Google Answers Logo
View Question
 
Q: Neonatal Cystic Fibrosis Screening ( Answered 5 out of 5 stars,   2 Comments )
Question  
Subject: Neonatal Cystic Fibrosis Screening
Category: Health
Asked by: chaboobi-ga
List Price: $20.00
Posted: 13 Aug 2005 20:34 PDT
Expires: 12 Sep 2005 20:34 PDT
Question ID: 555510
can you tell me which states in America do Neonatal cystic Fibrosis
screening and at what stage do they let the parents know the results?
In Australia it is only at 4-6 weeks even though the hospitals may
have some of the results earlier?

IF you happen to come across(but not required) I am also interrested
in the following information.
What do the tests involve. IRT levels? sweat tests? and which gene
mutations are tested?
Answer  
Subject: Re: Neonatal Cystic Fibrosis Screening
Answered By: crabcakes-ga on 13 Aug 2005 22:24 PDT
Rated:5 out of 5 stars
 
Hello Chaboobi, 


  Currently, as of Aug. 12, 2005, Colorado, Iowa, Mississippi, New
Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina,  Wisconsin, and Wyoming
are the US states that have laws in place mandating neonatal CF
testing. You can see by the chart on this page, that other states are
soon to implement testing, or test certain populations.
http://genes-r-us.uthscsa.edu/nbsdisorders.pdf


According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, only 7 states test
newborns for CF. (This document is obviously older than the one above,
but contains good information!)
?The newborn screening tests for CF are not diagnostic tools. If the
initial screen is positive, then further tests are done to rule out or
confirm a CF diagnosis. Only a fraction of newborns with a positive
initial screen ultimately will be diagnosed with CF. Currently, seven
states conduct CF newborn screening in all newborns; three states
screen for CF in some hospitals or populations; while two more states
are now implementing CF screening programs. From 1990 to 1999, 1.46
million babies were screened for CF and 372 were ultimately diagnosed
with CF. CF is one of the most common disorders identified in the
newborn screening programs that include it in their testing.?

?CF is a genetic disease that affects approximately 30,000 people in
the United States. A defective gene causes the body to produce
abnormally thick, sticky mucus that leads to chronic and
life-threatening lung infections and impairs digestion. When the CF
Foundation was created in 1955, few children lived to attend
elementary school. Today, because of research and care supported by
the CF Foundation with money raised through donations from
individuals, corporations and foundations, the median age of survival
for people with CF is in the early 30s.
The mission of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation is to assure the
development of the means to cure and control cystic fibrosis and to
improve the quality of life for those with the disease. For more
information on cystic fibrosis, call (800) FIGHT CF or visit
www.cff.org. ?
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/cff-tcf101304.php


?To ensure that screening for cystic fibrosis results in more benefit
than harm, the CDC recommends that a deliberative process be followed.
First, before implementation of screening, states should consult with
other states that have experience in screening for cystic fibrosis as
well as cystic fibrosis specialists in their states. Second, they
recommend that states carefully address provider and public education,
infection control practices among providers of care to persons with
cystic fibrosis, and effective communication with families. Third,
they propose that state newborn screening programs develop systems in
collaboration with specialty care providers to track short-term and
long-term child outcomes and identify resources to support this
activity.?
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3225/is_8_71/ai_n13795398#continue

?Abnormal results, and the strength of the test in predicting CF, is
based on where your child's test results fall in relation to the
values of all tested children to date and whether the test is positive
on repeat examination.
If your child's level of immunoreactive trypsinogen is greater than
140 ng/dL on the first screen, the test result is considered positive.
If your child's level is 120 ng/dL on the second screen, the second
test result is also considered positive.
Although these two test results indicate CF may exist, a sweat test
with a positive result confirms the diagnosis.?
http://www.georgetownuniversityhospital.org/body.cfm?id=555563&action=articleDetail&AEProductID=Adam2004_1&AEArticleID=003409


