| Literature DB >> 25147811 |
Claudia Frömmel1, Annemarie Brose2, Jeannette Klein3, Oliver Blankenstein3, Stephan Lobitz4.
Abstract
Sickle cell disease (SCD) does not occur in the indigenous German population, but with the increasing number of immigrants from countries at high risk for hemoglobinopathies, the question emerges whether or not a newborn screening program (NBS) for SCD disease should be initiated in Germany anyhow. We have recently shown that in Berlin, a city with a very large immigrant population, the incidence of SCD is considerable, but our findings are insufficient to make a decision for the country as a whole. In this paper we will show that a large body of epidemiological data can be generated in a relatively short period of time, with a very high degree of precision and at relatively little expense--a result that might motivate other working groups to start such a pilot project locally. We examined previously collected dried blood cards that were up to six months old, using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) as first method and capillary electrophoresis (CE) as second method. A single, part-time laboratory technician processed 38,220 samples in a period of 162 working days. The total costs per sample including all incidentals (as well as labor costs) were EUR 1.44.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25147811 PMCID: PMC4132432 DOI: 10.1155/2014/695828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Decision tree for handling samples of the babies born in the study period (n = 39,249). Samples were excluded if there was no consent for screening (n = 95), no consent to store the sample (n = 422), and no consent to use the sample in a scientific project (n = 126), too little material (n = 386) or a low AUC on the HPLC machine (n = 4,236). Please note if any hemoglobin variant other than HbS was detected by means of HPLC, this result was also confirmed by CE.
Figure 2Each dot represents the mean of an average of 353 samples (range 24–1090) of the same age. Of the samples that were analyzed within three months after being taken normally more than 90% were evaluable.
Figure 3Representative HPL chromatograms with the presumed hemoglobin patterns FA (a), FAS (b), FS (c), and FSC (d).
Detailed information on screening-positive babies.
| Patient number (ethnical origin) | Screening patterns HPLC/CE | Molecular genetic result |
|---|---|---|
| # 1 (West African) | FSa/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 2 (West African) | F5SaB/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 3 (Middle East) | FSa5B/FS | SCD-S/ |
| # 4 (West African) | FaCS/FSC | SCD-S/C |
| # 5 (Middle East) | F4SA/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 6 (West African) | FSCa/FSC | SCD-S/C |
| # 7 (Middle East) | FSa5/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 8 (West African) | FSaB/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 9 (West African) | FS4a/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 10 (West African) | FS5aB/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 11 (West African) | FCSa/FSC | SCD-S/C |
| # 12 (West African) | FSa2B/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 13 (West African) | FSa2B/FS | SCD-S/S |
| # 14 (West African) | FCS1/FSC | SCD-S/C |
High interrun precision of HPLC retention times of retention time markers.
| Hemoglobin | Retention times of RTM mean (range) [min] | CV [%] | Manufacturer's specifications mean (range) [min] |
|---|---|---|---|
| F | 0.494 (0.471–0.510) | 1.5 | 0.530 (0.470–0.590) |
| A | 0.792 (0.770–0.804) | 0.9 | 0.800 (0.730–0.870) |
| E/A2 | 0.954 (0.919–0.970) | 1.0 | 0.970 (0.930–1.010) |
| D | 1.042 (1.005–1.072) | 1.1 | 1.060 (1.010–1.110) |
| S | 1.158 (1.116–1.183) | 1.2 | 1.190 (1.130–1.250) |
| C | 1.663 (1.634–1.684) | 0.6 | 1.680 (1.610–1.750) |
High precision of HPLC retention times of hemoglobins derived from dried blood spot samples.
| Presumptive hemoglobin | Retention times mean (range) [min] | CV [%] | n |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 0.800 (0.785–0.816) | 0.8 | 100 |
| E | 0.952 (0.936–0.968) | 0.8 | 26 |
| D | 1.044 (1.028–1.060) | 1.0 | 11 |
| S | 1.154 (1.190–1.130) | 0.9 | 100 |
| C | 1.660 (1.647–1.670) | 0.4 | 23 |
Interrun precision of CE determined on liquid control samples provided by the manufacturer.
| HbF mean [%] | CV [%] | HbA mean [%] | CV [%] | HbS mean [%] | CV [%] | HbC mean [%] | CV [%] |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control FASC | 18.8 | 4.8 | 35.5 | 2.0 | 14.5 | 4.3 | 5.4 | 7.7 | 5 |
| HbF mean [%] | CV [%] | HbA mean [%] | CV [%] | HbS mean [%] | CV [%] |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control 1 | 37.3 | 2.9 | 8.9 | 5.3 | 3.6 | 6.3 | 11 |
| Control 2 | 40.1 | 4.8 | 1.9 | 27 | 1.0 | 50 | 8 |
| HbF mean [%] | CV [%] | HbA mean [%] | CV [%] | HbC mean [%] | CV [%] |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control 3 | 39.6 | 5.7 | 1.7 | 22 | 1.3 | 28 | 11 |
Precision was reduced if certain hemoglobin fractions were present in an order close to the detection limit of 1% of the total AUC.