Prospective cohort study of genomic newborn screening: BabyScreen+ pilot study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is a highly successful public health programme that uses biochemical and other assays to screen for severe but treatable childhood-onset conditions. Introducing genomic sequencing into NBS programmes increases the range of detectable conditions but raises practical and ethical issues. Evidence from prospectively ascertained cohorts is required to guide policy and future implementation. This study aims to develop, implement and evaluate a genomic NBS (gNBS) pilot programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The BabyScreen+ study will pilot gNBS in three phases. In the preimplementation phase, study materials, including education resources, decision support and data collection tools, will be designed. Focus groups and key informant interviews will also be undertaken to inform delivery of the study and future gNBS programmes. During the implementation phase, we will prospectively recruit birth parents in Victoria, Australia, to screen 1000 newborns for over 600 severe, treatable, childhood-onset conditions. Clinically accredited whole genome sequencing will be performed following standard NBS using the same sample. High chance results will be returned by genetic healthcare professionals, with follow-on genetic and other confirmatory testing and referral to specialist services as required. The postimplementation phase will evaluate the feasibility of gNBS as the primary aim, and assess ethical, implementation, psychosocial and health economic factors to inform future service delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project received ethics approval from the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne Research Ethics Committee: HREC/91500/RCHM-2023, HREC/90929/RCHM-2022 and HREC/91392/RCHM-2022. Findings will be disseminated to policy-makers, and through peer-reviewed journals and conferences.

The LEAP checklist for laboratory evaluation and analytical performance characteristics reporting of clinical measurement procedures.

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers, and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners.

Quality assurance programs for vitamin A and E in serum: are we doing enough to assess laboratory performance?

OBJECTIVES: Monitoring serum vitamin A (retinol) and vitamin E (α-tocopherol) concentrations is common practice for assessing nutritional status. Measurement of these vitamins can be challenging due to several factors. Whilst the RCPAQAP Vitamins: Serum Program assists participating laboratories in harmonisation, the materials provided do not contain the analogues of retinol and α-tocopherol that may be present in real patient samples. We aimed to assess participants' capacity to accurately report retinol and α-tocopherol in the presence of the vitamin E analogues tocopherol acetate and γ-tocopherol. METHODS: A supplementary series of a control sample and three matched spiked samples were distributed to each laboratory participating in the Program. Retinol and α-tocopherol results for each spiked sample were compared to the results of the control sample submitted by each participant. Acceptability of retinol and α-tocopherol results was determined based on the RCPAQAP allowable performance specifications (APS). RESULTS: Thirteen participants returned results for the supplementary sample series. Interference from α-tocopherol acetate was observed with results below the APS in 30 % (n=4) of laboratories for retinol quantification and in 23 % (n=3) for α-tocopherol quantification. One laboratory returned results above the APS for α-tocopherol when γ-tocopherol was present. CONCLUSIONS: This supplementary sample series has shown that the presence of vitamin E analogues can lead to the over or under estimation of nutritional status by some participants. Affected laboratories are encouraged to review their analytical procedures. To further assess laboratory competence, EQA providers should consider using patient samples or spiked challenge samples.

The LEAP checklist for laboratory evaluation and analytical performance characteristics reporting of clinical measurement procedures.

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners.

Ensuring quality in 17OHP mass spectrometry measurement: an international study assessing isomeric steroid interference.

OBJECTIVES: Interference from isomeric steroids is a potential cause of disparity between mass spectrometry-based 17-hydroxyprogesterone (17OHP) results. We aimed to assess the proficiency of mass spectrometry laboratories to report 17OHP in the presence of known isomeric steroids. METHODS: A series of five samples were prepared using a previously demonstrated commutable approach. These samples included a control (spiked to 15.0 nmol/L 17OHP) and four challenge samples further enriched with equimolar concentrations of 17OHP isomers (11α-hydroxyprogesterone, 11ß-hydroxyprogesterone, 16α-hydroxyprogesterone or 21-hydroxyprogesterone). These samples were distributed to 38 participating laboratories that reported serum 17OHP results using mass spectrometry in two external quality assurance programs. The result for each challenge sample was compared to the control sample submitted by each participant. RESULTS: Twenty-six laboratories (68 % of distribution) across three continents returned results. Twenty-five laboratories used liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and one used gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to measure 17OHP. The all-method median of the control sample was 14.3 nmol/L, ranging from 12.4 to 17.6 nmol/L. One laboratory had results that approached the lower limit of tolerance (minus 17.7 % of the control sample), suggesting the isomeric steroid caused an irregular result. CONCLUSIONS: Most participating laboratories demonstrated their ability to reliably measure 17OHP in the presence of the four clinically relevant isomeric steroids. The performance of the 12 (32 %) laboratories that did not engage in this activity remains unclear. We recommend that all laboratories offering LC-MS/MS analysis of 17OHP in serum, plasma, or dried bloodspots determine that the isomeric steroids are appropriately separated.

