» Articles » PMID: 23430863

Galactosemia Screening with Low False-positive Recall Rate: the Swedish Experience

Overview
Journal JIMD Rep
Publisher Wiley
Date 2013 Feb 23
PMID 23430863
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Newborn screening was implemented in the 1960s with screening for phenylketonuria (PKU). In the same decade, it became possible to screen for classical galactosemia, a rare autosomal recessive inherited disorder, which is potentially life threatening if not treated. While newborn screening for PKU has become almost universal, galactosemia is included only in a minority of European newborn screening programs. The major arguments why galactosemia is excluded from newborn screening programs are that the disease can be diagnosed clinically, there is a high rate of false positives and long-term complications are common despite early diagnosis.Here, we report how we have decreased the number of false-positive galactosemia recalls to less than 0.01%, using a two-tier test strategy. All samples are tested with the Beutler blood spot test, a method that measures galactose-1-phosphate uridyltransferase activity. Samples with less than ≤15% activity are tested for galactose with a galactose dehydrogenase test (the rapid GAL-DH test), which catalyzes the oxidation of galactose and the reduction of NAD(+) to NADH that is estimated visually by fluorescence under UV-light. Both tests are semiquantitative.With this strategy, screening for galactosemia is inexpensive, does not demand a heavy workload, and has a low false-positive re-call rate. The incidence of classical galactosemia in Sweden is 1/100,000, which is lower than the reported incidence in other European countries. Despite this, newborn screening for galactosemia has never been questioned. Concise sentence: Screening for galactosemia using well-established methods to reduce the false-positive rate.

Citing Articles

Biomarker discovery in galactosemia: Metabolomics with UPLC/HRMS in dried blood spots.

Alodaib A, Nimer R, Alhumaidy R, Alhenaky A, Abdel Jabar M, AlMalki R Front Mol Biosci. 2023; 10:1154149.

PMID: 37081853 PMC: 10110906. DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2023.1154149.


The risk of classical galactosaemia in newborns with borderline galactose metabolites on newborn screening.

Bernhardt I, Glamuzina E, Ryder B, Knoll D, Heather N, de Hora M JIMD Rep. 2023; 64(2):180-186.

PMID: 36873086 PMC: 9981414. DOI: 10.1002/jmd2.12339.


Galactose epimerase deficiency: lessons from the GalNet registry.

Derks B, Demirbas D, Arantes R, Banford S, Burlina A, Cabrera A Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022; 17(1):331.

PMID: 36056436 PMC: 9438182. DOI: 10.1186/s13023-022-02494-4.


Galactosemia: Biochemistry, Molecular Genetics, Newborn Screening, and Treatment.

Succoio M, Sacchettini R, Rossi A, Parenti G, Ruoppolo M Biomolecules. 2022; 12(7).

PMID: 35883524 PMC: 9313126. DOI: 10.3390/biom12070968.


Galactosemia: Towards Pharmacological Chaperones.

Banford S, McCorvie T, Pey A, Timson D J Pers Med. 2021; 11(2).

PMID: 33562227 PMC: 7914515. DOI: 10.3390/jpm11020106.


References
1.
Freer D, Ficicioglu C, Finegold D . Newborn screening for galactosemia: a review of 5 years of data and audit of a revised reporting approach. Clin Chem. 2010; 56(3):437-44. DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2009.135947. View

2.
Jeong J, Yoon H, Hong S . Development of a new diagnostic method for galactosemia by high-performance anion-exchange chromatography with pulsed amperometric detection. J Chromatogr A. 2006; 1140(1-2):157-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2006.11.085. View

3.
Coman D, Murray D, Byrne J, Rudd P, Bagaglia P, Doran P . Galactosemia, a single gene disorder with epigenetic consequences. Pediatr Res. 2009; 67(3):286-92. DOI: 10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181cbd542. View

4.
Waggoner D, Buist N, Donnell G . Long-term prognosis in galactosaemia: results of a survey of 350 cases. J Inherit Metab Dis. 1990; 13(6):802-18. DOI: 10.1007/BF01800204. View

5.
Guthrie R, Susi A . A SIMPLE PHENYLALANINE METHOD FOR DETECTING PHENYLKETONURIA IN LARGE POPULATIONS OF NEWBORN INFANTS. Pediatrics. 1963; 32:338-43. View