The BUN and FASTER studies, two prospective multicenter trials in the United States, validated the accuracy and detection rates of first and second trimester screening previously reported abroad. These studies, coupled with the 2007 release of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Practice Bulletin that endorsed first trimester screening as an alternative to traditional second trimester multiple marker screening, led to an explosion of screening options available to pregnant women. ACOG also recommended that invasive diagnostic testing for chromosome aneuploidy be made available to all women regardless of maternal age. More recently, another option known as Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) became available to screen for chromosome aneuploidy. While screening and testing options may be limited due to a variety of factors, healthcare providers need to be aware of the options in their area in order to provide their patients with accurate and reliable information. If not presented clearly, patients may feel overwhelmed at the number of choices available. The following guideline includes recommendations for healthcare providers regarding which screening or diagnostic test should be offered based on availability, insurance coverage, and timing of a patient's entry into prenatal care, as well as a triage assessment so that a general process can be adapted to unique situations.

Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 are the three most common trisomies among infants who survive to 20 weeks gestation or more. Overall information about birth prevalence, natural history, and mortality for all three trisomies is well defined, but information about ethnic-specific rates is limited. Only a few studies have examined mortality rates of trisomies 18 and 13 because so few cases are liveborn and most have very short life spans. This study assessed ethnic-specific population-based survival probabilities among infants for each trisomy. All cases of trisomies 21, 18, and 13 born in Texas between 1999 and 2003 were obtained from the Texas Birth Defects Registry and included 2,260 cases of trisomy 21, 398 cases of trisomy 18, and 213 cases of trisomy 13. Date and cause of death were obtained from the Texas vital statistics records and the National Death Index. Overall, birth prevalence rates (per 10,000 adjusted live births) for the three trisomies were 11.74 (95% CI: 11.25-12.25), 1.34 (95% CI: 1.18-1.52), 0.92 (95% CI: 0.79-1.07), respectively, and are consistent with previously reported rates. There were no differences in survival rates by ethnicity and the median survival for each trisomy was consistent with previous reports. The results of this study provide comprehensive population-based information for survival of infants with trisomies 21, 18, and 13.

Purpose In the past five years new screening protocols have been developed that provide improved cancer screening options for individuals with Li-Fraumeni Syndrome. Very little has been published on the psychosocial impact of these screening protocols. The goals of this study were to determine how participation in screening impacts individuals psychosocially, to examine the benefits and drawbacks of screening, and to evaluate possible barriers to continued screening. Methods We performed a qualitative study consisting of semi-structured phone interviews conducted from December 2015-February 2016 with 20 individuals attending the LFS screening program at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Results Data analysis showed that benefits of screening include early detection, peace of mind, centralized screening, knowledge providing power, and screening making LFS seem more livable. Perceived drawbacks included logistical issues, difficulty navigating the system, screening being draining, and significant negative emotional reactions such as anxiety, fear, and skepticism. Regardless of the emotions that were present, 100% of participants plan on continuing screening in the program. Conclusion Our data indicates that the perceived benefits of screening outweigh the drawbacks of screening. Individuals in this screening program appear to have improved psychosocial well-being because of their access to the screening program.

The first practice based competencies (PBCs) for the field of genetic counseling were adopted by the American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC), 1996. Since that time, there has been significant growth in established and new work settings (clinical and non-clinical) and changes in service delivery models and the roles of genetic counselors. These changes prompted the ABGC to appoint a PBC Task Force in 2011 to review the PBCs with respect to their current relevance and to revise and update them as necessary. There are four domains in the revised PBCs: (I) Genetics Expertise and Analysis (II) Interpersonal, Psychosocial and Counseling Skills (III) Education and (IV) Professional Development and Practice. There are 22 competencies, each clarified with learning objectives or samples of activities and skills; a glossary is included. New competencies were added that address genomics, genetic testing and genetic counselors' roles in risk assessment, education, supervision, conducting research and presenting research options to patients. With PBCs serving as the pre-defined abilities or outcomes of training, graduating genetic counselors will be well prepared to enter the field with a minimum level of skills and abilities. A description of the Task Force's work, key changes and the 2013 PBCs are presented herein.