Best Practice for Identification of Classical 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency Should Include 21 Deoxycortisol Analysis with Appropriate Isomeric Steroid Separation.

There are mixed reports on the inclusion and use of 21 deoxycortisol (21DF) as the primary decision marker for classical 21-hydroxylase deficiency. We hypothesize that this may be due to insufficient recognition of the presence and chromatographic separation of isomeric steroids. The aim of this study was to determine the comparative utility of 21DF for screening and diagnosis of CAH due to classical 21-hydroxylase deficiency using a second-tier LC-MS/MS method that included the separation of isomeric steroids to 17OHP and 21DF. For each baby sample, one 3.2 mm dried blood spot was eluted in a methanolic solution containing isotopically matched internal standards. Data were interrogated by univariate and receiver operator characteristic analysis. Steroid profile results were generated for 924 non-CAH baby samples (median gestational age 37 weeks, range 22 to 43 weeks) and 17 babies with 21-hydroxylase deficiency. The ROC curves demonstrated 21DF to have the best sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of classical 21-hydroxylase deficiency with an AUC = 1.0. The heatmap showed the very strong correlation (r = 0.83) between 17OHP and 21DF. Our data support 21DF as a robust marker for CAH due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency. We recommend that 21DF be incorporated into routine newborn screening panels as part of the second-tier LC-MS/MS method, follow-up plasma steroid panels, and external quality assurance material.

The LEAP checklist for Laboratory Evaluation and Analytical Performance characteristics reporting of clinical measurement procedures.

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers, and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners.

The LEAP checklist for laboratory evaluation and analytical performance characteristics reporting of clinical measurement procedures.

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers, and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the Laboratory Evaluation and Analytical Performance Characteristics (LEAP) checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners.

The LEAP checklist for Laboratory Evaluation and Analytical Performance Characteristics reporting of clinical measurement procedures.

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers, and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript.The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners.

The LEAP checklist for laboratory evaluation and analytical performance characteristics reporting of clinical measurement procedures.

Reporting a measurement procedure and its analytical performance following method evaluation in a peer-reviewed journal is an important means for clinical laboratory practitioners to share their findings. It also represents an important source of evidence base to help others make informed decisions about their practice. At present, there are significant variations in the information reported in laboratory medicine journal publications describing the analytical performance of measurement procedures. These variations also challenge authors, readers, reviewers, and editors in deciding the quality of a submitted manuscript. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Method Evaluation Protocols (IFCC WG-MEP) developed a checklist and recommends its adoption to enable a consistent approach to reporting method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics of measurement procedures in laboratory medicine journals. It is envisioned that the LEAP checklist will improve the standardisation of journal publications describing method evaluation and analytical performance characteristics, improving the quality of the evidence base that is relied upon by practitioners.

Method evaluation in the clinical laboratory.

Method evaluation is one of the critical components of the quality system that ensures the ongoing quality of a clinical laboratory. As part of implementing new methods or reviewing best practices, the peer-reviewed published literature is often searched for guidance. From the outset, Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) has a rich history of publishing methods relevant to clinical laboratory medicine. An insight into submissions, from editors' and reviewers' experiences, shows that authors still struggle with method evaluation, particularly the appropriate requirements for validation in clinical laboratory medicine. Here, we consider through a series of discussion points an overview of the status, challenges, and needs of method evaluation from the perspective of clinical laboratory medicine. We identify six key high-level aspects of clinical laboratory method evaluation that potentially lead to inconsistency. 1. Standardisation of terminology, 2. Selection of analytical performance specifications, 3. Experimental design of method evaluation, 4. Sample requirements of method evaluation, 5. Statistical assessment and interpretation of method evaluation data, and 6. Reporting of method evaluation data. Each of these areas requires considerable work to harmonise the practice of method evaluation in laboratory medicine, including more empirical studies to be incorporated into guidance documents that are relevant to clinical laboratories and are freely and widely available. To further close the loop, educational activities and fostering professional collaborations are essential to promote and improve the practice of method evaluation procedures.

Emerging technology: a definition for laboratory medicine.

The term "emerging technology" (ET) is used extensively, and there are numerous definitions offered, but to our knowledge, none specifically encompass the field of laboratory medicine. An ET definition that incorporates the overarching IFCC aim of "Advancing excellence in laboratory medicine to support healthcare worldwide" would clarify discussions. We discuss key aspects of the term "emerging technology(ies)" as it applies to laboratory medicine with a view to laying the foundations for a practical definition for the profession and propose the definition of an ET as "An analytical method or device that by virtue of its stage of development, translation into broad routine clinical practice, or geographical adoption and implementation has the potential to add value to clinical diagnostics".

