a condition: a structured approach through horizon scanning; and an ad hoc process. For assessment of a condition, there was unanimous support for a robust process based on criteria. While the need to assess harms and benefits was a repeated theme in the articles, there is no agreed-upon threshold for benefit in decision-making. Furthermore, the literature was consistent in its recommendation for an overarching, independent, multidisciplinary group providing recommendations to government. An implementation plan focusing on the different levels on which NBS operates and the information needed on each level is essential for successful implementation. Continuously monitoring, and improving a program is vital, particularly following the implementation of screening for a new condition. An advisory committee could advise on implementation, development, review, modification, and cessation of (parts of) NBS. CONCLUSION: The results highlight that there are a wave of issues facing NBS programs that policy makers must take into account when developing policy processes. What conditions to screen, and the technologies used in NBS, are both up for debate.

Outcomes of an International Workshop on Preconception Expanded Carrier Screening: Some Considerations for Governments.

BACKGROUND: Consideration of expanded carrier screening has become an emerging issue for governments. However, traditional criteria for decision-making regarding screening programs do not incorporate all the issues relevant to expanded carrier screening. Further, there is a lack of consistent guidance in the literature regarding the development of appropriate criteria for government assessment of expanded carrier screening. Given this, a workshop was held to identify key public policy issues related to preconception expanded carrier screening, which governments should consider when deciding whether to publicly fund such programs. METHODS: In June 2015, a satellite workshop was held at the European Society of Human Genetics Conference. It was structured around two design features: (1) the provision of information from a range of perspectives and (2) small group deliberations on the key issues that governments need to consider and the benefits, risks, and challenges of implementing publicly funded whole-population preconception carrier screening. RESULTS: Forty-one international experts attended the workshop. The deliberations centered primarily on the conditions to be tested and the elements of the screening program itself. Participants expected only severe conditions to be screened but were concerned about the lack of a consensus definition of "severe." Issues raised regarding the screening program included the purpose, benefits, harms, target population, program acceptability, components of a program, and economic evaluation. Participants also made arguments for consideration of the accuracy of screening tests. CONCLUSION: A wide range of issues require careful consideration by governments that want to assess expanded carrier screening. Traditional criteria for government decision-making regarding screening programs are not a "best fit" for expanded carrier screening and new models of decision-making with appropriate criteria are required. There is a need to define what a "severe" condition is, to build evidence regarding the reliability and accuracy of screening tests, to consider the equitable availability and downstream effects on and costs of follow-up interventions for those identified as carriers, and to explore the ways in which the components of a screening program would be impacted by unique features of expanded carrier screening.

International differences in the evaluation of conditions for newborn bloodspot screening: a review of scientific literature and policy documents.

Despite international adoption of newborn bloodspot screening (DBS), no two countries' screening programs are the same. This article aims to understand what factors influence DBS decision-making criteria and how conditions are assessed against them. In doing so, it offers unique insights into the international landscape of DBS. A systematic review on DBS criteria in scientific literature was first undertaken. Through this, five topics were identified for consideration when analyzing DBS decision-making. Using these five topics as a template, a side-by-side comparison was conducted on DBS in policy documents of eight countries. Programs are using different approaches to explore the same policy issues, including: the beneficiary of DBS, definition of criteria, the way conditions are assessed, level of evidence required, and recommendations after assessment. These differences have the potential to result in increased disparity across DBS internationally. Ultimately, governments need to decide on their role and develop an approach to DBS decision-making in line with this role. The analyses presented in this article highlight that despite programs' commonalities, no one 'DBS decision-making solution' exists. Understanding the different approaches to decision-making within the literature and policy settings, provides an objective starting point for structured decision-making approaches for DBS programs.

Review of Current International Decision-Making Processes for Newborn Screening: Lessons for Australia.

Newborn bloodspot screening has been operating successfully in Australia for almost 50 years. Recently, the development of new technologies and treatments has led to calls for the addition of new conditions to the screening programs. Internationally, it is recognized by governments that national policies for newborn screening should support transparent and evidence-based decision making, and promote consistency between states within a country. Australia is lagging behind the international community, and currently has no national policies or decision-making processes, agreed by government, to support its newborn screening programs. In contrast, New Zealand (NZ), the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States of America (US) have robust and transparent processes to assess conditions for screening, which have been developed by, and have pathways to, government. This review provides detail on the current policy environment for newborn screening in Australia, highlighting that there are a number of risks to the programs resulting from the lack of a decision-making process. It also describes the processes used to assess conditions for newborn screening in the US, UK, and NZ. These examples highlight the benefits of developing a national decision-making process, including ensuring that screening is evidence based and effective. These examples also provide models that might be considered for Australia, as well as other countries currently seeking to introduce or expand newborn bloodspot screening.