Pancreatitis-Associated Protein in Neonatal Screening for Cystic Fibrosis: Strengths and Weaknesses

Overview

Journal Int J Neonatal Screen

Date 2020 Oct 19

PMID 33073025

Citations 6

Authors

Olaf Sommerburg

Jutta Hammermann

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

There are currently four countries and one local region in Europe that use PAP in their newborn screening programme. The first country to employ PAP at a national level was the Netherlands, which started using IRT/PAP/DNA/EGA in 2011. Germany followed in 2016 with a slightly different IRT/PAP/DNA strategy. Portugal also started in 2016, but with an IRT/PAP/IRT programme, and in 2017, Austria changed its IRT/IRT protocol to an IRT/PAP/IRT program. In 2018, Catalonia started to use an IRT/PAP/IRT/DNA strategy. The strengths of PAP are the avoidance of carrier detection and a lower detection rate of CFSPID. PAP seems to have advantages in detecting CF in ethnically-diverse populations, as it is a biochemical approach to screening, which looks for pancreatic injury. Compared to an IRT/IRT protocol, an IRT/PAP protocol leads to earlier diagnoses. While PAP can be assessed with the same screening card as the first IRT, the second IRT in an IRT/IRT protocol requires a second heel prick around the 21st day of the patient's life. However, IRT/PAP has two main weaknesses. First, an IRT/PAP protocol seems to have a lower sensitivity compared to a well-functioning IRT/DNA protocol, and second, IRT/PAP that is performed as a purely biochemical protocol has a very low positive predictive value. However, if the advantages of PAP are to be exploited, a combination of IRT/PAP with genetic screening or a second IRT as a third tier could be an alternative for a sufficiently performing CF-NBS protocol.

Citing Articles

Newborn Screening Program for Cystic Fibrosis in Türkiye: Experiences from False-Negative Tests and Requirement for Optimization.

Coksuer F, Kartal Ozturk G, Duman Senol H, Barlik M, Ozaslan M, Girgin Dindar B Balkan Med J. 2024; 42(1):45-53.

PMID: 39574132 PMC: 11725669. DOI: 10.4274/balkanmedj.galenos.2024.2024-7-144.

Four-year evaluation of neonatal cystic fibrosis screening in Southern Belgium.

Thimmesch M, Berardis S, Hanssens L, Quentin C, Boemer F, Luis G Eur J Pediatr. 2024; 184(1):38.

PMID: 39570414 DOI: 10.1007/s00431-024-05845-4.

IRT/IRT as a newborn cystic fibrosis screening method: optimal cutoff points for a mixed population.

Godoy C, Brito P, Amorim T, Souza E, Boa-Sorte N Cad Saude Publica. 2024; 40(7):e00150623.

PMID: 39194088 PMC: 11349280. DOI: 10.1590/0102-311XEN150623.

Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023).

Therrell B, Padilla C, Borrajo G, Khneisser I, Schielen P, Knight-Madden J Int J Neonatal Screen. 2024; 10(2).

PMID: 38920845 PMC: 11203842. DOI: 10.3390/ijns10020038.

Neonatal Screening for Cystic Fibrosis in Hungary-First-Year Experiences.

Xue A, Lenart I, Kincs J, Szabo H, Parniczky A, Balogh I Int J Neonatal Screen. 2023; 9(3).

PMID: 37754773 PMC: 10531581. DOI: 10.3390/ijns9030047.

References

Castellani C, Southern K, Brownlee K, Dankert Roelse J, Duff A, Farrell M . European best practice guidelines for cystic fibrosis neonatal screening. J Cyst Fibros. 2009; 8(3):153-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2009.01.004. View

Lundman E, Gaup H, Bakkeheim E, Olafsdottir E, Rootwelt T, Storrosten O . Implementation of newborn screening for cystic fibrosis in Norway. Results from the first three years. J Cyst Fibros. 2016; 15(3):318-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2015.12.017. View

Vernooij-van Langen A, Loeber J, Elvers B, Triepels R, Gille J, van der Ploeg C . Novel strategies in newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: a prospective controlled study. Thorax. 2012; 67(4):289-95. DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2011-200730. View

Iovanna J, Keim V, Nordback I, Montalto G, Camarena J, Letoublon C . Serum levels of pancreatitis-associated protein as indicators of the course of acute pancreatitis. Multicentric Study Group on Acute Pancreatitis. Gastroenterology. 1994; 106(3):728-34. DOI: 10.1016/0016-5085(94)90708-0. View

