Use of a web-based portal to return normal individual research results in Early Check: Exploring user behaviors and attitudes.

Early Check is a voluntary, large-scale expanded newborn screening study in North Carolina that uses a self-directed web-based portal for return of normal individual research results (IRR). Little is known about participant perspectives in using web-based portals to receive IRR. This study explored user attitudes and behaviors within the Early Check portal using three methods: (1) a feedback survey available to the consenting parent of participating infants (typically mothers), (2) semi-structured interviews conducted with a subset of parents, and (3) Google Analytics. During an approximate 3-year period, 17 936 newborns received normal IRR and there were 27 812 visits to the portal. Most surveyed parents reported viewing their baby's results (86%, 1410/1639). Parents largely found the portal easy to use to get results, and helpful in understanding the results. However, 10% of parents said it was difficult to find enough information to understand their baby's results. In Early Check, providing normal IRR via the portal made a large-scale study practical, and was highly rated by most users. Return of normal IRR may be particularly amenable to web-based portals, as the consequences to participants from not viewing results are modest, and the interpretation of a normal result is relatively straightforward.

Education and Consent for Population-Based DNA Screening: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the Early Check Newborn Screening Pilot Study.

A challenge in implementing population-based DNA screening is providing sufficient information, that is, understandable and acceptable, and that supports informed decision making. Early Check is an expanded newborn screening study offered to mothers/guardians whose infants have standard newborn screening in North Carolina. We developed electronic education and consent to meet the objectives of feasibility, acceptability, trustworthiness, and supporting informed decisions. We used two methods to evaluate Early Check among mothers of participating infants who received normal results: an online survey and interviews conducted via telephone. Survey and interview domains included motivations for enrollment, acceptability of materials and processes, attitudes toward screening, knowledge recall, and trust. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics and assessment of factors associated with knowledge recall and trust. Qualitative data were coded, and an inductive approach was used to identify themes across interviews. Survey respondents (n = 1,823) rated the following as the most important reasons for enrolling their infants: finding out if the baby has the conditions screened (43.0%), and that no additional blood samples were required (20.1%). Interview respondents (n = 24) reported the value of early knowledge, early intervention, and ease of participation as motivators. Survey respondents rated the study information as having high utility for decision making (mean 4.7 to 4.8 out of 5) and 98.2% agreed that they had sufficient information. Knowledge recall was relatively high (71.8-92.5% correct), as was trust in Early Check information (96.2% strongly agree/agree). Attitudes about Early Check screening were positive (mean 0.1 to 0.6 on a scale of 0-4, with lower scores indicating more positive attitudes) and participants did not regret participation (e.g., 98.6% strongly agreed/agreed Early Check was the right decision). Interview respondents further reported positive attitudes about Early Check materials and processes. Early Check provides a model for education and consent in large-scale DNA screening. We found evidence of high acceptability, trustworthiness and knowledge recall, and positive attitudes among respondents. Population-targeted programs need to uphold practices that result in accessible information for those from diverse backgrounds. Additional research on those who do not select screening, although ethically and practically challenging, is important to inform population-based DNA screening practices.

Caregivers' assessment of meaningful and relevant clinical outcome assessments for Sanfilippo syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Sanfilippo syndrome is a rare multisystem disease with no approved treatments. This study explores caregiver perspectives on the most impactful symptoms and patient-relevant clinical outcomes assessments. The pediatric onset and progressive neurodegenerative nature of Sanfilippo limits use of self-report in clinical research. This study obtains Sanfilippo caregiver data to support the selection of fit-for-purpose and patient-relevant clinical outcome assessments (COAs). METHODS: We conducted an asynchronous online focus group (n = 11) followed by individual interviews with caregivers (n = 19) of children with Sanfilippo syndrome. All participants reported on the impact of disease symptoms and level of unmet treatment need across Sanfilippo symptom domains. Focus group participants reviewed existing assessments relating to 8 symptom domains (15 total assessments) and provided feedback on meaningfulness and relevance. Focus group data were used to reduce the number of assessments included in subsequent interviews to 8 COAs across 7 symptom domains: communication, eating, sleep, mobility, pain, behavior and adapting. Interview respondents provided data on meaningfulness and relevance of assessments. Data were coded using an item-tracking matrix. Data summaries were analyzed by caregivers' responses regarding meaningfulness; relevance to Sanfilippo syndrome; and based on caregiver indication of missing or problematic subdomains and items. RESULTS: Participants' children were 2-24 years in age and varied in disease progression. Caregivers reported communication and mobility as highly impactful domains with unmet treatment needs, followed closely by pain and sleep. Domains such as eating, adaptive skills, and behaviors were identified as impactful but with relatively less priority, by comparison. Participants endorsed the relevance of clinical outcome assessments associated with communication, eating, sleep, and pain, and identified them as highly favorable for use in a clinical trial. Participants specified some refinements in existing assessments to best reflect Sanfilippo symptoms and disease course. DISCUSSION: The identification of impactful symptoms to treat and relevant and meaningful clinical outcome assessments supports patient-focused drug development. Our results inform targets for drug development and the selection of primary and secondary outcome assessments with high meaningfulness and face validity to Sanfilippo syndrome caregivers. Assessments identified as less optimal might be refined, replaced, or remain if the clinical trial necessitates.