Impact of COVID-19 on Pediatric Laboratory Medicine: An IFCC C-ETPLM, SSIEM, ISNS Global Survey.

Objective: Pediatric laboratory medicine is a unique practice serving a vulnerable group of patients including highly specialized testing aiming to detect and treat inherited conditions early to avoid adverse outcomes. Data on the actual impact of COVID-19 pandemic on this speciality is lacking. Methods: A survey was conducted by the IFCC Committee on Emerging Technologies in Pediatric Laboratory Medicine in partnership with the Society for the Study of Inborn Errors of Metabolism and International Society for Neonatal Screening, to assess the impact on the clinical service provision during the initial wave (January to July 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic and to gather experiences learned in order to improve laboratory preparedness for future outbreaks. Results: 217 survey responses were received from 69 regions. Sixty-three laboratories (29%) reported a restriction or suspension of service for a median period of four months. The common tests/ services suspended were new-born screening program, body fluids and sweat testing. The reasons for the suspension were related to bio-safety risks of COVID-19 transmission, manpower constraints and supplies disruption. A minority (9-10%) of laboratories did observe delayed/missed diagnoses or a more severe presentation of a clinical disorder. The critical operational decisions that helped manage the initial wave of COVID-19 included modifying work shift patterns, split-teams arrangement, use of personal protection equipment and social distancing. Conclusion: The provision and delivery of pediatric laboratories services were affected during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Manpower preparedness for future potential disruptions to pediatric laboratory services is a key finding and recommendation from this survey.

Multi-omics analysis from archival neonatal dried blood spots: limitations and opportunities.

Newborn screening (NBS) programs operate in many countries, processing millions of dried bloodspot (DBS) samples annually. In addition to early identification of various adverse health outcomes, these samples have considerable potential as a resource for population-based research that could address key questions related to child health. The feasibility of archival DBS samples for emerging targeted and untargeted multi-omics analysis has not been previously explored in the literature. This review aims to critically evaluate the latest advances to identify opportunities and challenges of applying omics analyses to NBS cards in a research setting. Medline, Embase and PubMed databases were searched to identify studies utilizing DBS for genomic, proteomic and metabolomic assays. A total of 800 records were identified after removing duplicates, of which 23 records were included in this review. These papers consisted of one combined genomic/metabolomic, four genomic, three epigenomic, four proteomic and 11 metabolomic studies. Together they demonstrate that the increasing sensitivity of multi-omic analytical techniques makes the broad use of NBS samples achievable for large cohort studies. Maintaining the pre-analytical integrity of the DBS sample through storage at temperatures below -20 °C will enable this important resource to be fully realized in a research capacity.

Validation of steroid ratios for random urine by mass spectrometry to detect 5α-reductase deficiency in Vietnamese children.

OBJECTIVES: The 5α-reductase-type-2 deficiency (5ARD2) is a rare autosomal recessive 46,XY disorder of sex development caused by the mutated 5α-reductase type 2 (SRD5A2) gene. In this disease, defective conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone leads to variable presentations of male ambiguous genitalia during fetal development. We aimed to examine characteristics of patients presenting with 5ARD2 over a 4 year period. METHODS: Random urine samples of control and patients with suspected 5ARD2 were collected and urine steroidomic metabolites were measured by Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in the period from 2017 to 2021 at National Children's Hospital, Hanoi Vietnam. 5α- to 5ß-reduced steroid metabolite ratio, 5a-tetrahydrocortisol to tetrahydrocortisol (5α-THF/THF), was reviewed by receive operator characteristics (ROC) curve analysis. Molecular testing was offered to 25 patients who were diagnosed with 5ARD2 by GC-MS urinary steroid analysis. RESULTS: Urine steroidomic profiling was conducted for 104 male controls and 25 patients between the ages of 6 months and 13 years old. Twelve of the twenty-five 5ARD2 patients agreed to undertake genetic analysis, and two mutations of the SRD5A2 gene were detected in each patient, confirming the diagnosis. All patients showed a characteristically low ratio of 5α-THF/THF. There was no overlap of 5α-THF/THF ratio values between control and 5ARD2 groups. The ROC of 5α-THF/THF ratio at 0.19 showed 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for boys between 6 months and 13 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the urine steroid metabolome by GC-MS can be used to assist in the diagnosis of 5ARD2. We recommend consideration of random urine steroid analysis as a first-line test in the diagnosis of 5ARD2.