Fragile X Newborn Screening: Lessons Learned From a Multisite Screening Study.

BACKGROUND: Delays in the diagnosis of children with fragile X syndrome (FXS) suggest the possibility of newborn screening as a way to identify children earlier. However, FXS does not have a proven treatment that must be provided early, and ethical concerns have been raised about the detection of infants who are carriers. This article summarizes major findings from a multisite, prospective, longitudinal pilot screening study. METHODS: Investigators in North Carolina, California, and Illinois collaborated on a study in which voluntary screening for FXS was offered to parents in 3 birthing hospitals. FXS newborn screening was offered to >28 000 families to assess public acceptance and determine whether identification of babies resulted in any measurable harms or adverse events. Secondary goals were to determine the prevalence of FMR1 carrier gene expansions, study the consent process, and describe early development and behavior of identified children. RESULTS: A number of publications have resulted from the project. This article summarizes 10 "lessons learned" about the consent process, reasons for accepting and declining screening, development and evaluation of a decision aid, prevalence of carriers, father participation in consent, family follow-up, and maternal reactions to screening. CONCLUSIONS: The project documented public acceptance of screening as well as the challenges inherent in obtaining consent in the hospital shortly after birth. Collectively, the study provides answers to a number of questions that now set the stage for a next generation of research to determine the benefits of earlier identification for children and families.

Obtaining consent from both parents for pediatric research: what does "reasonably available" mean?

OBJECTIVE: Circumstances surrounding parental availability and decision-making were examined in the setting of a research protocol involving newborn screening (NBS) for fragile X syndrome, in which the institutional review board (IRB) had determined that consent (permission) was required from both parents. METHODS: A survey was conducted with 3001 families who were approached to participate in optional NBS. In addition to basic demographics, observational notes detailed the reasons why fathers were not present or deemed "not reasonably available" (per IRB regulations), and content analysis identified the factors for this lack of availability. Logistic regression models estimated the likelihood that both parents would agree to enroll their infant in the screening project. RESULTS: Fathers were not present in 589 cases, including 158 in which fathers were ultimately determined to be not reasonably available. Primary reasons for father's unavailability were deployment with the military, incarceration, living out of state, or not involved in the mother's life. In cases in which both parents were available, 64% agreed to enroll in the NBS study. Criteria to guide researchers in making required determinations were developed from consultations with IRB officials and legal counsel. CONCLUSIONS: In a large-scale population-based study, 19.6% of fathers were absent for the consent process. Scenarios encountered underscore the complexity of parental relations and their implications for obtaining consent for research involving children. The algorithm developed may serve as a useful tool for others in applying the regulatory requirements for dual parental permission.

Design and evaluation of a decision aid for inviting parents to participate in a fragile X newborn screening pilot study.

The major objectives of this project were to develop and evaluate a brochure to help parents make an informed decision about participation in a fragile X newborn screening study. We used an iterative development process that drew on principles of Informed Decision Making (IDM), stakeholder input, design expertise, and expert evaluation. A simulation study with 118 women examined response to the brochure. An independent review rated the brochure high on informational content, guidance, and values. Mothers took an average of 6.5 min to read it and scored an average of 91.1 % correct on a knowledge test. Most women rated the brochure as high quality and trustworthy. When asked to make a hypothetical decision about study participation, 61.9 % would agree to screening. Structural equation modeling showed that agreement to screening and decisional confidence were associated with perceived quality and trust in the brochure. Minority and white mothers did not differ in perceptions of quality or trust. We demonstrate the application of IDM in developing a study brochure. The brochure was highly rated by experts and consumers, met high standards for IDM, and achieved stated goals in a simulation study. The IDM provides a model for consent in research disclosing complicated genetic information of uncertain value.

Can a decision aid enable informed decisions in neonatal nursery recruitment for a fragile X newborn screening study?

PURPOSE: To determine whether a brochure based on principles of informed decision making improved attention to study materials or altered decisions made by parents invited to participate in a fragile X syndrome newborn screening study. METHODS: A total of 1,323 families were invited to participate in a newborn screening study to identify infants with fragile X syndrome as well as premutation carrier infants. Of these families, 716 received the original project brochure and 607 were given a new decision aid brochure. RESULTS: Families were more likely to look at the new decision aid and mothers were more likely to read it completely, but the proportion of mothers who read the entire decision aid was only 14%. Families were more likely to rate the decision aid as very helpful. Consistent with informed decision making theory and research, participants receiving the decision aid brochure were less likely to agree to participate. CONCLUSION: The decision aid increased attention to and perceived helpfulness of educational information about the study, but most families did not read it completely. The study suggests that even well-designed study materials are not fully reviewed in the context of in-hospital postpartum study recruitment and may need to be accompanied by a research recruiter to obtain informed consent.

Parents' decisions to screen newborns for FMR1 gene expansions in a pilot research project.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to document rates of parental consent in a pilot study of newborn screening for FMR1 gene expansions, examine demographic characteristics of mothers who consented or declined, describe the reasons for their decision, and discuss ethical and social aspects of the consent process. METHODS: A brief survey was used to record basic demographic data from mothers and an open-ended question was used to elicit parents' reasons for accepting or declining screening. A descriptive analysis was conducted on the number of mothers who consented to or declined screening, and a logistic regression model predicted mothers' likelihood to agree to screening based on demographic characteristics. Reasons for decisions were analyzed using content analysis. The study was conducted at University of North Carolina Hospitals. A total of 2137 mothers were approached. RESULTS: The uptake rate for couples was 63%. Acceptance rates varied by race/ethnicity, with black respondents being less likely to accept screening. Primary reasons for accepting were "to know," "belief in research," and "the test was minimal/no risk." Reasons for declining included not wanting to know or worry, not being a good time, and issues with testing children or with genetic tests. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate that a majority of parents accepted newborn screening for FMR1 gene expansions, but decision rates and reasons for accepting or declining varied in part as a function of race/ethnicity and in part as a function of what parents most valued or feared in their assessment of risks and benefits.