?When to get tested?
When a newborn infant has meconium ileus (no stools in the first 24 to
48 hours of life) or when a person has symptoms of CF (salty sweat,
persistent respiratory infections, wheezing, persistent diarrhea,
foul-smelling greasy stools, malnutrition, and vitamin deficiency); if
a person has a positive sweat chloride or IRT test or a close relative
who has been diagnosed with CF; when a patient is undergoing genetic
counseling and wants to find out if they are a CF carrier; or for
prenatal diagnosis?
http://www.labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/cf_gene/glance.html

There are pitfalls in CF testing, one of which is locating the child?s
pediatrician. Sometimes the results fall through the cracks. Delays in
results are usually caused by communication delays ? failure to enter
results in a computer, failure to promptly mail results, etc. If I
were the parent and did not have results back in a week, I would start
calling the pediatrician for results.
www.mostgene.org/gd/gdvol15f.htm

You are correct that IRT levels are tested. ?While newborn screening
for cystic fibrosis (CF) has been feasible since 1979 using the IRT
(immunoreactive trypsinogen test), and there have been slowly
accumulating observational data regarding the potential benefits of
such testing, it is not routinely performed in most states. In part,
this is because CF is different from the classic model of PKU newborn
screening in which a relatively simple intervention must be initiated
within a short time frame (weeks) in order to avoid a significant
complication (severe mental retardation). In contrast, cystic fibrosis
is a chronic and gradually progressive disease and the potential
benefit of newborn screening may be harder to discern.?

?Additionally, qualitative studies in Wisconsin and Australia
suggested that there are no significant negative psychosocial problems
in children identified with CF through screening. There may also be a
reduction in the parental anxiety since the time to diagnosis is less
with newborn screening, but this is difficult to assess for
methodological reasons.?
http://www.mostgene.org/gd/gdvol15d.htm

About the follow-up sweat test:
?The most common test for CF is called the sweat test. It measures the
amount of salt (sodium chloride) in the sweat. In this test, an area
of the skin (usually the forearm) is made to sweat by using a chemical
called pilocarpine and applying a mild electric current. To collect
the sweat, the area is covered with a gauze pad or filter paper and
wrapped in plastic. After 30 to 40 minutes, the plastic is removed,
and the sweat collected in the pad or paper is analyzed. Higher than
normal amounts of sodium and chloride suggest that the person has
cystic fibrosis.
The sweat test may not work well in newborns because they do not
produce enough sweat. In that case, another type of test, such as the
immunoreactive trypsinogen test (IRT), may be used. In the IRT test,
blood drawn 2 to 3 days after birth is analyzed for a specific protein
called trypsinogen. Positive IRT tests must be confirmed by sweat and
other tests.
Also, a small percentage of people with CF have normal sweat chloride
levels. They can only be diagnosed by chemical tests for the presence
of the mutated gene. Some of the other tests that can assist in the
diagnosis of CF are chest x-rays, lung function tests, and sputum
(phlegm) cultures. Stool examinations can help identify the digestive
abnormalities that are typical of CF.?
http://www.healingwell.com/library/cysticfibrosis/info2.asp


The CF gene
-----------
?The CF gene was identified in 1989. Since then, a great deal has been
learned about this gene and its protein product. The biochemical
abnormality in CF results from a mutation in a gene that produces a
protein responsible for the movement through the cell membranes of
chloride ions (a component of sodium chloride, or common table salt).
The protein is called CFTR--cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator.

CFTR is present in cells that line the passageways of the lungs,
pancreas, colon, and genitourinary tract. When this protein is
abnormal, two of the hallmarks of CF result-blockage of the movement
of chloride ions and water in the lung and other cells and secretion
of abnormal mucus.

