ArticleJournal of inherited metabolic disease2025
Development of a novel tool for individual treatment trials in mucopolysaccharidosis.
Article in Journal of inherited metabolic disease, 2025. 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.
- Advances in Therapies for Mucopolysaccharidoses.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Variant profile of Brazilian patients with Sanfilippo syndrome type B.Genetics and molecular biology · 2026Article
- Neuroinflammation as a Novel Therapeutic Frontier for Sanfilippo Syndrome.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Development of a novel tool for individual treatment trials in mucopolysaccharidosis.Journal of inherited metabolic disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) encompasses a group of genetic lysosomal storage disorders, linked to reduced life expectancy and a significant lack of effective treatment options. Immunomodulatory drugs could have the potential to be a relevant medical approach, as the accumulation of undegraded substances initiates an innate immune response, which leads to inflammation and clinical deterioration. However, immunomodulators are not licensed for this indication. Consequently, we aim to provide evidence advocating fast access to innovative individual treatment trials (ITTs) with immunomodulatory drugs and high-quality evaluation of drug effects by implementing a risk-benefit model tailored for MPS. The iterative methodology of our novel decision analysis framework (DAF) involves three key steps: (i) literature review on promising treatment targets and immunomodulators in MPS; (ii) quantitative risk-benefit assessment (RBA) of selected molecules; (iii) assigning phenotypic profiles and quantitative evaluations. The results facilitate a personalized application of the model and are based on published evidence as well as interdisciplinary experts' consensus and patient perspectives. Four promising immunomodulators have been identified: adalimumab, abatacept, anakinra, and cladribine. An improvement in mobility is most likely with adalimumab, while anakinra is anticipated as a treatment of choice for neuronopathic MPS patients. Nevertheless, a comprehensive RBA should always be completed on an individual basis. Our evidence-based DAF tool for ITTs directly addresses the substantial unmet medical need in MPS and characterizes an initial stride toward precision medicine with immunomodulators.
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.