Performance Comparison Between Conventional Fluorescent Spot Test and Quantitative Assay in Detecting G6PD Deficiency in Neonates

Sarah Abdul Halim; Rosnah Bahar; Wan Zaidah Abdullah; Erinna Mohamad Zon; Shafini Mohamed Yusoff

doi:10.5001/omj.2023.86

Performance Comparison Between Conventional Fluorescent Spot Test and Quantitative Assay in Detecting G6PD Deficiency in Neonates

Oman Med J. 2023 Jul 31;38(4):e524. doi: 10.5001/omj.2023.86. eCollection 2023 Jul.

Authors

Sarah Abdul Halim^{1

2}, Rosnah Bahar^{1

2}, Wan Zaidah Abdullah^{1

2}, Erinna Mohamad Zon^{3

2}, Shafini Mohamed Yusoff^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine Unit, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia.
² Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia.
³ Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia.

Abstract

Objectives: Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is the most common enzymopathy worldwide. The fluorescent spot test (FST) is the conventional method for screening neonates for G6PD. However, it has limitations and quantitative assays such as the CareStart Biosensor 1 are being increasingly recommended. This study aimed to compare FST and CareStart Bioensor 1 in their ability to detect G6PD levels in neonates.

Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 455 neonates between June and December 2020. Two milliliters of cord blood were analyzed with CareStart Biosensor 1 and dried cord blood spots with FST. Data was recorded and statistically analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated to determine the performance of FST at specific G6PD cut-off values; Cohen's kappa analysis assessed the agreement between the two methods.

Results: The sensitivity of FST at 30% cut-off G6PD activity level was 91.0%, (95% CI: 57.0-100) and specificity of 97.0% (95% CI: 95.0-98.0). At 60% cut-off, the FST sensitivity sharply declined to 29.0% (95% CI: 19.0-40.0) with a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 98.0-100). The overall prevalence of G6PD deficiency was 5.1% as measured by FST and 17.8% by Biosensor 1 (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: In this study, FST missed a significant proportion of cases of intermediate G6PD levels. FST also misclassified several G6PD intermediate individuals as normal, rendering them susceptible to oxidative stress. Biosensor 1 reported a significantly higher prevalence of G6PD deficiency.

Keywords: G6PD Deficiency; Prevalence; Quantitative Assay; Sensitivity; Specificity.