The mutation involved in CF causes the deletion of three of the base
pairs in the gene. This in turn, causes a loss in the CFTR protein of
an amino acid (the building blocks of proteins). Because phenylalanine
is located in position 508 of the protein chain, this mutant protein
is called deltaF508 CFTR.
However, deltaF508 CFTR accounts for only 70-80 percent of all CF
cases. Various other mutations-over 400 at the last count-seem to be
responsible for the remaining CF cases. Differences in disease
patterns seen in individuals and families probably result from the
combined effects of the particular mutation and various, but still
unknown, factors in the CF patient and his or her environment.?
http://www.healingwell.com/library/cysticfibrosis/info2.asp

?The CF gene mutation test identifies mutations in the CFTR gene on
chromosome 7. Each cell in the human body (except sperm and eggs) has
46 chromosomes (23 inherited from the mother and 23 from the father).
Genes on these chromosomes form the body?s blueprint for producing
proteins that control body functions. Cystic fibrosis is caused by a
mutation in a pair of genes located on chromosomes 7. Both copies
(alleles) of this gene must be abnormal to cause CF. If only one copy
of the gene pair is mutated, the patient will be a carrier. Carriers
are not ill, they do not have any symptoms, but they can pass their
abnormal CF gene copy on to their children.

To date, almost 1000 different mutations of the chromosome 7 gene have
been identified, but only a few of the mutations are common. The
majority of CF in the U.S. is caused by a mutation called deltaF508.?
http://www.labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/cf_gene/sample.html



Additional Information
======================

?Some people who suffer from repeated sinus infections may be
predisposed to them because they carry the same genetic mutation
responsible for cystic fibrosis (CF), new findings suggest.[1]
"For years we've known that children and adults with CF have severe
sinus infections--it's almost a given with the disease," said Garry R.
Cutting, MD, a geneticist at the McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic
Medicine, at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, in
Baltimore. "We've long wondered if having just one mutant CFTR gene
has any health effects. Now we can confirm what we've suspected: Genes
may play a role in chronic sinus disease," Dr. Cutting said in an
interview with RESPIRATORY REVIEWS.?
http://www.respiratoryreviews.com/jan01/rr_jan01_genemutation.html


This is an interesting article of a study conducted in Scotland, using
the CF gene in a nasal spray!
?The results of the first Clinical Trial of Gene Therapy for CF in
Scotland were announced on 1 March 1997 (Porteous et al, Gene Therapy
4:210-218 (1997)). The results give rise to cautious optimism. The
study, led by Prof David Porteous , Dr Alastair Innes , Dr Andrew
Greening and their colleagues at Edinburgh's Western General Hospital,
involved a gene spray applied to the nose. The spray consists of a
working copy of the CF gene mixed with liposomes (fat droplets) which
'package and post' the gene into the cells lining the nose. The study
showed that the treatment was safe and works, but only briefly. Repeat
treatments would be needed. Further laboratory tests are underway and
an improved version of the treatment should be ready for testing in
the lung by the end of the year.
At the same time, results from a similar study with similar findings
were announced by an Oxford/Cambridge/Leeds/Manchester team (see Gill
et al, Gene Therapy 4:199-209 (1997)).

This gives further reassurance that this liposome based approach to
gene therapy may eventually become a useful form of treatment for CF.
Scotland in particular and the UK in general are at the international
forefront of this effort.?
http://www.genetics.med.ed.ac.uk/cysfib/background.shtml

Medine Plus
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003409.htm

The March of Dimes has an informational site here:
http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/681_1200.asp


I hope this has adequately answered your question. If any part of this
answer is unclear, please request an Answer Carification, before
rating, and I will be happy to respond.

Regards, Crabcakes


Search Terms
=============
Cystic Fibrosis + neonatal screening
States testing neonates + CF
CF testing + newborns
CF screening + States

Request for Answer Clarification by chaboobi-ga on 14 Aug 2005 02:35 PDT
Hi Crabcakes,
Thank you for the lengthy answer and the clarification of which states
perform the newborn screening.I am specifically after what stage the
parents are told the results?

For example, in Australia at 2-3 day old newborns have a blood test
and IRT levels are measured, the highest 1%of samples then go for
further gene testing and only the deltaF508 gene is looked for. Those
who are homozygous for the gene are diagnosed as having CF but the
parents are only told until the child is 4-6 weeks of age (inorder not
to interfere with the parent child bonding process).Those who only
have one deltaF508 mutation are called in when the child is 4 weeks
old to have a sweat test(which is a diagnostic test) and they are
given their results in 24 hours. My question was more on the specifics
of the time at which the parents are told, is the same process used in
the US as described above?)

