Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 0: clinchem.2009.133819v1, 2009; 10.1373/clinchem.2009.133819
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Adam, B. W.
Right arrow Articles by Hannon, W. H.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Adam, B. W.
Right arrow Articles by Hannon, W. H.

Received on July 16, 2009
Accepted on September 28, 2009

Pediatric Clinical Chemistry

Preliminary Proficiency Testing Results for Succinylacetone in Dried Blood Spots for Newborn Screening for Tyrosinemia Type I

Barbara W. Adam 1*, Timothy H. Lim 1, Elizabeth M. Hall 2, W. Harry Hannon 1

1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Newborn Screening Quality Assurance Program, Atlanta, GA
2 Battelle Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation, Atlanta, GA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: bwa1{at}cdc.gov.

BACKGROUND: Succinylacetone (SUAC) is the primary metabolite accumulated in tyrosinemia type I—an inborn error of metabolism that, if untreated, can cause death from liver failure during the first months of life. Newborn screening laboratories measure SUAC in dried blood spot (DBS) samples to detect asymptomatic tyrosinemia type I. We used panels of SUAC-enriched DBSs to compare and evaluate the performance of these screening tests.

METHODS: We prepared sets of DBS materials enriched with predetermined SUAC concentrations and distributed samples of these materials, along with a screening practices questionnaire, to laboratories that perform SUAC tests. We compared their reported SUAC concentrations and questionnaire responses to identify screening practices that affect SUAC test outcomes.

RESULTS: Data from 2 pilot surveys showed large differences among laboratories in SUAC recoveries, reproducible within-laboratory recoveries, and stable performance of the DBS materials. Results from 257 proficiency test analyses contained a total of 6 false-negative misclassifications. Reported recoveries of added SUAC ranged from 0 to >200%. Low-biased SUAC recoveries were associated with 1 method used by 5 laboratories. All laboratories that reported SUAC recoveries ≥100% used DBS matrix calibrators.

CONCLUSIONS: The wide ranges of SUAC concentrations reported for pilot and proficiency testing specimens demonstrate a need to harmonize quantitative results among laboratories. Although DBS matrix calibrators are important for optimizing SUAC recoveries, the preparation of these calibrators is not standardized among laboratories. Certified DBS-based SUAC calibrators are needed for accuracy and harmonization.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2009 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.