WISENET Logo

 
                       | Issue 60 Contents |


The "New" Newborn Screening and the Tyranny of the Randomised Controlled Trial

Bridgit Wilcken

Newborn screening tests detect babies who need treatment for rare diseases. Because the diseases ARE very rare, it is very difficult to evaluate the effects of early diagnosis and treatment by the currently accepted standard of the randomised controlled trial and lesser evidence often needs to be gathered. It is hard to get this evidence accepted by the scientific community.

Newborn screening tests
    The aim of performing biochemical tests in newborns is to detect treatable diseases before the adverse effects occur. Newborn screening was started in the 1960’s with a simple robust test for phenylketonuria (PKU), a metabolic disorder which causes severe mental retardation unless diet treatment is started in the first few weeks of life. The test was developed by an American microbiologist, Dr Bob Guthrie, and was conducted then using a bacterial inhibition assay, on a blood sample dried on filter paper. The use of a dried blood sample made mass testing possible, cheaply, at a central laboratory. This was a dramatic step in preventive medicine. For the first time, a disease that caused severe mental retardation could be completely controlled. Our PKU patients can now lead normal lives by following a low-phenylalanine diet. The next important step in newborn screening was in the 1970’s with the introduction of a test for hypothyroidism (cretinism), a hormone deficiency that also leads to mental retardation if it is diagnosed too late. Several other disorders where there is a benefit from early treatment can be detected by newborn screening, but each needs a separate test, and this is time consuming and expensive. In New South Wales before 1998 we only tested for 4 disorders, PKU, hypothyroidism, cystic fibrosis, and galactosaemia. Testing for the even rarer disorders couldn’t easily be justified. That is, until the advent of electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS), which was suitable for the fast through-put needed to test hundreds of babies per day.
 

The new development, tandem mass spectrometry
   
MS/MS, by scanning groups of structurally related compounds simultaneously and sorting by mass, offers the possibility of broad-spectrum screening which will detect a large number of disorders by a single test. So testing can be offered for disorders that, because of their extreme rarity, would not easily qualify for inclusion if a separate test were needed. At present we measure selected amino acids and acylcarnitines.

An example of finding a very rare disorder before harm is done
   
In 1991 a 16-month-old boy was seen for the first time with heart failure. He was thoroughly investigated, and several tests were done to find the cause. Before a crucial test result came back he died suddenly and unexpectedly. He was found to have had a very rare disorder, carnitine transporter defect, (only then described in a handful of cases world-wide) and was the first patient in Australia identified with this disorder. Carnitine is an important component of the normal diet, and is also produced endogenously. It is necessary for the transport of long-chain fats into the mitochondrion, to be used in energy production. Babies and children with this disorder have defective carnitine absorption in the intestine, and also lose a lot in the urine. As a result they have very low blood and tissue levels of carnitine, and this interferes with how they can use fat for energy. The disorder most commonly causes a cardiomyopathy (poor heart muscle function), and leads to heart failure and, if not treated, death.

In 1999, Baby Douglas had a newborn screening blood test, just as all other babies have done for over 30 years. But Douglas’s test was performed in the new way by tandem mass spectrometry. He was found to have a very low level of carnitine in the blood, and he too has the carnitine transporter defect. But things will be very different for Douglas. From the age of three weeks he was treated with extra carnitine which he takes as a pleasant tasting liquid. This will successfully treat the disorder and keep him healthy. He is one of a number of babies to have benefited already from the exciting new technology.

Newborn screening by tandem mass spectrometry.
   
For all of New South Wales (NSW) and the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), newborn screening is conducted at one central laboratory at the Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney. Similar centralised laboratory services in Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth cover the rest of Australia. In late 1997 at the Children’s Hospital Westmead, we were able to purchase a tandem mass spectrometer for the New South Wales Newborn Screening Programme. Tandem mass spectrometry is a “great leap forward” for newborn screening. It enormously expands the number of disorders that can be detected. At present we analyse a range of amino acids and acylcarnitines in one dried blood spot, containing 3 microlitres of blood (much less than a single drop), the test taking a little over 2 minutes per sample. Apart from PKU, (which is now tested for with the new technology) we can detect about 20 other disorders of amino acid and organic acid metabolism, and 10 or more disorders of fatty acid oxidation. As our screening programme tests all the babies born in NSW and ACT, over 90,000 babies each year. This means that almost 400 babies are tested every working day. In fact, the testing process runs overnight and takes over 14 hours to complete. In the first 4 years of MS/MS testing in NSW we have detected over 50 babies with rare treatable disorders, (in addition to the approximately 280 detected with the less rare disorders previously tested for). South Australia started this screening in 1999, and Victoria in 2002.

How can we evaluate newborn screening tests?
   
A randomised controlled trial is a powerful tool for investigating the merits of an intervention. Subjects are randomly assigned to receive the intervention under investigation (in this case it would be a completed newborn screening test) or to receive standard medical care (in this case, no completed test). When drug treatments are compared, usually the trial is “blind” , that is, neither the investigator nor the patient knows who has been assigned to which group. The end-points need to be defined: cure of an existing condition, reduction in deaths or defined complications, or some other predetermined outcome measure.  Importantly, there need to be enough subjects for the differences in outcome to reach statistical significance – and therein lies the problem for assessing the effects of newborn screening tests. Because the disorders are rare, literally millions of babies may need to be tested for there to be enough affected babies to be statistically useful in assessing outcomes. The disorders sought before MS/MS came were indeed rare. PKU occurs in NSW in 1:10,000 babies. The commonest disorder sought is cystic fibrosis, occurring in about 1:2,500 babies. These disorders can be sought by mass screening because the tests are relatively cheap. Of all newborn screening throughout the world, only for cystic fibrosis has a randomised trial been carried out, in Wisconsin and in the UK, and although the trial protocols were approved by ethics committees, in the US a family is suing because of delayed diagnosis for their child, who was randomised not to receive a completed screening test.

Anything less than a randomised controlled trial is often considered scientifically quite doubtful, because the control group will not be strictly comparable to the test group. We will have a big problem in assessing the benefits and harms of the new MS/MS testing. The individual disorders we can detect are extremely rare, and few have a birth prevalence more than 1: 100,000. Nevertheless, we have planned an Australia wide study, using as controls either babies born in the same time-frame but in different states, or babies born in the same state, but before the new screening began. In this way we hope to get enough evidence to be sure of the benefits and disadvantages of this exciting new development in newborn screening.

Bridget Wilcken is Associate Professor and Director, NSW Biochemical Genetics and Newborn Screening Services, New Children's Hospital, Westmead.
 


| Issue 60 Contents |