Skip to main content

Advertising Disclaimer »

Main menu

  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Open Access
    • Editorial Policies
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Blogs
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • AAP Meeting Abstracts
  • Pediatric Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health
    • More Collections...
  • AAP Policy
  • Supplements
  • Multimedia
    • Video Abstracts
    • Pediatrics On Call Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers
  • Other Publications
    • American Academy of Pediatrics

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Academy of Pediatrics

AAP Gateway

Advanced Search

AAP Logo

  • Log in
  • Journals
    • Pediatrics
    • Hospital Pediatrics
    • Pediatrics in Review
    • NeoReviews
    • AAP Grand Rounds
    • AAP News
  • Authors/Reviewers
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Open Access
    • Editorial Policies
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Archive
    • Blogs
    • Topic/Program Collections
    • AAP Meeting Abstracts
  • Pediatric Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health
    • More Collections...
  • AAP Policy
  • Supplements
  • Multimedia
    • Video Abstracts
    • Pediatrics On Call Podcast
  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Careers

Discover Pediatric Collections on COVID-19 and Racism and Its Effects on Pediatric Health

American Academy of Pediatrics
Article

Population-Based Newborn Screening for Genetic Disorders When Multiple Mutation DNA Testing Is Incorporated: A Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening Model Demonstrating Increased Sensitivity but More Carrier Detections

Anne Marie Comeau, Richard B. Parad, Henry L. Dorkin, Mark Dovey, Robert Gerstle, Kenan Haver, Allen Lapey, Brian P. O'Sullivan, David A. Waltz, Robert G. Zwerdling and Roger B. Eaton
Pediatrics June 2004, 113 (6) 1573-1581; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.113.6.1573
Anne Marie Comeau
*New England Newborn Screening Program of University of Massachusetts Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard B. Parad
*New England Newborn Screening Program of University of Massachusetts Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
‡The Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Henry L. Dorkin
§New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark Dovey
‡The Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Gerstle
‖Baystate Medical Center Children's Hospital, Springfield, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kenan Haver
¶Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Allen Lapey
¶Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian P. O'Sullivan
#University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care, Worcester, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David A. Waltz
‡The Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert G. Zwerdling
#University of Massachusetts Memorial Health Care, Worcester, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roger B. Eaton
*New England Newborn Screening Program of University of Massachusetts Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Comments
Loading

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Download PDF

Abstract

Objectives. Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) provides a model to investigate the implications of applying multiple-mutation DNA testing in screening for any disorder in a pediatric population-based setting, where detection of affected infants is desired and identification of unaffected carriers is not. Widely applied 2-tiered CF newborn screening strategies first test for elevated immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT) with subsequent analysis for a single CFTR mutation (ΔF508), systematically missing CF-affected infants with any of the >1000 less common or population-specific mutations. Comparison of CF newborn screening algorithms that incorporate single- and multiple-mutation testing may offer insights into strategies that maximize the public health value of screening for CF and other genetic disorders. The objective of this study was to evaluate technical feasibility and practical implications of 2-tiered CF newborn screening that uses testing for multiple mutations (multiple-CFTR-mutation testing).

Methods. We implemented statewide CF newborn screening using a 2-tiered algorithm: all specimens were assayed for IRT; those with elevated IRT then had multiple-CFTR-mutation testing. Infants who screened positive by detection of 1 or 2 mutations or extremely elevated IRT (>99.8%; failsafe protocol) were then referred for definitive diagnosis by sweat testing. We compared the number of sweat-test referrals using single- with multiple-CFTR-mutation testing. Initial physician assessments and diagnostic outcomes of these screened-positive infants and any affected infants missed by the screen were analyzed. We evaluated compliance with our screening and follow-up protocols. All Massachusetts delivery units, the Newborn Screening Program, pediatric health care providers who evaluate and refer screened-positive infants, and the 5 Massachusetts CF Centers and their affiliated genetic services participated. A 4-year cohort of 323 506 infants who were born in Massachusetts between February 1, 1999, and February 1, 2003, and screened for CF at ∼2 days of age was studied.

Results. A total of 110 of 112 CF-affected infants screened (negative predictive value: 99.99%) were detected with IRT/multiple-CFTR-mutation screening; 2 false-negative screens did not show elevated IRT. A total of 107 (97%) of the 110 had 1 or 2 mutations detected by the multiple- CFTR-mutation screen, and 3 had positive screens on the basis of the failsafe protocol. In contrast, had we used single-mutation testing, only 96 (87%) of the 110 would have had 1 or 2 mutations detectable by single-mutation screen, 8 would have had positive screens on the basis of the failsafe protocol, and an additional 6 infants would have had false-negative screens. Among 110 CF-affected screened-positive infants, a likely “genetic diagnosis” was made by the multiple-CFTR-mutation screen in 82 (75%) versus 55 (50%) with ΔF508 alone. Increased sensitivity from multiple-CFTR-mutation testing yielded 274 (26%) more referrals for sweat testing and carrier identifications than testing with ΔF508 alone.

Conclusions. Use of multiple-CFTR-mutation testing improved sensitivity and postscreening prediction of CF at the cost of increased referrals and carrier identification.

