Literature DB >> 8523199

Neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis: a comparison of two strategies for case detection in 1.2 million babies.

B Wilcken1, V Wiley, G Sherry, U Bayliss.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To review the overall performance of a neonatal screening program for cystic fibrosis (CF) from 1981 to 1994, and to compare two strategies of case detection. PROGRAM
DESIGN: Initially, immunoreactive trypsin (IRT) was measured in dried blood spots, and because of the low sensitivity of this test at days 3 to 5, a second sample was needed from babies with positive test results. Since 1993 a positive IRT assay result has been followed by direct gene analysis for the common CF mutation, delta F508, with the use of the same sample. Cases with false-negative results were actively sought throughout the period.
RESULTS: With IRT alone, 1,015,000 babies were tested. Of 389 babies with CF, 30 had a clinical diagnosis of CF made after a negative screening test result or an administrative error. Early diagnosis was achieved in 92%. With the IRT/DNA protocol, 59 of 62 infants had a positive screening test result (44 were homozygous for delta F508) among 189,000 babies tested. Three babies with CF had no copy of this mutation, but two were identified early because of meconium ileus. The false-positive rate was much greater for IRT alone than for the IRT/DNA test (0.69% vs 0.054%). All false-positive cases in the IRT/DNA protocol were, of necessity, CF carriers.
CONCLUSION: The percentage of babies with CF who had an early diagnosis was similar with the two protocols, but we concluded that the advantages of the IRT/DNA test for screening, particularly in the avoidance of the need for second IRT samples, outweighed the drawback of unwanted carrier detection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8523199     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3476(95)70040-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr        ISSN: 0022-3476            Impact factor:   4.406


  23 in total

1.  Genetic counselling after carrier detection by newborn screening when one parent carries DeltaF508 and the other R117H.

Authors:  L Curnow; R Savarirayan; J Massie
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 2.  Ethical issues in newborn screening and the impact of new technologies.

Authors:  Bridget Wilcken
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2003-11-14       Impact factor: 3.183

3.  A decision-tree approach to cost comparison of newborn screening strategies for cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Janelle Wells; Marjorie Rosenberg; Gary Hoffman; Michael Anstead; Philip M Farrell
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Newborn screening.

Authors:  James J Pitt
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2010-05

5.  Newborn screening in the Asia Pacific region.

Authors:  Carmencita D Padilla; Bradford L Therrell
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2007-07-23       Impact factor: 4.982

6.  Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: techniques and strategies.

Authors:  Bridget Wilcken
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2007-05-12       Impact factor: 4.982

7.  Quality performance of newborn screening systems: strategies for improvement.

Authors:  D Webster
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2007-08-14       Impact factor: 4.982

8.  The limitations of sweat electrolyte reference intervals for the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Avantika Mishra; Ronda Greaves; John Massie
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2007-05

9.  Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: Polish 4 years' experience with CFTR sequencing strategy.

Authors:  Agnieszka Sobczyńska-Tomaszewska; Mariusz Ołtarzewski; Kamila Czerska; Katarzyna Wertheim-Tysarowska; Dorota Sands; Jarosław Walkowiak; Jerzy Bal; Tadeusz Mazurczak
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Reproductive decisions after neonatal screening identifies cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  T Dudding; B Wilcken; B Burgess; J Hambly; G Turner
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.747

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.