Why cystic fibrosis newborn screening programs have failed to meet original expectations… thus far

Abstract

This Commentary summarizes what the author has learned in 46 years of research on newborn screening (NBS) for cystic fibrosis (CF) combined with healthcare and public health practice. The original expectation was that screening for this relatively common, life-threatening genetic disorder would lead to consistently timely diagnoses in the neonatal period and be equitable. Unfortunately, this ambitious goal has not been achieved in the USA despite the availability of an excellent, although imperfect, 2-tiered screening test employing immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT) and DNA analysis for pathogenic variants in the gene that encodes the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR). In fact, variations in the quality of NBS programs, inconsistencies in their operations, and disparities in outcomes have been prominent features. The causes include leadership challenges and deficiencies among both CF centers and NBS labs; failures to form effective partnerships among CF centers and with NBS programs; relatively rapid implementation after 2005 with variable quality planning; misunderstandings and erroneous dogma about CF; data limitations regarding IRT, especially cutoff values, and CFTR genetics; tolerance of suboptimal protocols and false negative results; problems in dried blood spot collections plus a lack of transparency and national oversight; partial lack of readiness, qualifications, funding and/or willingness to innovate with floating IRT cutoffs and DNA/CFTR analyses; follow up challenges/deficiencies impairing timeliness, including sweat testing limitations; and published guidelines that are more descriptive than sufficiently critical and directive. But the lessons learned through uniquely intensive CF NBS research have been enlightening and guided the U.S. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation to nationwide quality improvement initiatives.