Search

Background: Evidence suggests that coordination of care for people affected by rare diseases is poor. In order to improve the way that care is coordinated it is necessary to understand the preferences of people affected by these conditions, and providers. The aim of this study was to examine patient, parent and carer, and health care professional preferences for different attributes of care coordination for people affected by rare diseases. We conducted a discrete choice experiment using online surveys. There were no restrictions on participants in terms of rare conditions, demographic factors other than age, or geographical location within the UK. Choice scenarios were based on the following attributes: annual cost of attending appointments; access to health records; access to clinical expertise; support of a care coordinator; access to a specialist centre; and, the existence of a documented plan for emergency care. Data were analysed using alternative-specific conditional logit regression models. Results: Valid responses were obtained from 996 individuals (528 patients, 280 carers, 188 health care professionals) between August and December 2019. All attributes significantly influenced the type of service respondents preferred. Patients, carers and health professionals' preferences for care coordination were influenced by: the cost of attending appointments; access to health records; clinical expertise; role of care coordinators; access to specialist centres; and the existence of plan for emergency care. There were no statistically significant differences in the preferences between patients and carers. Preferences of health professionals differed to those of patients and carers. Both patients and carers selected responses which granted them a greater degree of autonomy in relation to the role of care coordinators, whereas health professionals preferred services where care coordinators had more autonomy. Health care professionals also expressed a stronger preference for a documented formal emergency plan to be in place. Conclusions: The findings highlight that people value better coordinated care, in line with policy documents emphasising commitments to coordinated care for people affected by rare diseases. This study highlights the factors that could be included in service provision as ways of improving the coordination of care for people affected by rare diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Noninvasive cfDNA testing for monogenic disorders (sgNIPT) has become integrated into the care of pregnant women at increased risk based on carrier status, known family history, or ultrasound anomalies. The availability of commercial tests for common autosomal recessive and de novo autosomal dominant conditions has led to the use of these tests in low‐risk pregnancies. However, is the technology ready for use in this low‐risk population? This report is a summary of the debate on this topic at the 27th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy. Both expert debaters provided strong arguments in favor and against the use of sgNIPT in low‐risk pregnancies. The argument in favor of sgNIPT for autosomal recessive conditions is that it allows the identification of affected pregnancies without the need for involving the partner in testing. Arguments for sgNIPT for autosomal dominant conditions include identification of affected fetuses that would have either presented later in pregnancy with fetal anomalies or not been detected prenatally given normal ultrasounds, respect for patient autonomy and patient desire for information. Strong arguments were made against offering sgNIPT screening. Given that traditional carrier screening for recessive conditions can be carried out in many jurisdictions, the added value of sgNIPT has not been clearly demonstrated. Arguments against sgNIPT for autosomal dominant conditions included the total lack of clinical validation studies and the risk of false reassurance in cases of negative results and unnecessary invasive procedures in cases of false positive results. Although there is a desire to take advantage of new technologies to improve the detection of monogenic disorders in low‐risk populations, based on the discussion and the audience vote, it appears premature to offer sgNIPT to all low risk pregnant women. Further clinical validation studies are needed prior to broad implementation. Key points: What's already known about this topic?cfDNA testing on maternal blood is technically possible and commercially available for dominant and recessive monogenic conditions. What does the study add?This report summarizes an oral debate presented at the 27th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy in Edinburgh, UK on June 20th, 2023.The benefits, limitations and challenges of performing cfDNA screening for monogenic conditions in low‐risk populations are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Determine the incremental diagnostic yield of prenatal exome sequencing (pES) over chromosome microarray (CMA) or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with central nervous system (CNS) abnormalities., Methods: Data were collected via electronic searches from January 2010 to April 2022 in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Web of Science and EMBASE. The NHS England prenatal exome cohort was also included. Incremental yield was calculated as a pooled value using a random-effects model., Results: Thirty studies were included (n = 1583 cases). The incremental yield with pES for any CNS anomaly was 32% [95%CI 27%-36%; I 2  = 72%]. Subgroup analysis revealed apparent incremental yields in; (a) isolated CNS anomalies; 27% [95%CI 19%-34%; I 2  = 74%]; (b) single CNS anomaly; 16% [95% CI 10%-23%; I 2  = 41%]; (c) more than one CNS anomaly; 31% [95% Cl 21%-40%; I 2  = 56%]; and (d) the anatomical subtype with the most optimal yield was Type 1 malformation of cortical development, related to abnormal cell proliferation or apoptosis, incorporating microcephalies, megalencephalies and dysplasia; 40% (22%-57%; I 2  = 68%). The commonest syndromes in isolated cases were Lissencephaly 3 and X-linked hydrocephalus., Conclusions: Prenatal exome sequencing provides a high incremental diagnostic yield in fetuses with CNS abnormalities with optimal yields in cases with multiple CNS anomalies, particularly those affecting the midline, posterior fossa and cortex., (© 2023 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)