Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24370383›Full record

ArticleClinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry2014

Quantification of sulfatides in dried blood and urine spots from metachromatic leukodystrophy patients by liquid chromatography/electrospray tandem mass spectrometry.

Mariana Barcenas, Teryn R Suhr, C Ronald Scott, Frantisek Turecek, Michael H Gelb

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mariana BarcenasDepartments of Chemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States.
Teryn R SuhrMLD Foundation, 21345 Miles Dr., West Linn, OR 97068, United States.
C Ronald ScottDepartments of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle WA 98195, United States.
Frantisek TurecekDepartments of Chemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States.
Michael H GelbDepartments of Chemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States; Departments of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States. Electronic address: gelb@chem.washington.edu.
University of Washington · USCOPD Foundation · US

Funding

Multiplex Analysis of Inborn Errors of MetabolismR01DK067859 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI GELB, MICHAEL H · 2003 to 2025
$9.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS DK67859NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK067859
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatments are being developed for metachromatic leukodystrophy (MLD), suggesting the need for eventual newborn screening. Previous studies have shown that sulfatide molecular species are increased in the urine of MLD patients compared to samples from non-MLD individuals, but there is no data using dried blood spots (DBS), the most common sample available for newborn screening laboratories.

methodsWe used ultra-high performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC/MS/MS) to quantify sulfatides in DBS and dried urine spots from 14 MLD patients and 50 non-MLD individuals.

resultsSeveral sulfatide molecular species were increased in dried urine samples from all MLD samples compared to non-MLD samples. Sulfatides, especially low molecular species, were increased in DBS from MLD patients, but the sulfatide levels were relatively low. There was good separation in sulfatide levels between MLD and non-MLD samples when dried urine spots were used, but not with DBS, because DBS from non-MLD individuals have measurable levels of sulfatides.

conclusionSulfatide accumulation studies in urine, but not in DBS, emerges as the method of choice if newborn screening is to be proposed for MLD.

Indexed as

Tandem Mass SpectrometryChromatography, LiquidDried Blood Spot TestingHumansInfant, NewbornLeukodystrophy, MetachromaticSulfoglycosphingolipidsUrinalysisSulfoglycosphingolipidsDried blood spotsLysosomal storage diseasesMetachromatic leukodystrophyNewborn screeningSulfatidesTandem mass spectrometryUrine

Identifiers

PMID24370383
PMCPMC4039571
OpenAlexW1971059112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.