Modern Family: An Ethical Justification for System-Led Contact of Relatives Eligible for Cascade Screening in the United States.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Public Health Genomics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-09 DOI:10.1159/000541301
Katherine E Bonini, Hadley Stevens Smith, Emily S Bonkowski, Benjamin E Berkman, Leila Jamal
{"title":"Modern Family: An Ethical Justification for System-Led Contact of Relatives Eligible for Cascade Screening in the United States.","authors":"Katherine E Bonini, Hadley Stevens Smith, Emily S Bonkowski, Benjamin E Berkman, Leila Jamal","doi":"10.1159/000541301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Though genomic science has rapidly advanced, efforts to demonstrate the population-level utility of genomics have been slow to follow. It has long been argued that the family is an important unit of significance in genomics, yet it has been challenging to address this in clinical care. This is apparent in how hospital administrators and clinicians in the United States typically approach cascade screening, the process of notifying and offering genetic testing to at-risk relatives of a patient with a hereditary condition. The most common notification approach is proband-led contact, in which the index patient is responsible for communicating a health risk to their relatives. This model has been associated with suboptimal outcomes. In contrast, recent research has shown that system-led contact, in which healthcare or public health institutions initiate communication to relatives with the proband's consent, has been associated with increased clinical utility and acceptability.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>With the needs of hospital administrators and clinicians in mind, we revisit normative questions about the appropriate way to notify relatives about their potentially elevated risk of developing an actionable disease. We review evidence demonstrating that system-led direct contact of relatives is feasible and acceptable. We further argue that system-led contact of relatives eligible for cascade screening is ethically justified if these programs are designed with public input, have an opt-out provision, and are implemented for conditions that meet specific criteria which we propose in this article.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>In this article, we emphasize the usefulness of public health ethics frameworks to inform the design of system-led contact programs. Beyond this, we make the case that such programs are necessary to realize the population utility of genomic medicine equitably.</p>","PeriodicalId":49650,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Genomics","volume":" ","pages":"19-33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Genomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541301","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Though genomic science has rapidly advanced, efforts to demonstrate the population-level utility of genomics have been slow to follow. It has long been argued that the family is an important unit of significance in genomics, yet it has been challenging to address this in clinical care. This is apparent in how hospital administrators and clinicians in the United States typically approach cascade screening, the process of notifying and offering genetic testing to at-risk relatives of a patient with a hereditary condition. The most common notification approach is proband-led contact, in which the index patient is responsible for communicating a health risk to their relatives. This model has been associated with suboptimal outcomes. In contrast, recent research has shown that system-led contact, in which healthcare or public health institutions initiate communication to relatives with the proband's consent, has been associated with increased clinical utility and acceptability.

Summary: With the needs of hospital administrators and clinicians in mind, we revisit normative questions about the appropriate way to notify relatives about their potentially elevated risk of developing an actionable disease. We review evidence demonstrating that system-led direct contact of relatives is feasible and acceptable. We further argue that system-led contact of relatives eligible for cascade screening is ethically justified if these programs are designed with public input, have an opt-out provision, and are implemented for conditions that meet specific criteria which we propose in this article.

Key messages: In this article, we emphasize the usefulness of public health ethics frameworks to inform the design of system-led contact programs. Beyond this, we make the case that such programs are necessary to realize the population utility of genomic medicine equitably.

现代家庭:在美国,以系统为主导联系符合级联筛查条件的亲属的伦理理由。
背景:虽然基因组科学发展迅速,但在展示基因组学在人群中的应用方面却进展缓慢。长期以来,人们一直认为家庭是基因组学的重要单位,但在临床护理中解决这一问题却一直面临挑战。这一点从美国医院管理者和临床医生通常如何处理级联筛查(即通知遗传病患者的高危亲属并为其提供基因检测的过程)中可以明显看出。最常见的通知方式是由原发病患者主导联系,即由原发病患者负责将健康风险告知其亲属。这种模式与次优结果有关。摘要:考虑到医院管理者和临床医生的需求,我们重新审视了有关通知亲属其罹患可采取行动疾病的潜在风险升高的适当方式的规范性问题。我们回顾的证据表明,由系统主导直接联系亲属是可行且可接受的。我们还认为,如果这些计划在设计时考虑了公众的意见,有选择退出的规定,并且是针对符合我们在本文中提出的特定标准的情况实施的,那么由系统主导联系符合级联筛查条件的亲属在伦理上是合理的:在这篇文章中,我们强调了公共卫生伦理框架对系统主导的接触项目设计的有用性。除此以外,我们还论证了此类计划对于公平实现基因组医学的人口效用是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Health Genomics
Public Health Genomics 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Public Health Genomics'' is the leading international journal focusing on the timely translation of genome-based knowledge and technologies into public health, health policies, and healthcare as a whole. This peer-reviewed journal is a bimonthly forum featuring original papers, reviews, short communications, and policy statements. It is supplemented by topic-specific issues providing a comprehensive, holistic and ''all-inclusive'' picture of the chosen subject. Multidisciplinary in scope, it combines theoretical and empirical work from a range of disciplines, notably public health, molecular and medical sciences, the humanities and social sciences. In so doing, it also takes into account rapid scientific advances from fields such as systems biology, microbiomics, epigenomics or information and communication technologies as well as the hight potential of ''big data'' for public health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信