Literature DB >> 17183573

Making the case for objective performance metrics in newborn screening by tandem mass spectrometry.

Piero Rinaldo1, Saba Zafari, Silvia Tortorelli, Dietrich Matern.   

Abstract

The expansion of newborn screening programs to include multiplex testing by tandem mass spectrometry requires understanding and close monitoring of performance metrics. This is not done consistently because of lack of defined targets, and interlaboratory comparison is almost nonexistent. Between July 2004 and April 2006 (N=176,185 cases), the overall performance metrics of the Minnesota program, limited to MS/MS testing, were as follows: detection rate 1:1,816, positive predictive value 37% (54% in 2006 till date), and false positive rate 0.09%. The repeat rate and the proportion of cases with abnormal findings actually been reported are new metrics proposed here as an objective mean to express the overall noise in a program, where noise is defined as the total number of abnormal results obtained using a given set of cut-off values. On the basis of our experience, we propose the following targets as evidence of adequate analytical and postanalytical performance: detection rate 1:3,000 or higher, positive predictive value>20%, and false positive rate<0.3%. Copyright (c) 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17183573     DOI: 10.1002/mrdd.20130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev        ISSN: 1080-4013


  11 in total

Review 1.  Newborn screening for disorders of fatty-acid oxidation: experience and recommendations from an expert meeting.

Authors:  Martin Lindner; Georg F Hoffmann; Dietrich Matern
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 4.982

2.  Newborn screening in North America.

Authors:  Bradford L Therrell; John Adams
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2007-07-23       Impact factor: 4.982

3.  Improving newborn screening laboratory test ordering and result reporting using health information exchange.

Authors:  Stephen M Downs; Peter C van Dyck; Piero Rinaldo; Clement McDonald; R Rodrey Howell; Alan Zuckerman; Gregory Downing
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 4.  Genetic screening.

Authors:  Wylie Burke; Beth Tarini; Nancy A Press; James P Evans
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 6.222

Review 5.  Newborn screening for lysosomal storage disorders and other neuronopathic conditions.

Authors:  Dietrich Matern; Devin Oglesbee; Silvia Tortorelli
Journal:  Dev Disabil Res Rev       Date:  2013

6.  Reduction of the false-positive rate in newborn screening by implementation of MS/MS-based second-tier tests: the Mayo Clinic experience (2004-2007).

Authors:  D Matern; S Tortorelli; D Oglesbee; D Gavrilov; P Rinaldo
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2007-07-23       Impact factor: 4.982

7.  Structures for clinical follow-up: newborn screening.

Authors:  R Rodney Howell; Gilian Engelson
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2007-08-10       Impact factor: 4.982

8.  Incorporation of second-tier tests and secondary biomarkers to improve positive predictive value (PPV) rate in newborn metabolic screening program.

Authors:  Sarang Younesi; Bahareh Yazdani; Mohammad Mahdi Taheri Amin; Pourandokht Saadati; Soudabeh Jamali; Mohammad-Hossein Modarresi; Shahram Savad; Saloomeh Amidi; Homayoun Razavi; Soudeh Ghafouri-Fard
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 3.124

9.  Newborn Screening in Slovenia.

Authors:  Andraž Šmon; Urh Grošelj; Mojca Žerjav Tanšek; Ajda Biček; Adrijana Oblak; Mirjana Zupančič; Ciril Kržišnik; Barbka Repič Lampr Et; Simona Murko; Sergej Hojker; Tadej Battelino
Journal:  Zdr Varst       Date:  2015-03-13

10.  Postanalytical tools improve performance of newborn screening by tandem mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Patricia L Hall; Gregg Marquardt; David M S McHugh; Robert J Currier; Hao Tang; Stephanie D Stoway; Piero Rinaldo
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.