Heidi L. Cope, Elizabeth R. Jalazo, Jonathan S. Berg, Jennifer A. Sullivan, Katerina S. Kucera, Scott M. Shone, Hannah E. Frawley, Angela Y. Gwaltney, Ana N. Forsythe, Brooke A. Migliore, Becca Wright, Rebecca R. Moultrie, Laura V. Milko, Rebekah S. Zimmerman, Paul Kruszka, Sharon F. Suchy, Amber Begtrup, Katherine G. Langley, Kristin G. Monaghan, Christina Kraczkowski, Adam J. Guenzel, Kirsty McWalter, Kathleen S. Hruska, Donald B. Bailey, Anne C. Wheeler, Melissa Raspa, Cynthia M. Powell, Holly L. Peay
{"title":"在早期检查项目中扩大新生儿基因组筛查的可行性和临床应用","authors":"Heidi L. Cope, Elizabeth R. Jalazo, Jonathan S. Berg, Jennifer A. Sullivan, Katerina S. Kucera, Scott M. Shone, Hannah E. Frawley, Angela Y. Gwaltney, Ana N. Forsythe, Brooke A. Migliore, Becca Wright, Rebecca R. Moultrie, Laura V. Milko, Rebekah S. Zimmerman, Paul Kruszka, Sharon F. Suchy, Amber Begtrup, Katherine G. Langley, Kristin G. Monaghan, Christina Kraczkowski, Adam J. Guenzel, Kirsty McWalter, Kathleen S. Hruska, Donald B. Bailey, Anne C. Wheeler, Melissa Raspa, Cynthia M. Powell, Holly L. Peay","doi":"10.1038/s41591-025-03945-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although genomic sequencing presents groundbreaking newborn screening (NBS) opportunities, critical feasibility and utility questions remain. Here we present initial results from the Early Check program—an observational study assessing the feasibility and clinical utility of genomic NBS in North Carolina. Recruitment was statewide through mailed letters with electronic consent. Genome sequencing with analysis of 169 high actionability genes (plus 29 optional lower actionability genes) was performed using residual NBS dried blood spots. In 8 months, 1,979 newborns were screened, with 50 (2.5%) screen positives. Negative results were returned electronically, positive results by genetic counselors. Twenty-eight results (55%) were true positives, all received anticipatory guidance, surveillance and management recommendations, and referral to specialists as appropriate. We report technical feasibility and preliminary clinical utility finding, along with interpretation and follow-up challenges that hinder public health implementation. We propose standardized terminology to facilitate cross-study comparisons and accurate characterization of genomic NBS outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":19037,"journal":{"name":"Nature Medicine","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":50.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility and clinical utility of expanded genomic newborn screening in the Early Check program\",\"authors\":\"Heidi L. Cope, Elizabeth R. Jalazo, Jonathan S. Berg, Jennifer A. Sullivan, Katerina S. Kucera, Scott M. Shone, Hannah E. Frawley, Angela Y. Gwaltney, Ana N. Forsythe, Brooke A. Migliore, Becca Wright, Rebecca R. Moultrie, Laura V. Milko, Rebekah S. Zimmerman, Paul Kruszka, Sharon F. Suchy, Amber Begtrup, Katherine G. Langley, Kristin G. Monaghan, Christina Kraczkowski, Adam J. Guenzel, Kirsty McWalter, Kathleen S. Hruska, Donald B. Bailey, Anne C. Wheeler, Melissa Raspa, Cynthia M. Powell, Holly L. Peay\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41591-025-03945-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Although genomic sequencing presents groundbreaking newborn screening (NBS) opportunities, critical feasibility and utility questions remain. Here we present initial results from the Early Check program—an observational study assessing the feasibility and clinical utility of genomic NBS in North Carolina. Recruitment was statewide through mailed letters with electronic consent. Genome sequencing with analysis of 169 high actionability genes (plus 29 optional lower actionability genes) was performed using residual NBS dried blood spots. In 8 months, 1,979 newborns were screened, with 50 (2.5%) screen positives. Negative results were returned electronically, positive results by genetic counselors. Twenty-eight results (55%) were true positives, all received anticipatory guidance, surveillance and management recommendations, and referral to specialists as appropriate. We report technical feasibility and preliminary clinical utility finding, along with interpretation and follow-up challenges that hinder public health implementation. We propose standardized terminology to facilitate cross-study comparisons and accurate characterization of genomic NBS outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Medicine\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":50.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-03945-8\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-03945-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Feasibility and clinical utility of expanded genomic newborn screening in the Early Check program
Although genomic sequencing presents groundbreaking newborn screening (NBS) opportunities, critical feasibility and utility questions remain. Here we present initial results from the Early Check program—an observational study assessing the feasibility and clinical utility of genomic NBS in North Carolina. Recruitment was statewide through mailed letters with electronic consent. Genome sequencing with analysis of 169 high actionability genes (plus 29 optional lower actionability genes) was performed using residual NBS dried blood spots. In 8 months, 1,979 newborns were screened, with 50 (2.5%) screen positives. Negative results were returned electronically, positive results by genetic counselors. Twenty-eight results (55%) were true positives, all received anticipatory guidance, surveillance and management recommendations, and referral to specialists as appropriate. We report technical feasibility and preliminary clinical utility finding, along with interpretation and follow-up challenges that hinder public health implementation. We propose standardized terminology to facilitate cross-study comparisons and accurate characterization of genomic NBS outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Nature Medicine is a monthly journal publishing original peer-reviewed research in all areas of medicine. The publication focuses on originality, timeliness, interdisciplinary interest, and the impact on improving human health. In addition to research articles, Nature Medicine also publishes commissioned content such as News, Reviews, and Perspectives. This content aims to provide context for the latest advances in translational and clinical research, reaching a wide audience of M.D. and Ph.D. readers. All editorial decisions for the journal are made by a team of full-time professional editors.
Nature Medicine consider all types of clinical research, including:
-Case-reports and small case series
-Clinical trials, whether phase 1, 2, 3 or 4
-Observational studies
-Meta-analyses
-Biomarker studies
-Public and global health studies
Nature Medicine is also committed to facilitating communication between translational and clinical researchers. As such, we consider “hybrid” studies with preclinical and translational findings reported alongside data from clinical studies.