ReviewOrphanet journal of rare diseases2019
Recommendations for patient screening in ultra-rare inherited metabolic diseases: what have we learned from Niemann-Pick disease type C?
Review in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Australian standard of care for Niemann-Pick disease type C.Internal medicine journal · 2026Article
- [Inherited metabolic liver disease causing copper deposition].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025Review
- Hypometabolism and atrophy patterns associated with Niemann-Pick type C.EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- Treatable Ataxias: How to Find the Needle in the Haystack?Journal of movement disorders · 2022Article
- Metabolic Alteration Analysis of Steroid Hormones in Niemann-Pick Disease Type C Model Cell Using Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Identification of novel mutations among Iranian NPC1 patients: a bioinformatics approach to predict pathogenic mutations.Hereditas · 2022Article
- Searching, Structural Determination, and Diagnostic Performance Evaluation of Biomarker Molecules for Niemann-Pick Disease Type C Using Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry.Mass spectrometry (Tokyo, Japan) · 2022Review
- Inhibition of Histone Deacetylases 1, 2, and 3 Enhances Clearance of Cholesterol Accumulation in Niemann-Pick C1 Fibroblasts.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2021Article
- Gene Therapy in a Mouse Model of Niemann-Pick Disease Type C1.Human gene therapy · 2021Article
- Hereditary Hypofibrinogenemia with Hepatic Storage.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Recessive Ataxia Differential Diagnosis Algorithm (RADIAL) Versus Specific Niemann-Pick Type C Suspicion Indices: A Retrospective Algorithm Comparison.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2020Article
- Novel compound heterozygous mutation inJournal of genetics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRare and ultra-rare diseases (URDs) are often chronic and life-threatening conditions that have a profound impact on sufferers and their families, but many are notoriously difficult to detect. Niemann-Pick disease type C (NP-C) serves to illustrate the challenges, benefits and pitfalls associated with screening for ultra-rare inborn errors of metabolism (IEMs). A comprehensive, non-systematic review of published information from NP-C screening studies was conducted, focusing on diagnostic methods and study designs that have been employed to date. As a key part of this analysis, data from both successful studies (where cases were positively identified) and unsuccessful studies (where the chosen approach failed to identify any cases) were included alongside information from our own experiences gained from the planning and execution of screening for NP-C. On this basis, best-practice recommendations for ultra-rare IEM screening are provided. Twenty-six published screening studies were identified and categorised according to study design into four groups: 1) prospective patient cohort and family-based secondary screenings (18 studies); 2) analyses of archived 'biobank' materials (one study); 3) medical chart review and bioinformatics data mining (five studies); and 4) newborn screening (two studies). NPC1/NPC2 sequencing was the most common primary screening method (Sanger sequencing in eight studies and next-generation sequencing [gene panel or exome sequencing] in five studies), followed by biomarker analyses (usually oxysterols) and clinical surveillance.
conclusionsHistorically, screening for NP-C has been based on single-patient studies, small case series, and targeted cohorts, but the emergence of new diagnostic methods over the last 5-10 years has provided opportunities to screen for NP-C on a larger scale. Combining clinical, biomarker and genetic diagnostic methods represents the most effective way to identify NP-C cases, while reducing the likelihood of misdiagnosis. Our recommendations are intended as a guide for planning screening protocols for ultra-rare IEMs in general.
Indexed as
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.