不同新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒筛查算法的敏感性和特异性比较

IF 4 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY International Journal of Neonatal Screening Pub Date : 2023-06-14 DOI:10.3390/ijns9020033
Mark R Schleiss, Lori Panther, Sandeep Basnet, Meklit Workneh, John Diaz-Decaro
{"title":"不同新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒筛查算法的敏感性和特异性比较","authors":"Mark R Schleiss,&nbsp;Lori Panther,&nbsp;Sandeep Basnet,&nbsp;Meklit Workneh,&nbsp;John Diaz-Decaro","doi":"10.3390/ijns9020033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Screening newborns for congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) infection is critical for early detection and prompt diagnosis of related long-term consequences of infection, such as sensorineural hearing loss and neurodevelopmental delays. The objective of this study was to describe the validity of different newborn cCMV infection screening approaches and compare the expected number of cCMV cases detected across targeted and universal screening algorithms. The overall sensitivity (OSn) of targeted screening algorithms that required failure of auditory brain stem response and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TOAE; two-fail serial testing) or TOAE only (one-fail serial testing) before diagnostic CMV testing using saliva and urine PCR tests was 79% and 88%, respectively. The OSn for two-fail serial testing with diagnostic CMV testing using dried blood spot (DBS) was 75%. In contrast, OSn was 90% for universal screening (saliva and urine PCR tests) and 86% for universal screening with DBS testing alone. Overall, specificities were 100% across all algorithms. Universal screening using DBS testing and universal screening using saliva and urine testing can potentially detect 312 and 373 more cCMV cases per 100,000 live births, respectively, than two-fail serial testing. Overall, implementing universal cCMV newborn screening would improve cCMV detection, ultimately leading to better health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":14159,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10299607/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Overall Sensitivity and Specificity across Different Newborn Screening Algorithms for Congenital Cytomegalovirus.\",\"authors\":\"Mark R Schleiss,&nbsp;Lori Panther,&nbsp;Sandeep Basnet,&nbsp;Meklit Workneh,&nbsp;John Diaz-Decaro\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ijns9020033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Screening newborns for congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) infection is critical for early detection and prompt diagnosis of related long-term consequences of infection, such as sensorineural hearing loss and neurodevelopmental delays. The objective of this study was to describe the validity of different newborn cCMV infection screening approaches and compare the expected number of cCMV cases detected across targeted and universal screening algorithms. The overall sensitivity (OSn) of targeted screening algorithms that required failure of auditory brain stem response and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TOAE; two-fail serial testing) or TOAE only (one-fail serial testing) before diagnostic CMV testing using saliva and urine PCR tests was 79% and 88%, respectively. The OSn for two-fail serial testing with diagnostic CMV testing using dried blood spot (DBS) was 75%. In contrast, OSn was 90% for universal screening (saliva and urine PCR tests) and 86% for universal screening with DBS testing alone. Overall, specificities were 100% across all algorithms. Universal screening using DBS testing and universal screening using saliva and urine testing can potentially detect 312 and 373 more cCMV cases per 100,000 live births, respectively, than two-fail serial testing. Overall, implementing universal cCMV newborn screening would improve cCMV detection, ultimately leading to better health outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Neonatal Screening\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10299607/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Neonatal Screening\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns9020033\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns9020033","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: 1

摘要

筛查新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒(cCMV)感染对于早期发现和及时诊断感染的相关长期后果至关重要,如感音神经性听力损失和神经发育迟缓。本研究的目的是描述不同新生儿cCMV感染筛查方法的有效性,并比较在靶向和通用筛查算法中检测到的cCMV病例的预期数量。需要听觉脑干反应失败和瞬态诱发耳声发射(TOAE)的靶向筛选算法的总体灵敏度(OSn);在使用唾液和尿液PCR检测诊断巨细胞病毒之前,两次失败连续检测或仅TOAE(一次失败连续检测)分别为79%和88%。用干血斑(DBS)诊断巨细胞病毒(CMV)检测的两次失败串联检测的OSn为75%。相比之下,通用筛查(唾液和尿液PCR检测)的OSn为90%,单独使用DBS检测的通用筛查的OSn为86%。总的来说,所有算法的特异性都是100%。与两次失败的连续检测相比,使用DBS检测和使用唾液和尿液检测进行普遍筛查,每10万活产婴儿中分别可能多发现312例和373例cCMV病例。总体而言,实施普遍的新生儿cCMV筛查将改善cCMV的检测,最终带来更好的健康结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Comparison of Overall Sensitivity and Specificity across Different Newborn Screening Algorithms for Congenital Cytomegalovirus.

Screening newborns for congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) infection is critical for early detection and prompt diagnosis of related long-term consequences of infection, such as sensorineural hearing loss and neurodevelopmental delays. The objective of this study was to describe the validity of different newborn cCMV infection screening approaches and compare the expected number of cCMV cases detected across targeted and universal screening algorithms. The overall sensitivity (OSn) of targeted screening algorithms that required failure of auditory brain stem response and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TOAE; two-fail serial testing) or TOAE only (one-fail serial testing) before diagnostic CMV testing using saliva and urine PCR tests was 79% and 88%, respectively. The OSn for two-fail serial testing with diagnostic CMV testing using dried blood spot (DBS) was 75%. In contrast, OSn was 90% for universal screening (saliva and urine PCR tests) and 86% for universal screening with DBS testing alone. Overall, specificities were 100% across all algorithms. Universal screening using DBS testing and universal screening using saliva and urine testing can potentially detect 312 and 373 more cCMV cases per 100,000 live births, respectively, than two-fail serial testing. Overall, implementing universal cCMV newborn screening would improve cCMV detection, ultimately leading to better health outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
Cystic Fibrosis Screening Efficacy and Seasonal Variation in California: 15-Year Comparison of IRT Cutoffs Versus Daily Percentile for First-Tier Testing. American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics ACT Sheets Are a Vital Resource for State Newborn Screening Programs. DNAJC12 Deficiency, an Emerging Condition Picked Up by Newborn Screening: A Case Illustration and a Novel Variant Identified. Psychological Impact of Presymptomatic X-Linked ALD Diagnosis and Surveillance: A Small Qualitative Study of Patient and Parent Experiences. 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.
×
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