Reviews and feature articleThe Wisconsin approach to newborn screening for severe combined immunodeficiency
Section snippets
Results of 3 years of NBS in Wisconsin
During the first 3 years of screening in Wisconsin, 207,696 infants were screened with the TREC assay.11 In total, 72 full-term infants (0.035%) had an abnormal TREC assay result (low TREC counts and normal β-actin levels) during the first 3 years of testing, which included 63 infants found to have abnormal results on initial testing and 9 infants reclassified as having abnormal results after repeat testing because of prematurity or low β-actin levels. Of the abnormal results, 38 infants had
The TREC assay in premature infants
Early in the implementation of the NBS program for SCID, it became apparent that the numbers of abnormal (ie, low TREC counts and normal β-actin levels) or inconclusive (ie, low TREC counts and low β-actin levels) TREC assay results were higher in premature infants (adjusted gestational age [AGA] ≤ 37 weeks) compared with those seen in full-term infants.9, 11 In 3 years of screening, 63 (0.03%) full-term infants were classified as having abnormal results, and 51 (0.025%) had inconclusive
Pitfalls and dilemmas
It is generally accepted that a diagnosis of SCID can be made with a T-cell count of less than 200 cells/μL and particularly with mitogenic responses of less than 10% of control values, even in the absence of a molecular cause. This definition, however, would have only applied to 2 infants detected in Wisconsin, highlighting that the TREC assay detects known and unknown causes of SCID/TCL. The infant with a de novo mutation in the RAC2 gene had relatively normal T-cell counts and T-cell
Anticipatory guidance of infants detected with SCID/TCL
With the inception of NBS for SCID, newborns with SCID/sTCL are being identified within the first few weeks of life, before the onset of illness or infections. We have developed a multidisciplinary program, with input from both the clinical immunology and bone marrow transplantation services, to manage infants with high suspicion for SCID/sTCL. Our primary goal is to prevent infections that could predispose infants to end-organ damage and transplant-related mortality. We have also developed
Where should patients be managed? The decision of inpatient versus outpatient care
Infants suspected of SCID but without infectious symptoms are cared for at home, and we use several guidelines to prevent infection (Table III). We also require that the infant live within 1 hour’s drive of our hospital or another appropriate hospital well versed in taking care of sick children from which transfer to our hospital would occur. Infants whose social surroundings, home surroundings, or both are worrisome for poor care, follow-up, or family’s lack of understanding of the prophylaxis
Prophylaxis of infectious disease and other management issues
The infectious diseases department is consulted, and all newborns with possible SCID undergo a panel of PCR tests to evaluate for viral disease (Table IV). If results of these PCR assays are negative, surveillance PCR assays are repeated monthly or bimonthly during the pretransplantation period. The frequency of PCR surveillance increases based on clinical suspicion of new infection (eg, fever or irritability) or if the initial PCR result is positive. Other laboratory studies (eg, lumbar
Conclusion
NBS for SCID/sTCL with the TREC assay is the first step in the early identification and treatment of SCID and other severe immunodeficiencies that present with TCL. Since the initiation of NBS for SCID/sTCL in 2008, there has been considerable progress in implementing nationwide screening. Outcomes to date have been extremely encouraging because all infants given a diagnosis of SCID/sTCL by means of existing NBS have been successfully treated and there have been no missed cases of SCID in the
References (17)
- et al.
Neonatal diagnosis of severe combined immunodeficiency leads to significantly improved survival outcome: the case for newborn screening
Blood
(2011) - et al.
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for severe combined immunodeficiency in the neonatal period leads to superior thymic output and improved survival
Blood
(2002) - et al.
Development of a routine newborn screening protocol for severe combined immunodeficiency
J Allergy Clin Immunol
(2009) - et al.
Development of population-based newborn screening for severe combined immunodeficiency
J Allergy Clin Immunol
(2005) - et al.
Making a definitive diagnosis: successful clinical application of whole exome sequencing in a child with intractable inflammatory bowel disease
Genet Med
(2011) - et al.
Primary immunodeficiency diseases: an update on the classification from the International Union of Immunological Societies Expert Committee for Primary Immunodeficiency
Front Immunol
(2012) - et al.
Principles and practice of screening for disease. World Health Organization
Public Health Papers
(1968) - et al.
Preferential rearrangements of the T cell receptor-delta-deleting elements in human T cells
J Immunol
(1997)
Cited by (83)
Screening Newborns for Low T Cell Receptor Excision Circles (TRECs) Fails to Detect Immunodeficiency, Centromeric Instability, and Facial Anomalies Syndrome
2023, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In PracticeAdvances and Challenges of the Decade: The Ever-Changing Clinical and Genetic Landscape of Immunodeficiency
2023, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In PracticeNatural history of infants with non-SCID T cell lymphopenia identified on newborn screen
2022, Clinical ImmunologyNewborn tandem mass spectroscopy screening for adenosine deaminase deficiency: First 2 years experience
2022, Annals of Allergy, Asthma and ImmunologyA Spot of Good News: Israeli Experience With SCID Newborn Screening
2022, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In PracticeLessons Learned From Five Years of Newborn Screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency in Israel
2022, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
Supported by the Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin, the Jeffrey Modell Foundation, the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U01 EH000365).
Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: J. Verbsky has received honoraria from Baxter, Illumina, and the Jeffrey Modell Foundation. M. Thakar declares that she has no relevant conflicts of interest. J. Routes has received research support from the National Institutes of Health.