Antenatal screening for carriers of cystic fibrosis: randomised trial of stepwise v couple screening.

OBJECTIVE--To perform a rigorous comparative evaluation of stepwise and couple approaches to antenatal carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. DESIGN--Pragmatic randomised trial. SETTING--Hospital antenatal clinic serving a regional population. SUBJECTS--2002 women (couples) attending for booking antenatal visit at less than 17 weeks'' gestation with no family history of cystic fibrosis. INTERVENTIONS--Offering counselling and carrier testing for cystic fibrosis, either to women in the first instance (stepwise) or to couples (couple screening). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Uptake rates; anxiety; knowledge of cystic fibrosis and carrier status (both partners); attitudes to health, pregnancy, the baby, and screening (both partners); and uptake of carrier testing by relatives. RESULTS--Uptake of screening was the same for both approaches (90%). After delivery most women remembered test results and their meaning, but 53/253 (21%) of those with negative results of couple testing had forgotten that repeat testing would be advisable if they had a pregnancy with a new partner. With stepwise screening women identified as carriers had high levels of anxiety when results were received (mean anxiety score 52.3). This dissipated with a reassuring partner''s result (carriers'' mean anxiety score 36.1) to levels similar to those receiving negative results from couple screening. Of those receiving negative results, women who had stepwise screening were significantly less anxious than those who had couple screening (mean score with result 32.1 v 35.4, 95% confidence interval for difference -4.7 to -2.1). CONCLUSIONS--Couple screening allows carriers to avoid transient high levels of anxiety, but is associated with more anxiety and false reassurance among most screenees who will test negative. Stepwise screening gives carriers and their relatives genetic information and is, in our opinion, the better method.     

Preconception cystic fibrosis carrier couple screening: impact,understanding, and satisfaction

The impact, understanding of test-results, and satisfaction among participating couples in a preconception cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier screening project were assessed 6 months after testing. Questionnaire data were obtained from 17/18 identified carriers, 15 partners of carriers with negative test results, and 794 (73%) other participants. None of the carriers changed their reproductive plans because of their test results. Eight participants were worried about their results, including four carriers. Those who attended a general practitioner (GP) consultation for pretest education were less worried than those who attended an educational session. Seven carriers felt less healthy. Predictors of a correct understanding of test results (correct in 62% of participants) were: positive test results, high level of knowledge of CF, high level of education, attending an educational session, and previously heard of CF. All participants who reported that they were worried, all carriers, and 95% of the other participants said that they would make the same decision to be tested again. Although couples who were educated during a GP consultation were less worried, the results of the study suggest that understanding is more correct in couples attending an educational session. The results further suggest that since satisfaction with the screening was high, worries and feeling less healthy due to the test results are probably not a great burden.     

Cost effectiveness of antenatal screening for cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVE--To estimate the cost effectiveness of different antenatal screening programmes for cystic fibrosis. SETTING--Antenatal clinics and general practices in the United Kingdom. DESIGN--Four components of the screening process were identified: information giving, DNA testing, genetic counselling, and prenatal diagnosis. The component costs were derived from the literature and from a pilot screening study in Yorkshire. The cost of a given screening programme was then obtained by summing the components according to the specific screening strategy adopted (sequential and couple), the proportion of carriers detected by the DNA test, and the uptake of screening. Baseline assumptions were made about the proportion with missing information on carrier status from previous pregnancies (20%), the proportion changing partners between pregnancies (20%), and the uptake of prenatal diagnosis (100%). Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying these assumptions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--Cost per affected pregnancy detected. RESULTS--Under the baseline assumptions sequential screening costs between pounds 40,000 and pounds 90,000 per affected pregnancy detected, depending on the carrier detection rate and uptake. Couple screening was more expensive, ranging from pounds 46,000 to pounds 104,000. From the sensitivity analysis a 10% change in the assumed proportion with missing information from a previous pregnancy alters the cost by pounds 4000; a 10% change in the proportion with new partners has a similar effect but only for couple screening; and cost will change directly in proportion to the uptake of prenatal diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS--While economic analysis cannot determine screening policy, the paper provides the NHS with the information on cost effectiveness needed to inform decisions on the introduction of a screening service for cystic fibrosis.     

Prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis carriers: an economic evaluation.

The cloning of the CFTR gene has made it technically possible to avert the unwanted birth of a child with cystic fibrosis (CF). Several large trials offering prenatal CF carrier screening suggest that such screening is practical and that identified carriers generally use the information obtained. Therefore, a critical question is whether the cost of such screening is justified. Decision analysis was performed that used information about choices that pregnant women were observed to make at each stage in the Rochester prenatal carrier-screening trial. The cost of screening per CF birth voluntarily averted was estimated to be $1,320,000-$1,400,000. However, the lifetime medical cost of the care of a CF child in today's dollars was estimated to be slightly>$1,000,000. Therefore, despite both the high cost of carrier testing and the relative infrequency of CF conceptions in the general population, the averted medical-care cost resulting from choices freely made are estimated to offset approximately 74%-78% of the costs of a screening program. At present, if it is assumed that a pregnancy terminated because of CF is replaced, the marginal cost for prenatal CF carrier screening is estimated to be $8,290 per quality-adjusted life-year. This value compares favorably with that of many accepted medical services. The cost of prenatal CF carrier screening could fall to equal the averted costs of CF patient care if the cost of carrier testing were to fall to $100.     

Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis in a prenatal setting

Maternal prenatal cystic fibrosis (CF) screening was offered from September, 1997, to April, 1999, at the Ghent University Hospital, to couples undergoing prenatal diagnosis (amniocentesis) for reasons not related to CF. Fifteen minutes were devoted to explaining CF, CF screening, and the study protocol. The purpose was to assess the short- and long-term knowledge of CF, the attitude towards carrier screening, and carriership. A total of 314 couples entered the pilot study; 13 female CF carriers were identified. None of their partners carried an identifiable mutation. Our survey results show that information about CF and CF screening can be given effectively as part of antenatal care because most couples recalled important medical and genetic issues, valued the genetic test for CF, and seemed to cope well with the results. Risk estimates and actual numbers were more difficult to process and recall. From the small number of couples in which the woman alone was found to be a carrier, there was little or no evidence of marked distress.     

Neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis: result of a pilot study using both immunoreactive trypsinogen and cystic fibrosis gene mutation analyses

We have evaluated a two-tier neonatal cystic fibrosis (CF) screening of immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT) followed by CFTR gene mutation analysis using a systematic scanning of exons 7, 10, and 11, and, if necessary, by direct DNA sequencing. Over an 18-month period we screened 32,300 neonates born in the western part of Britanny. The first tier, involving IRT screening at 3 days of age, utilizes a low elevation of the trypsinogen level (600 ng/ml), which is highly sensitive. The second tier, which corresponds to the exhaustive screening for mutations in three exons of the gene, is highly specific for this population (Britanny). The false positive rate is very low, and no false negatives have been reported to date. This strategy has allowed the identification of five novel alleles (V322A, V317A, 1806 del A, R553G, G544S). Moreover the test can be adapted to other countries in which the distribution of mutations is established.     

Molecular screening of partners of cystic fibrosis heterozygotes.

We have screened 100 partners of known or suspected CF heterozygotes for ten CF mutations which account for 88% of the CF mutations seen by us on CF chromosomes. We have identified six CF heterozygotes amongst the 100 low-risk people screened. As two of the six people at high-risk of being CF carriers were subsequently shown not to be CF carriers this gave rise to four couples with a one in four risk of CF in a pregnancy and so far to two PND's. The risk of CF in the remaining 94 couples was reduced to less than one in 800. We have concentrated on the screening of partners for the commoner CF mutations rather than haplotyping them for the CF linked markers XV-2c/TaqI and KM19/PstI which are in linkage disequilibrium with CF. For individuals shown not to carry these ten mutations, a five fold difference in risk of being a CF carrier remains between those who have the XV-2c/KM19 genotypes associated with the highest risk(BB), as compared to those with the lowest risk(CC). Nevertheless we feel that effort is better expended in mutation screening rather than haplotyping.