ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2023
Evaluation of specificity and sensitivity of IRT/IRT protocol in the cystic fibrosis newborn screening program: 6-year experience of three tertiary centers.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Newborn Screening Program for Cystic Fibrosis in Türkiye: Experiences from False-Negative Tests and Requirement for OptimizationBalkan medical journal · 2025Article
- Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023).International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Review
- IRT/IRT as a newborn cystic fibrosis screening method: optimal cutoff points for a mixed population.Cadernos de saude publica · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate cutoff values of immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT)/IRT and determine relationship between IRT values and clinical characteristics of children with cystic fibrosis (CF). This study is cross-sectional study. Data of children with positive newborn screening (NBS) between 2015 and 2021 were evaluated in three pediatric pulmonology centers. Age at admission, sex, gestational age, presence of history of meconium ileus, parental consanguinity, sibling with CF, and doll-like face appearance, first and second IRT values, sweat chloride test, fecal elastase, fecal fat, biochemistry results, and age at CF diagnosis were recorded. Sensitivity and specificity of IRT cutoff values were evaluated. Of 815 children with positive NBS, 58 (7.1%) children were diagnosed with CF. Median values of first and second IRT were 157.2 (103.7-247.6) and 113.0 (84.0-201.5) μg/L. IRT values used in current protocol, sensitivity was determined as 96.6%, specificity as 17.2% for first IRT, and 96.6% sensitivity, 20.5% specificity for second IRT. Positive predictive value (PPV) was determined as 7.1%. When cutoff value for first IRT was estimated as 116.7 μg/L, sensitivity was 69.0% and specificity was 69.6%, and when cutoff value was set to 88.7 μg/L for second IRT, sensitivity was 69.0% and specificity was 69.0%. Area under curve was 0.757 for first and 0.763 for second IRT (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). PPV was calculated as 4.3%. Conclusion: Although sensitivity of CF NBS is high in our country, its PPV is significantly lower than expected from CF NBS programs. False-positive NBS results could have been overcome by revising NBS strategy. What is Known: • Although immunoreactive trypsinogen elevation is a sensitive test used in cystic fibrosis newborn screening, its specificity is low. • In countries although different algorithms are used, all strategies begin with the measurement of immunoreactive trypsinogen in dried blood spots. What is New: • In our study, it was shown that use of the IRT/IRT protocol for cystic fibrosis newborn screening is not sufficient for the cut-off values determined by the high number of patients. • Newborn screening strategy should be reviewed to reduce false positive newborn screening results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.