The aim of this study was to observe the outcomes of newborn screening (NBS) in a certain population by using next-generation sequencing (NGS) as a first-tier screening test combined with tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS). We performed a multicenter study of 29,601 newborns from eight screening centers with NBS via NGS combined with MS/MS. A custom-designed panel targeting the coding region of the 142 genes of 128 inborn errors of metabolism (IEMs) was applied as a first-tier screening test, and expanded NBS using MS/MS was executed simultaneously. In total, 52 genes associated with the 38 IEMs screened by MS/MS were analyzed. The NBS performance of these two methods was analyzed and compared respectively. A total of 23 IEMs were diagnosed via NGS combined with MS/MS. The incidence of IEMs was approximately 1 in 1287. Within separate statistical analyses, the positive predictive value (PPV) for MS/MS was 5.29%, and the sensitivity was 91.3%. However, for genetic screening alone, the PPV for NGS was 70.83%, with 73.91% sensitivity. The three most common IEMs were methylmalonic academia (MMA), primary carnitine deficiency (PCD) and phenylketonuria (PKU). The five genes with the most common carrier frequencies were PAH (1:42), PRODH (1:51), MMACHC (1:52), SLC25A13 (1:55) and SLC22A5 (1:63). Our study showed that NBS combined with NGS and MS/MS improves the performance of screening methods, optimizes the process, and provides accurate diagnoses.

Background and aims Newborn screening (NBS) for glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency by biochemical tests is being used worldwide, however, the outcomes arising from combined genetic and biochemical tests have not been evaluated. This research aimed to evaluate the outcomes of application of combined genetic and biochemical NBS for G6PD deficiency and to investigate the molecular epidemiological characteristics, variant spectrum, and genotype-phenotype correlation of G6PD deficiency in China. Methods A population-based cohort of 29,601 newborns were prospectively recruited from eight NBS centers in China between February 21 and December 30, 2021. Biochemical and genetic NBS was conducted simultaneously. Results The overall prevalence of G6PD deficiency was 1.12% (1.86% for male, and 0.33% for female; 1.94% for South China and 0.08% for North China). Genetic NBS identified 10 male patients undetected by biochemical NBS. The overall positive predictive values (PPVs) of biochemical and genetic NBS were 79.95% and 47.57%, respectively. A total of 15 variants were identified, with the six most common variants being c.1388G > A, c.1376G > T, c.95A > G, c.871G > A, c.1024C > T and c.392G > T (94.2%). The activity of G6PD was correlated with the type and WHO classification of variants. Conclusion This study highlighted that combined screening could enhance the efficiency of current NBS for diagnosing G6PD deficiency. The prevalence, variant spectrum and allele frequency of G6PD deficiency vary across different regions. Our data provide valuable references for clinical practice and optimization of future screening strategies for G6PD deficiency.

IMPORTANCE Newborn screening via biochemical tests is in use worldwide. The availability of genetic sequencing has allowed rapid screening for a substantial number of monogenic disorders. However, the outcomes of this strategy have not been evaluated in a general newborn population. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the outcomes of applying gene panel sequencing as a first-tier newborn screening test.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study included newborns who were prospectively recruited from 8 screening centers in China between February 21 and December 31, 2021. Neonates with positive results were followed up before July 5, 2022. EXPOSURES All participants were concurrently screened using dried blood spots. The screen consisted of biochemical screening tests and a targeted gene panel sequencing test for 128 conditions. The biochemical and genomic tests could both detect 43 of the conditions, whereas the other 85 conditions were screened solely by the gene panel.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes were the number of patients detected by gene panel sequencing but undetected by the biochemical test.RESULTS This study prospectively recruited 29 601 newborns (15 357 [51.2%] male). The mean (SD) gestational age was 39.0 (1.5) weeks, and the mean (SD) birth weight was 3273 (457) g. The gene panel sequencing screened 813 infants (2.7%; 95% CI, 2.6%-2.9%) as positive. By the date of follow-up, 402 infants (1.4%; 95% CI, 1.2%-1.5%) had been diagnosed, indicating the positive predictive value was 50.4% (95% CI, 50.0%-53.9%). The gene panel sequencing identified 59 patients undetected by biochemical tests, including 20 patients affected by biochemically and genetically screened disorders and 39 patients affected by solely genetically screened disorders, which translates into 1 out of every 500 newborns (95% CI, v385-v625) benefiting from the implementation of gene panels as a first-tier screening test.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, the use of gene panel sequencing in a general newborn population as a first-tier screening test improved the detection capability of traditional screening, providing an evidence-based suggestion that it could be considered as a crucial method for first-tier screening.