英国国家筛查委员会,新生儿基因组计划,以及英国新生儿筛查的伦理难题。

IF 1.5 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Sara M Rankin, Lucy Marskell, Lina Hamad, Laura Machin
{"title":"英国国家筛查委员会,新生儿基因组计划,以及英国新生儿筛查的伦理难题。","authors":"Sara M Rankin, Lucy Marskell, Lina Hamad, Laura Machin","doi":"10.1007/s12687-025-00788-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Countries in the Global North use biochemical tests to screen for at least 20 diseases in newborns, while in the UK, only 10 diseases are screened for. The United Kingdom National Screening Committee (UKNSC) is the entity responsible for making recommendations to the government with regards to which conditions should be included in the Newborn Screening (NBS) programme. Examination of the meeting minutes of the UKNSC between 2015 and 2022 revealed that no new diseases were recommended for NBS during this period. If there was no 'effective treatment' for the disease it was rejected for NBS. In 2022, the Newborn Genomes Programme (NGP) was announced; a research study aiming to screen for over 223 rare genetic diseases using whole genome sequencing technology in newborns. While this could lead to a seismic expansion of NBS in the UK, many of the diseases included in the programme are currently considered 'actionable' rather than 'treatable' conditions. This poses an ethical conundrum for the UKNSC, which is involved in both NBS and NGP, given that it has thus far made recommendations against the expansion of the NBS programme using available biochemical assays, contrary to what has been implemented in other countries in the Global North. In this paper, we aim to critically examine the processes and circumstances that have held back the expansion of the NBS programme in the UK, as compared with other countries, focusing on the period 2015-2022, when no new diseases were added to the UK NBS programme, and contrast them with the drivers that have led to the support and funding for the NGP during this same time.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The UK National screening committee, the newborn genomes programme, and the ethical conundrum for UK newborn screening.\",\"authors\":\"Sara M Rankin, Lucy Marskell, Lina Hamad, Laura Machin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12687-025-00788-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Countries in the Global North use biochemical tests to screen for at least 20 diseases in newborns, while in the UK, only 10 diseases are screened for. The United Kingdom National Screening Committee (UKNSC) is the entity responsible for making recommendations to the government with regards to which conditions should be included in the Newborn Screening (NBS) programme. Examination of the meeting minutes of the UKNSC between 2015 and 2022 revealed that no new diseases were recommended for NBS during this period. If there was no 'effective treatment' for the disease it was rejected for NBS. In 2022, the Newborn Genomes Programme (NGP) was announced; a research study aiming to screen for over 223 rare genetic diseases using whole genome sequencing technology in newborns. While this could lead to a seismic expansion of NBS in the UK, many of the diseases included in the programme are currently considered 'actionable' rather than 'treatable' conditions. This poses an ethical conundrum for the UKNSC, which is involved in both NBS and NGP, given that it has thus far made recommendations against the expansion of the NBS programme using available biochemical assays, contrary to what has been implemented in other countries in the Global North. In this paper, we aim to critically examine the processes and circumstances that have held back the expansion of the NBS programme in the UK, as compared with other countries, focusing on the period 2015-2022, when no new diseases were added to the UK NBS programme, and contrast them with the drivers that have led to the support and funding for the NGP during this same time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-025-00788-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-025-00788-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球北方的国家使用生化测试来筛查新生儿中至少20种疾病,而在英国,只有10种疾病被筛查。英国国家筛查委员会(UKNSC)是负责就新生儿筛查(NBS)计划应包括哪些条件向政府提出建议的实体。对英国国家安全委员会2015年至2022年会议纪要的审查显示,在此期间没有向国家统计局推荐新的疾病。如果对这种疾病没有“有效的治疗”,它就会被NBS拒绝。2022年,宣布了新生儿基因组计划(NGP);一项旨在利用新生儿全基因组测序技术筛查超过223种罕见遗传疾病的研究。虽然这可能导致英国国家统计局的大规模扩张,但该计划中包括的许多疾病目前被认为是“可采取行动”而不是“可治疗”的疾病。这给参与NBS和NGP的英国国家安全委员会提出了一个伦理难题,因为到目前为止,它已经提出了反对使用现有生化分析扩大NBS计划的建议,这与全球北方其他国家所实施的相反。在本文中,我们的目标是与其他国家相比,批判性地研究阻碍英国国家统计局计划扩张的过程和情况,重点关注2015-2022年期间,当英国国家统计局计划中没有添加新疾病时,并将其与导致支持和资助NGP的驱动因素进行对比。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The UK National screening committee, the newborn genomes programme, and the ethical conundrum for UK newborn screening.

Countries in the Global North use biochemical tests to screen for at least 20 diseases in newborns, while in the UK, only 10 diseases are screened for. The United Kingdom National Screening Committee (UKNSC) is the entity responsible for making recommendations to the government with regards to which conditions should be included in the Newborn Screening (NBS) programme. Examination of the meeting minutes of the UKNSC between 2015 and 2022 revealed that no new diseases were recommended for NBS during this period. If there was no 'effective treatment' for the disease it was rejected for NBS. In 2022, the Newborn Genomes Programme (NGP) was announced; a research study aiming to screen for over 223 rare genetic diseases using whole genome sequencing technology in newborns. While this could lead to a seismic expansion of NBS in the UK, many of the diseases included in the programme are currently considered 'actionable' rather than 'treatable' conditions. This poses an ethical conundrum for the UKNSC, which is involved in both NBS and NGP, given that it has thus far made recommendations against the expansion of the NBS programme using available biochemical assays, contrary to what has been implemented in other countries in the Global North. In this paper, we aim to critically examine the processes and circumstances that have held back the expansion of the NBS programme in the UK, as compared with other countries, focusing on the period 2015-2022, when no new diseases were added to the UK NBS programme, and contrast them with the drivers that have led to the support and funding for the NGP during this same time.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Community Genetics
Journal of Community Genetics GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals. Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues. The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries. The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信