This paper explores the appropriate COVs and determines their validity (sensitivity and specificity). These results further highlight a significant increase in the accuracy of the proposed COVs as an alternative to the current cut-off. Herein, we introduced a new protocol for NBS screening. A review of all cases with TGAL ≥ 4 mg/dL provides the following observations: Based on either DNA or clinical confirmation, CG was confirmed in 169 neonates, with 160 true positive cases and nine false negative results. The TGAL level appears to be a reliable predictor for distinguishing individuals with CG. Our ROC analysis revealed a sensitivity of 88.8% and a specificity of 49.2% for the current cut-off (TGAL ≥ 4 mg/dL), with a positive predictive value of 2.32. The low specificity of the 4 mg/dL COV has cost implications due to the high recall rate.
To minimize high false positive rates, the cut-off is constantly adjusted to improve specificity without compromising sensitivity. Similarly, Freer et al. proposed a TGAL COV of 30 mg/dL for urgent reporting, based on assessing the combination of TGAL levels and GALT activity (
14). However, highly specialized instruments are usually required for these techniques. Additionally, quantifying GALT activity involves complicated sample processing, which is influenced by high temperature, humidity, and the duration between sampling and testing. Furthermore, Porta et al. (
30) established a COV of 10 mg/dL in a population of 1,123,909 patients, resulting in 8,991 recalls and 33 abnormal results, indicating a high rate of false positives in the program. Similarly, Fujimoto et al. (
17) proposed a COV of 7 mg/dL, incorporating enzyme extraction and reaction in their screening program. They also recommended measuring GALT activity as a second-tier test to help distinguish between various forms of galactosemia. This method is not simple or practical, as it requires a Technicon auto analyzer with a special fluorometer. However, these efforts must be feasible and financially accountable for NBS programs.
The primary goal of NBS is to proactively detect disorders and implement a tailored management strategy before symptoms manifest, thereby minimizing potential harm. With a COV of TGAL ≥ 5.2 mg/dL, the screening achieves a conservative approach with 80.0% sensitivity, 81.3% specificity, and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 8.54%. This threshold effectively reduces false positives and recalls compared to the current COV of 4 mg/dL. While the latter is effective at excluding most cases without oversight, the former strikes a balance by enhancing detection accuracy for GALT-deficient neonates. Moreover, the COV of TGAL ≥ 5.2 mg/dL, compared to the COV of 7.35 mg/dL, prevents a higher number of false negative cases. Following a positive NBS test, the newborn is referred to a specialized clinical center where their clinical features are evaluated. Diagnostic confirmation is then performed through biochemical and molecular methods.
In our study, it was found that the vast majority (96.7%) of individuals who tested positive for galactosemia in the screening were not deficient in GALT. Therefore, we developed a flow diagram to reflect our suggested COVs (
Figure 4). A unique COV of 7.35 mg/dL for TGAL, with the highest cumulative sensitivity of 71.3% and specificity of 95.7%, along with a relative PPV of 27.94%, was identified as the optimal COV. Our proposed revisions to clinical protocols suggest that patients with a TGAL level of 7.35 mg/dL or higher, demonstrating a specificity of 95.7%, should be classified as candidates for urgent calls. These patients should be promptly referred to a galactosemia treatment center for full dietary restriction and appropriate confirmatory testing. We propose that a TGAL value < 5.2 mg/dL can be considered a negative screening result, and a TGAL value between 5.2 mg/dL and 7.35 mg/dL should be reported as inconclusive, requiring a repeat screening test as soon as possible.
Flow diagram for newborn screening for classical galactosemia with a total blood galactose (TGAL) cut-off value ≥ 5.2 mg/dL for reporting probable GALT-deficient galactosemia, and a TGAL cut-off ≥ 7.35 mg/dL for urgent referral to a treatment center.
One of the key principles of our proposed screening is the reduction of the false positive rate, which would be cost-effective and outweigh the psychological harm caused by the test. A study assessing the cost-effectiveness of including galactosemia in the NBS program in Shiraz stated that the financial burden of galactosemia was reduced by two-thirds through the introduction of neonatal screening for galactosemia (
10). It is also important to note that the anxiety experienced by parents or relatives of screen-positive newborns until the confirmation of results is primarily derived from false positives. In light of the current findings, we believe that increasing the TGAL cut-off to 5.2 ≤ TGAL (mg/dL) < 7.35 could reduce false positives to acceptable levels.
Our study has some limitations. Notably, not all reported cases of galactosemia were confirmed with DNA exome sequencing due to significant financial constraints. Additionally, the original data collection commenced in 2006, which led to incomplete access to patients' documents for follow-up laboratory data assessment. Further studies are essential to evaluate the efficacy of the suggested policy for NBS in reducing false positives. It is important to note that given the constraints on available resources, we employed this method to ensure the feasibility and integrity of our research. Future screening methods should focus on being well-established, inexpensive, and not demand a heavy workload.
5.1. Conclusions
In conclusion, our study indicated the prevalence of CG to be 1: 10,000 in neonates. We identified a TGAL level of 5.2 mg/dL as a conservative cut-off for CG screening, demonstrating excellent sensitivity and ensuring specificity for recalling suspicious cases. Additionally, a cut-off of 7.35 mg/dL was proposed for cases requiring urgent treatment. This represents the cut-off point at which the combination of sensitivity and specificity is maximal, making it the "optimal" cut-off point. The accuracy of the proposed COVs is substantially higher than the current cut-off. Implementing an appropriate cut-off value not only saves money and time but also reduces stress on an already overburdened system. Further clinical studies and practical application are necessary to support our findings.