Sontag M, Lee R, Wright D, Freedenberg D, Sagel S . Improving the Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value in a Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening Program Using a Repeat Immunoreactive Trypsinogen and Genetic Analysis. J Pediatr. 2016; 175:150-158.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.03.046. View

Calvin J, Hogg S, McShane D, McAuley S, Iles R, Ross-Russell R . Thirty-years of screening for cystic fibrosis in East Anglia. Arch Dis Child. 2012; 97(12):1043-7. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2012-301968. View

Sommerburg O, Lindner M, Muckenthaler M, Kohlmueller D, Leible S, Feneberg R . Initial evaluation of a biochemical cystic fibrosis newborn screening by sequential analysis of immunoreactive trypsinogen and pancreatitis-associated protein (IRT/PAP) as a strategy that does not involve DNA testing in a Northern European population. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2010; 33(Suppl 2):S263-71. DOI: 10.1007/s10545-010-9174-7. View

Wilcken B, Wiley V . Newborn screening methods for cystic fibrosis. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2003; 4(4):272-7. DOI: 10.1016/s1526-0542(03)00084-8. View

Barthellemy S, Maurin N, Roussey M, Ferec C, Murolo S, Berthezene P . [Evaluation of 47,213 infants in neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis, using pancreatitis-associated protein and immunoreactive trypsinogen assays]. Arch Pediatr. 2001; 8(3):275-81. DOI: 10.1016/s0929-693x(00)00194-9. View

10.

Sommerburg O, Stahl M, Hammermann J, Okun J, Kulozik A, Hoffmann G . [Newborn Screening on Cystic Fibrosis in Germany: Comparison of the new Screening Protocol with an Alternative Protocol]. Klin Padiatr. 2017; 229(2):59-66. DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-124187. View

11.

Skov M, Baekvad-Hansen M, Hougaard D, Skogstrand K, Lund A, Pressler T . Cystic fibrosis newborn screening in Denmark: Experience from the first 2 years. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2019; 55(2):549-555. DOI: 10.1002/ppul.24564. View

12.

Terlizzi V, Mergni G, Buzzetti R, Centrone C, Zavataro L, Braggion C . Cystic fibrosis screen positive inconclusive diagnosis (CFSPID): Experience in Tuscany, Italy. J Cyst Fibros. 2019; 18(4):484-490. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2019.04.002. View

13.

Marcao A, Barreto C, Pereira L, Vaz L, Cavaco J, Casimiro A . Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening in Portugal: PAP Value in Populations with Stringent Rules for Genetic Studies. Int J Neonatal Screen. 2020; 4(3):22. PMC: 7548908. DOI: 10.3390/ijns4030022. View

14.

Kharrazi M, Yang J, Bishop T, Lessing S, Young S, Graham S . Newborn Screening for Cystic Fibrosis in California. Pediatrics. 2015; 136(6):1062-72. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2015-0811. View

15.

Iovanna J, Ferec C, Sarles J, Dagorn J . The pancreatitis-associated protein (PAP). A new candidate for neonatal screening of cystic fibrosis. C R Acad Sci III. 1994; 317(6):561-4. View

16.

Sarles J, Berthezene P, Le Louarn C, Somma C, Perini J, Catheline M . Combining immunoreactive trypsinogen and pancreatitis-associated protein assays, a method of newborn screening for cystic fibrosis that avoids DNA analysis. J Pediatr. 2005; 147(3):302-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2005.05.017. View

17.

Krulisova V, Balascakova M, Skalicka V, Piskackova T, Holubova A, Paderova J . Prospective and parallel assessments of cystic fibrosis newborn screening protocols in the Czech Republic: IRT/DNA/IRT versus IRT/PAP and IRT/PAP/DNA. Eur J Pediatr. 2012; 171(8):1223-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00431-012-1747-z. View

18.

Weidler S, Stopsack K, Hammermann J, Sommerburg O, Mall M, Hoffmann G . A product of immunoreactive trypsinogen and pancreatitis-associated protein as second-tier strategy in cystic fibrosis newborn screening. J Cyst Fibros. 2016; 15(6):752-758. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2016.07.002. View

19.

Sarles J, Barthellemy S, Ferec C, Iovanna J, Roussey M, Farriaux J . Blood concentrations of pancreatitis associated protein in neonates: relevance to neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1999; 80(2):F118-22. PMC: 1720905. DOI: 10.1136/fn.80.2.f118. View

20.

Castellani C, Duff A, Bell S, Heijerman H, Munck A, Ratjen F . ECFS best practice guidelines: the 2018 revision. J Cyst Fibros. 2018; 17(2):153-178. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2018.02.006. View