Clarification of Answer by crabcakes-ga on 14 Aug 2005 06:34 PDT
Thank you for your clarification. I had not come across anything
similar to what you have described, but I will search further, and
post when I find the information.

Regards, Crabcakes

Clarification of Answer by crabcakes-ga on 14 Aug 2005 21:04 PDT
Hi again,

  As Clouseau so aptly pointed out, each state varies in the time
tested and in returning results. Here is an example from the state of
Indiana:
# Beginning in July 2002, mass spectroscopy newborn screening has
begun in Illinois.  This testing will detect 25 individual disorders:
amino acid disorders, organic acid disorders, and fatty acid oxidation
disorders.  Results are classified as "presumptive positive" and
"borderline positives". A presumptive positve has a 1/4 chanice of
being a true positive and borderline positives will be normal in about
95% of the cases.  The physician will be notified by the state Newborn
Screening Program if there is a presumpitive postive and an
information sheet and consultant list will be forwarded by fax.  It is
the respoonsibility of the physician to notify the family, determine
the clinical status of the newborn, and and refer the neonate to the
proper consultant.
# Borderline positive results will be mailed to the physician and and
they must still contact the familiy and determine the clinical
condition of the neonate. If necessary, the patient should be referred
to a consultant.
# Retesting and consultant fees are covered by the State. Special
formulas and foods are also covered by the State.
# Turnaround times have averaged 11 days with most of the delays
occurring between the time of colloection and reception at the State
Lab.

http://pedclerk.bsd.uchicago.edu/NeonatalScreening.html

There's a very good summary of newborn screening fm the American
Academy of Pediatrics on this site. The article is too long to post
here due to copyright restrictions:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/107/6/1451

Sincerely, Crabcakes
chaboobi-ga rated this answer:5 out of 5 stars
Thank you Crabcakes and Clouseau for your very informative information

Comments  
Subject: Re: Neonatal Cystic Fibrosis Screening
From: clouseau-ga on 14 Aug 2005 08:59 PDT
 
Hello chaboobi and crabcakes,

I actually work in the industry by day with a software company that
does lab and follow-up for state newborn screening departments. The
reality is, each state does things very differently from one another.
There is little that is federally mandated and there is just the
beginnings of consensus being reached based on studies and suggestions
from the March of Dimes.

For just a few examples:

In the US, it is standard to do the heelstick after 24 hours past
birth. As you mention, in Australia it is 2-3 days. In the UK, it is
5-8 days and that may miss a few positives for CAH, for example, which
should really have intervention sooner than the test is done there.
But in the UK, the heelstick is performed after the baby leaves the
hospital. The US occurs much sooner. They wait 24 hours for the blood
to stabilize after separation from the mother. Some states will test
cord blood. Others only the heelstick. Some states test for as many as
44 disorders now using Tandem Mass Spectrometry, even though many have
no treatment. Some are still testing for between the common 4 and 9
tests using analyte testing only.

How quickly the provider and/or the parent is notified is soley up to
the individual state, the quality of their software and their
policies. Could occur within a few days of the heel stick, or they
could require up to 2 repeat tests before they feel that there is a
confirmed positive or confirmed trait. And then, the data is sent to a
Case Management division and their schedules are determined by their
own internal business rules.

And, the cutoff value for retesting varies state by state. I *believe*
it is closer to the top 5% rather than 1% you mention in Australia,
but being the weekend I am not sure and have no references handy.

I must confess, I deal more with the software and marketing than I do
with lab and follow-up rules and procedures. But I thought it might be
valuable for you to know that in the states, each state is autonomous
and there is no standardization just yet though things are moving in
that direction.

Regards,

-=clouseau=-
Subject: Re: Neonatal Cystic Fibrosis Screening
From: crabcakes-ga on 14 Aug 2005 21:05 PDT
 
Thank you Clouseau, for the very informative comment! I'm sure
Chabboobi will appreciate it, as do I!

Sincerely, Crabcakes

Important Disclaimer: Answers and comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Google does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. Please read carefully the Google Answers Terms of Service.

If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
Search Google Answers for
Google Answers  


Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy