ArticleJIMD reports2013
Considering Fabry, but Diagnosing MPS I: Difficulties in the Diagnostic Process.
Article in JIMD reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional assessment of IDUA variants of uncertain significance identified by newborn screening.NPJ genomic medicine · 2024Article
- Mucopolysaccharidosis Type IIIE: A Real Human Disease or a Diagnostic Pitfall?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Misdiagnosis in mucopolysaccharidoses.Journal of applied genetics · 2022Review
- Lessons from two cases: is Fabry disease the correct diagnosis?BMJ case reports · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecent studies have indicated that a proportion of patients with renal failure, left ventricular hypertrophy, or cryptogenic stroke have sequence variants in their aGal A gene (Fabry disease), which has resulted in an increase in diagnostic activities for this disorder. The diagnostic process for lysosomal storage disorders may result in findings of unknown clinical significance. Here we report such an unexpected outcome. CASE: A 32-year-old male presented at the emergency department because of a transient ischemic attack. Extensive investigations revealed no cause and an initial diagnosis of cryptogenic stroke was made. Subsequently, aGal A activity was measured in a bloodspot and was shown to be normal, but the activity of alpha-L-iduronidase (IDUA), used as reference enzyme, was unexpectedly low: 0.5 umol/L (ref = 1.7-14.3). A diagnosis of IDUA deficiency, mucopolysaccharidosis type 1S or Scheie disease was considered. IDUA gene analysis revealed two homozygous sequence alterations: a silent sequence change (979C > T) in exon 7 (N297N) and an unknown missense mutation 875A > T (R263W). Physical examination was completely normal, without clinical signs of mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I). Leukocyte IDUA activity was also low: 2.1 nmol/mg prot/h (ref = 14-40 nmol prot/h), but higher than the patient range of <0.1 nmol/mg prot/h. Urinary glycosaminoglycan levels were normal both quantitatively and qualitatively. It was concluded that there was low IDUA activity without clinical symptoms and the diagnosis of mucopolysaccharidosis I was discarded.
conclusionThe diagnostic process for lysosomal storage disorders may result in biochemical abnormalities of unknown clinical significance. Early evaluation by a specialist in inborn errors of metabolism may help to avoid anxiety in patients and unnecessary additional analyses.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.