Trust in prenatal exome sequencing for expectant families facing unexplained fetal anomalies.

OBJECTIVE: Despite exome sequencing (ES) becoming increasingly incorporated into the prenatal setting, few studies have elucidated motivations for and trust in ES and genomic research among a diverse cohort of patients and their partners. METHODS: This is a qualitative study that involved semi-structured interviews with pregnant or recently pregnant individuals and their partners, interviewed separately, in the setting of ES performed through research for a fetal structural anomaly. All interview transcripts were coded thematically and developed by a multidisciplinary team. RESULTS: Thirty-five individuals participated, the majority of whom (66%) self-identified as a racial or ethnic group underrepresented in genomic research. Many patients and their partners expressed trust in the healthcare system and research process and appreciated the extensive testing for information and closure. There were nonetheless concerns about data privacy and protection for individuals, including those underrepresented, who participated in genomic testing and studies. CONCLUSION: Our findings illustrate important elements of motivation, trust and concern related to prenatal ES performed in the research setting, taking into account the perspectives not only of diverse and underrepresented study participants but also partners of pregnant individuals.

Experts' Views on Children's Access to Community-Based Therapeutic and Education Services After Genomic Sequencing Results.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how community-based experts respond to families seeking therapeutic and educational support services after pediatric genomic sequencing for rare conditions. METHODS: We interviewed 15 experts in the provision of community-based services for children with intellectual differences, developmental differences, or both, as part of a large study examining the utility of exome sequencing. RESULTS: Interviewees highlighted the complexity of the overall referral and assessment system for therapeutic or educational needs, that genetic diagnoses are secondary to behavioral observations in respect to eligibility for the provision of services, and that social capital drives service acquisition. Although emphasizing that genetic results do not currently provide sufficient information for determining service eligibility, interviewees also highlighted their hopes that genetics would be increasingly relevant in the future. CONCLUSION: Genomic results do not usually provide information that directly impacts service provision. However, a positive genomic test result can strengthen evidence for behavioral diagnoses and the future trajectory of a child's condition and support needs. Interviewees' comments suggest a need to combine emerging genetic knowledge with existing forms of therapeutic and educational needs assessment, and for additional supports for families struggling to navigate social and therapeutic services.