Preparing newborn screening for the future: a collaborative stakeholder engagement exploring challenges and opportunities to modernizing the newborn screening system.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Projections that 60 transformative cell and gene therapies could be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) within 10 years underscore an urgent need to modernize the newborn screening (NBS) system. This study convened expert stakeholders to assess challenges to the NBS system and propose solutions for its modernization. METHODS: NBS stakeholders (researchers, clinicians, state NBS leaders, advocates, industry professionals, and current/former advisory committee members) participated in one of five mixed-stakeholder panel discussions. Prior to panels, participants completed a survey in which they reviewed and ranked NBS challenges generated from relevant literature. During panels, participants deliberated on challenges and explored potential solutions. Pre-panel survey data were analyzed descriptively. Data from panel discussions were analyzed using a rapid qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Median scores of the ranked challenges (1 = most important) reveal the top three most important barriers to address: critical missing data for NBS decision-making (Median = 2), burden on state NBS laboratories (Median = 3), and the amount of time required for state-level implementation of screening for new conditions (Median = 4). Panel discussions were rooted in recurring themes: the infant's well-being should be the focal point; the transformative therapy pipeline, although undeniably positive for individuals with rare diseases, is a threat to NBS capacity; decisions about modernizing NBS should be evidence-based; additional financial support is required but not sufficient for modernization; and modernization will require participation of multiple NBS stakeholders. This final overarching theme is reported in depth, including expertise, coordination, and collaboration challenges facing NBS and novel approaches to oversight, partnership, and coordination that were suggested by participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study engaged representatives from multiple stakeholder groups to generate potential solutions to challenges facing NBS in the United States. These solutions provide a rich starting point for policy makers and other stakeholders who desire to maximize the impact of new transformative therapies for babies, families, and society.

Expert Evaluation of Strategies to Modernize Newborn Screening in the United States.

Importance: Novel therapies, including cell and gene therapies, can radically improve outcomes among patients with rare disorders, especially if provided early. Newborn screening (NBS) could support early access to novel therapies, but the speed of new therapy development is a disruptive event for which the public health NBS system and state newborn screening programs are unprepared. Objective: To identify and evaluate possible solutions for modernizing NBS. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this survey study, NBS experts representing clinical research, federal or state advisory boards, patient advocacy groups, industry, or state laboratories completed an online survey in which they considered 20 potential solutions for modernizing NBS and rated each. Exposures: Participants considered 20 potential solutions in the 5 following domains: (1) timeliness of disorder review, (2) alternative mechanisms to offer screening for new disorders not currently part of NBS, (3) expanded data collection, (4) support for states, and (5) emerging methods of screening and their consequences. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean ratings for each solution on efficacy, acceptability, feasibility, and sustainability. Results: The survey was completed by 40 NBS experts (median [range] age, 54 [37-73] years; 22 [55.0%] women). Participants acknowledged that substantial change is needed to prepare the NBS system for rapid expansion of novel therapies; on a scale of 0 (no change) to 10 (extensive change), the median (range) score was 8 (2-10), with 18 respondents (45.0%) believing that the NBS would need many new components or an entirely new system to accommodate the changes. All solutions for modernization were considered potentially efficacious by at least 23 respondents (57.5%). The 2 most strongly endorsed were to establish mechanisms for cross-state data coordination for provisional disorders (38 respondents [95.0%]) and create a network of regional screening laboratories (36 [90.0%]). These were closely followed by aligning programs across federal agencies (35 [87.5%]), expanding funding for research (34 [85.0%]), expanding funding to states (34 [85.0%]), building capacity to identify genetic variants and an associated clinical database (34 [85.0%]), and conducting surveillance to study long-term outcomes (34 [85.0%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, there was consensus among experts that NBS needs to change if the system is to be prepared for a rapid increase in transformative therapies. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic inventory of potential solutions for modernizing NBS and expert perceptions of each. The findings suggest that the modernization of NBS will require the integration of highly rated solutions, strategic planning, and coordination among multiple stakeholders.

