Comparative evaluation of newborn bloodspot specimen cards by experienced laboratory personnel and by an optical scanning instrument.

A major factor in determining the suitability of a dried blood spot (DBS) specimen is the subjective nature of evaluation by laboratory personnel. Using newborn screening DBS specimen cards as they were submitted to a public health NBS program, we conducted a systematic pilot study of DBS evaluation by multiple experienced laboratory personnel (ELP) and by an automated optical scanning instrument (OSI) (CardScan (tm), BSD Robotics). OSI confirmed the satisfactory status of all newborn DBS specimen cards that passed initial review by the first ELP. Among the questionable cards selected for further review, 58% passed multiple ELP consensus assessment, and 62% passed OSI evaluation. The overall agreement between ELP and OSI was 86%. Among questionable specimen cards, ELP and OSI were more strongly correlated when multiple ELP assessment was unanimous. We conclude that subjective assessment by ELP is essential and that OSI evaluation is a useful adjunct when ELP assessment does not reach consensus. OSI further allows the selection of optimal locations for punching DBS from unsatisfactory or questionable specimens, optimizing the quality of interim analyses that may be conducted while repeat specimens are being collected. Instrument evaluation of specimen cards would also be valuable as an independent reference method for training laboratory and specimen collection personnel. OSI technology merits further studies to confirm and extend our findings.

Enhanced interpretation of newborn screening results without analyte cutoff values.

PURPOSE: To improve quality of newborn screening by tandem mass spectrometry with a novel approach made possible by the collaboration of 154 laboratories in 49 countries. METHODS: A database of 767,464 results from 12,721 cases affected with 60 conditions was used to build multivariate pattern recognition software that generates tools integrating multiple clinically significant results into a single score. This score is determined by the overlap between normal and disease ranges, penetration within the disease range, differences between conditions, and weighted correction factors. RESULTS: Ninety tools target either a single condition or the differential diagnosis between multiple conditions. Scores are expressed as the percentile rank among all cases with the same condition and are compared to interpretation guidelines. Retrospective evaluation of past cases suggests that these tools could have avoided at least half of 279 false-positive outcomes caused by carrier status for fatty-acid oxidation disorders and could have prevented 88% of known false-negative events. CONCLUSION: Application of this computational approach to raw data is independent from single analyte cutoff values. In Minnesota, the tools have been a major contributing factor to the sustained achievement of a false-positive rate below 0.1% and a positive predictive value above 60%.