  • newborn screening
  • genetic screening
  • population screening
  • cystic fibrosis screening
  • cystic fibrosis
  • multiple-mutation testing
  • DNA screening
  • Received August 25, 2003.
  • Accepted October 23, 2003.
  • Copyright © 2004 by the American Academy of Pediatrics

Individual Login

Log in
You will be redirected to aap.org to login or to create your account.

Institutional Login

via Institution

You may be able to gain access using your login credentials for your institution. Contact your librarian or administrator if you do not have a username and password.

Log in through your institution

If your organization uses OpenAthens, you can log in using your OpenAthens username and password. To check if your institution is supported, please see this list. Contact your library for more details.

Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 2 days for US$25.00

Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.

Offer Reprints

PreviousNext
Back to top

Advertising Disclaimer »

In this issue

Pediatrics
Vol. 113, Issue 6
1 Jun 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
View this article with LENS
PreviousNext
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Academy of Pediatrics.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Population-Based Newborn Screening for Genetic Disorders When Multiple Mutation DNA Testing Is Incorporated: A Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening Model Demonstrating Increased Sensitivity but More Carrier Detections
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Academy of Pediatrics
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Academy of Pediatrics web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Request Permissions
Article Alerts
Log in
You will be redirected to aap.org to login or to create your account.
Or Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Population-Based Newborn Screening for Genetic Disorders When Multiple Mutation DNA Testing Is Incorporated: A Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening Model Demonstrating Increased Sensitivity but More Carrier Detections
Anne Marie Comeau, Richard B. Parad, Henry L. Dorkin, Mark Dovey, Robert Gerstle, Kenan Haver, Allen Lapey, Brian P. O'Sullivan, David A. Waltz, Robert G. Zwerdling, Roger B. Eaton
Pediatrics Jun 2004, 113 (6) 1573-1581; DOI: 10.1542/peds.113.6.1573

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Population-Based Newborn Screening for Genetic Disorders When Multiple Mutation DNA Testing Is Incorporated: A Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening Model Demonstrating Increased Sensitivity but More Carrier Detections
Anne Marie Comeau, Richard B. Parad, Henry L. Dorkin, Mark Dovey, Robert Gerstle, Kenan Haver, Allen Lapey, Brian P. O'Sullivan, David A. Waltz, Robert G. Zwerdling, Roger B. Eaton
Pediatrics Jun 2004, 113 (6) 1573-1581; DOI: 10.1542/peds.113.6.1573
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Print
Download PDF
Insight Alerts
  • Table of Contents

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Comments

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Advances in the Diagnosis and Management of Cystic Fibrosis in the Genomic Era
  • Newborn Screening for Cystic Fibrosis in California
  • Assessing the Disease-Liability of Mutations in CFTR
  • Novel strategies in newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: a prospective controlled study
  • A Decision-Tree Approach to Cost Comparison of Newborn Screening Strategies for Cystic Fibrosis
  • Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: pros and cons
  • The Need for Vigilance: The Case of a False-Negative Newborn Screen for Cystic Fibrosis
  • Clarification of Laboratory and Clinical Variables That Influence Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening With Initial Analysis of Immunoreactive Trypsinogen
  • Newborn Screening for Cystic Fibrosis in New York State: In Reply
  • Guidelines for Implementation of Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening Programs: Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Workshop Report
  • New York State Cystic Fibrosis Consortium: The First 2.5 Years of Experience With Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening in an Ethnically Diverse Population
  • Immunoreactive Trypsin/DNA Newborn Screening for Cystic Fibrosis: Should the R117H Variant Be Included in CFTR Mutation Panels?
  • Cost-effectiveness of 4 Neonatal Screening Strategies for Cystic Fibrosis
  • Early Pulmonary Manifestation of Cystic Fibrosis in Children With the {Delta}F508/R117H-7T Genotype
  • Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening: Shifting the Key Question From "Should We Screen?" to "How Should We Screen?"
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Nurse Home Visiting and Maternal Mental Health: 3-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Trial
  • Neighborhood Child Opportunity Index and Adolescent Cardiometabolic Risk
  • Neonates Born to Mothers With COVID-19: Data From the Spanish Society of Neonatology Registry
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Pulmonology
    • Pulmonology
  • Genetics
    • Genetics

Keywords

  • newborn screening
  • genetic screening
  • population screening
  • cystic fibrosis screening
  • cystic fibrosis
  • multiple-mutation testing
  • DNA screening
  • CF, cystic fibrosis
  • MA-CF, Massachusetts CF newborn screening program
  • IRT, immunoreactive trypsinogen
  • CFTR, cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator
  • CFF, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
  • NENSP, New England Newborn Screening Program
  • [IRT], IRT concentration
  • Cl−, chloride
  • QNS, quantity not sufficient
  • NPV, negative predictive value PPV, positive predictive value
  • CI, confidence interval
  • Journal Info
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Policies
  • Overview
  • Licensing Information
  • Authors/Reviewers
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submit My Manuscript
  • Open Access
  • Reviewer Guidelines
  • Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions
  • Usage Stats
  • Support
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe
  • Resources
  • Media Kit
  • About
  • International Access
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Statement
  • FAQ
  • AAP.org
  • shopAAP
  • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Instagram
  • Visit American Academy of Pediatrics on Facebook
  • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Twitter
  • Follow American Academy of Pediatrics on Youtube
  • RSS
American Academy of Pediatrics

© 2021 American Academy of Pediatrics