Parent Experiences of Sanfilippo Syndrome Impact and Unmet Treatment Needs: A Qualitative Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Sanfilippo syndrome (MPS III) is a rare, degenerative condition characterized by symptoms impacting cognitive ability, mobility, behavior, and quality of life. Currently there are no approved therapies for this severe life-limiting disease. Integrating patient and caregiver experience data into drug development and regulatory decision-making has become a priority of the Food and Drug Administration and rare disease patient communities. METHODS: This study assesses parents' perceptions of their child's Sanfilippo syndrome disease-related symptoms using a research approach that is consistent with the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) guidance. This study was initiated by the Cure Sanfilippo Foundation, and all steps in the research process were informed by a multidisciplinary advisory committee, with an objective of informing biopharmaceutical companies and regulatory agencies. We explored caregiver burden, symptoms with greatest impact, and meaningful but unmet treatment needs. Data were collected from 25 parents through three focus groups and a questionnaire. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis, and descriptive analysis of quantitative data was conducted. RESULTS: Participating parents' children ranged in age from 4 to 36 years. Participants endorsed high caregiving burden across all stages of the disease. Analysis revealed multiple domains of unmet need that impact child and family quality of life, including cognitive-behavioral challenges in communication, relationships, behavior, anxiety, and child safety; and physical health symptoms including sleep, pain, and mobility. Participants reported placing high value on incremental benefits targeting those symptoms, and on a treatment that would slow or stop symptom progression. CONCLUSION: Even modest treatment benefits for Sanfilippo syndrome were shown to be highly valued. Despite high caregiver burden, most parents expressed a willingness to "try anything," including treatments with potentially high risk profiles, to maintain their child's current state.

Early Check: translational science at the intersection of public health and newborn screening.

BACKGROUND: Newborn screening (NBS) occupies a unique space at the intersection of translational science and public health. As the only truly population-based public health program in the United States, NBS offers the promise of making the successes of translational medicine available to every infant with a rare disorder that is difficult to diagnose clinically, but for which strong evidence indicates that presymptomatic treatment will substantially improve outcomes. Realistic NBS policy requires data, but rare disorders face a special challenge: Screening cannot be done without supportive data, but adequate data cannot be collected in the absence of large-scale screening. The magnitude and scale of research to provide this expanse of data require working with public health programs, but most do not have the resources or mandate to conduct research. METHODS: To address this gap, we have established Early Check, a research program in partnership with a state NBS program. Early Check provides the infrastructure needed to identify conditions for which there have been significant advances in treatment potential, but require a large-scale, population-based study to test benefits and risks, demonstrate feasibility, and inform NBS policy. DISCUSSION: Our goal is to prove the benefits of a program that can, when compared with current models, accelerate understanding of diseases and treatments, reduce the time needed to consider inclusion of appropriate conditions in the standard NBS panel, and accelerate future research on new NBS conditions, including clinical trials for investigational interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registration # NCT03655223 . Registered on August 31, 2018.

How do Kenyan orphan girls experience less meaningful lives and how much does it matter for 'health'?

BACKGROUND: Currently, 2.5 million orphaned children are living in Kenya and 56 million orphaned children are living across sub-Saharan Africa. No empirical research has investigated meaningfulness of life among this population, and few studies provide perspectives on the life-course consequences of losing a parent during childhood. METHODS: In this study, we assess life meaningfulness in cross section of Kenyan women (n = 1974) in a semi-rural area of the country (Meru County) collected during June 2015. We used two sets of mediation analyses to assess (1) whether meaningfulness of life was lower among women who reported a parental death during their childhood, and how this association was mediated by social support, family functioning, school completion and HIV+ status of household, and (2) the extent to which lower subjective overall health among women who experienced orphanhood during childhood was mediated by less meaningfulness of life. RESULTS: Women who experienced a parental death during childhood reported significantly less meaningful lives as adults. Lower social support and family functioning explained approximately 40% of the disparity. Women who experienced a parental death during childhood also had significantly worse subjective overall health, 18% of which was explained by lower meaningfulness of life. CONCLUSIONS: Further study on life meaningfulness and family capital in the context of the orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa is warranted, and required to promote equity across the lifespan. Policy efforts to support orphans and vulnerable children should target strengthening support networks and family functioning to optimize self-reported health outcomes.