Retrospective Review of Positive Newborn Screening Results for Isovaleric Acidemia and Development of a Strategy to Improve the Efficacy of Newborn Screening in the UK

IF 4 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY International Journal of Neonatal Screening Pub Date : 2024-03-13 DOI:10.3390/ijns10010024
R. Carling, Katy Hedgethorne, A. Chakrapani, Patricia L Hall, Nick Flynn, Toby Greenfield, Stuart J Moat, Joshua Ssali, L. Shakespeare, Nazia Taj, Teresa Wu, Mark Anderson, Arunabha Ghosh, Hugh Lemonde, Germaine Pierre, M. Sharrard, Sreevidya Sreekantam, James R Bonham
{"title":"Retrospective Review of Positive Newborn Screening Results for Isovaleric Acidemia and Development of a Strategy to Improve the Efficacy of Newborn Screening in the UK","authors":"R. Carling, Katy Hedgethorne, A. Chakrapani, Patricia L Hall, Nick Flynn, Toby Greenfield, Stuart J Moat, Joshua Ssali, L. Shakespeare, Nazia Taj, Teresa Wu, Mark Anderson, Arunabha Ghosh, Hugh Lemonde, Germaine Pierre, M. Sharrard, Sreevidya Sreekantam, James R Bonham","doi":"10.3390/ijns10010024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the UK commenced newborn screening for isovaleric acidemia in 2015, changes in prescribing have increased the incidence of false positive (FP) results due to pivaloylcarnitine. A review of screening results between 2015 and 2022 identified 24 true positive (TP) and 84 FP cases, with pivalate interference confirmed in 76/84. Initial C5 carnitine (C5C) did not discriminate between FP and TP with median (range) C5C of 2.9 (2.0–9.6) and 4.0 (1.8–>70) µmol/L, respectively, and neither did Precision Newborn Screening via Collaborative Laboratory Integrated Reports (CLIR), which identified only 1/47 FP cases. However, among the TP cases, disease severity showed a correlation with initial C5C in ‘asymptomatic’ individuals (n = 17), demonstrating a median (range) C5C of 3.0 (1.8–7.1) whilst ‘clinically affected’ patients (n = 7), showed a median (range) C5C of 13.9 (7.7–70) µmol/L. These findings allowed the introduction of dual cut-off values into the screening algorithm to reduce the incidence of FPs, with initial C5C results ≥ 5 µmol/L triggering urgent referral, and those >2.0 and <5.0 µmol/L prompting second-tier C5-isobar testing. This will avoid delayed referral in babies at particular risk whilst reducing the FP rate for the remainder.","PeriodicalId":14159,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns10010024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the UK commenced newborn screening for isovaleric acidemia in 2015, changes in prescribing have increased the incidence of false positive (FP) results due to pivaloylcarnitine. A review of screening results between 2015 and 2022 identified 24 true positive (TP) and 84 FP cases, with pivalate interference confirmed in 76/84. Initial C5 carnitine (C5C) did not discriminate between FP and TP with median (range) C5C of 2.9 (2.0–9.6) and 4.0 (1.8–>70) µmol/L, respectively, and neither did Precision Newborn Screening via Collaborative Laboratory Integrated Reports (CLIR), which identified only 1/47 FP cases. However, among the TP cases, disease severity showed a correlation with initial C5C in ‘asymptomatic’ individuals (n = 17), demonstrating a median (range) C5C of 3.0 (1.8–7.1) whilst ‘clinically affected’ patients (n = 7), showed a median (range) C5C of 13.9 (7.7–70) µmol/L. These findings allowed the introduction of dual cut-off values into the screening algorithm to reduce the incidence of FPs, with initial C5C results ≥ 5 µmol/L triggering urgent referral, and those >2.0 and <5.0 µmol/L prompting second-tier C5-isobar testing. This will avoid delayed referral in babies at particular risk whilst reducing the FP rate for the remainder.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国新生儿异戊酸血症筛查阳性结果回顾及提高新生儿筛查有效性的策略制定
自 2015 年英国开始新生儿异戊酸血症筛查以来,处方的变化增加了因新戊酰基肉碱导致的假阳性 (FP) 结果的发生率。对 2015 年至 2022 年期间的筛查结果进行回顾后发现,有 24 例真阳性 (TP) 和 84 例 FP,其中 76/84 例确认了特戊酰基肉碱干扰。初始 C5 肉碱(C5C)不能区分 FP 和 TP,C5C 的中位数(范围)分别为 2.9(2.0-9.6)和 4.0(1.8->70)µmol/L,通过协作实验室综合报告(CLIR)进行的新生儿精准筛查也不能区分 FP 和 TP,仅发现了 1/47 个 FP 病例。然而,在 TP 病例中,疾病严重程度与 "无症状 "患者(17 人)的初始 C5C 值相关,C5C 值的中位数(范围)为 3.0(1.8-7.1),而 "临床受影响 "患者(7 人)的 C5C 值的中位数(范围)为 13.9(7.7-70)µmol/L。根据这些发现,在筛查算法中引入了双重临界值,以减少FP的发生率,初始C5C结果≥ 5 µmol/L时会触发紧急转诊,而>2.0和<5.0 µmol/L时会触发二级C5-isobar检测。这将避免有特殊风险的婴儿延迟转诊,同时降低其余婴儿的 FP 率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Neonatal Screening
International Journal of Neonatal Screening Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Incidence of Inborn Errors of Metabolism and Endocrine Disorders Among 40965 Newborn Infants at Riyadh Second Health Cluster of the Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia. A Systematic Literature Review on the Global Status of Newborn Screening for Mucopolysaccharidosis II. The Value of Reducing Inconclusive and False-Positive Newborn Screening Results for Congenital Hypothyroidism, Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia and Maple Syrup Urine Disease in The Netherlands. Newborn Screening for Sickle Cell Disease in Catalonia between 2015 and 2022-Epidemiology and Impact on Clinical Events. Prevalence and Mutation Analysis of Short-Chain acyl-CoA Dehydrogenase Deficiency Detected by Newborn Screening in Hefei, China.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1