Hastings Cent Rep. 2018 Jul;48 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S2-S6. doi: 10.1002/hast.874.
Many scientists and doctors hope that affordable genome sequencing will lead to more personalized medical care and improve public health in ways that will benefit children, families, and society more broadly. One hope in particular is that all newborns could be sequenced at birth, thereby setting the stage for a lifetime of medical care and self-directed preventive actions tailored to each child's genome. Indeed, commentators often suggest that universal genome sequencing is inevitable. Such optimism can come with the presumption that discussing the potential limits, cost, and downsides of widespread application of genomic technologies is pointless, excessively pessimistic, or overly cautious. We disagree. Given the pragmatic challenges associated with determining what sequencing data mean for the health of individuals, the economic costs associated with interpreting and acting on such data, and the psychosocial costs of predicting one's own or one's child's future life plans based on uncertain testing results, we think this hope and optimism deserve to be tempered. In the analysis that follows, we distinguish between two reasons for using sequencing: to diagnose individual infants who have been identified as sick and to screen populations of infants who appear to be healthy. We also distinguish among three contexts in which sequencing for either diagnosis or screening could be deployed: in clinical medicine, in public health programs, and as a direct-to-consumer service. Each of these contexts comes with different professional norms, policy considerations, and public expectations. Finally, we distinguish between two main types of genome sequencing: targeted sequencing, where only specific genes are sequenced or analyzed, and whole-exome or whole-genome sequencing, where all the DNA or all the coding segments of all genes are sequenced and analyzed. In a symptomatic newborn, targeted or genome-wide sequencing can help guide other tests for diagnosis or for specific treatment that is urgently needed. Clinicians use the infant's symptoms (or phenotype) to interrogate the sequencing data. These same complexities and uncertainties, however, limit the usefulness of genome-wide sequencing as a population screening tool. While we recognize considerable benefit in using targeted sequencing to screen for or detect specific conditions that meet the criteria for inclusion in newborn screening panels, use of genome-wide sequencing as a sole screening tool for newborns is at best premature. We conclude that sequencing technology can be beneficially used in newborns when that use is nuanced and attentive to context.
许多科学家和医生希望经济实惠的基因组测序将带来更个性化的医疗保健,并以更广泛地有益于儿童、家庭和社会的方式改善公共卫生。特别是,人们希望所有新生儿都能在出生时进行测序,从而为终生的医疗保健和针对每个孩子基因组的自我指导的预防措施奠定基础。事实上,评论员经常表示,普遍进行基因组测序是不可避免的。这种乐观情绪可能源于这样一种假设,即讨论广泛应用基因组技术的潜在限制、成本和缺点是毫无意义的、过于悲观的或过于谨慎的。我们不同意这种观点。考虑到确定测序数据对个人健康意味着什么的实际挑战,以及解释和根据这些数据采取行动的经济成本,以及根据不确定的测试结果预测自己或孩子未来生活计划的心理社会成本,我们认为这种希望和乐观情绪值得缓和。在下面的分析中,我们将使用测序的两个原因区分开来:诊断已被确定为患病的个体婴儿和筛查似乎健康的婴儿群体。我们还将测序用于诊断或筛查的三种情况区分开来:临床医学、公共卫生计划和直接面向消费者的服务。这些情况中的每一种都有不同的专业规范、政策考虑因素和公众期望。最后,我们将两种主要类型的基因组测序区分开来:靶向测序,仅对特定基因进行测序或分析,以及全外显子或全基因组测序,对所有 DNA 或所有基因的编码片段进行测序和分析。在有症状的新生儿中,靶向或全基因组测序可以帮助指导其他诊断或急需的特定治疗测试。临床医生使用婴儿的症状(或表型)来询问测序数据。然而,同样的复杂性和不确定性限制了全基因组测序作为人群筛查工具的有用性。虽然我们认识到使用靶向测序来筛查或检测符合新生儿筛查面板纳入标准的特定疾病有相当大的好处,但将全基因组测序作为新生儿的唯一筛查工具是不成熟的。我们得出的结论是,只有当测序技术的使用具有细微差别并能注意到具体情况时,才能在新生儿中有益地使用测序技术。