SynthesisThe Journal of dermatology2025
Cutaneous manifestations of Fabry disease: A systematic review.
Synthesis in The Journal of dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cutaneous manifestations of Fabry disease: A systematic review.The Journal of dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Fabry disease cardiomyopathy: A state-of-the-art review.Progress in cardiovascular diseasesPooled it
- Review
- Decoding Genetic Disease Through the Skin: Lessons From the UDN.International journal of dermatology · 2026Article
- Fabry Disease: A Focus on the Role of Oxidative Stress.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Long-Term Cardiac Stability Despite Late Enzyme Replacement Therapy in Fabry Disease With Severe Renal Involvement.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Benign Cutaneous Neoplasms with Syndromic Associations.Dermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fabry disease (FD) is a rare X-linked lysosomal storage disorder resulting in potential debilitating accumulation of glycosphingolipids in organs such as skin, nerves, heart, kidneys, lungs, and the central nervous system. Skin is easily investigated and can guide clinicians to diagnose FD, minimizing delay of enzyme substitution therapy. This systematic review followed the PICO and PRISMA guidelines. Using Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase, a total of 968 studies were retrieved by January 1, 2024. All clinical studies describing the skin characteristics and abnormalities of FD patients were included. After inclusion of articles, the methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 critical appraisal checklist. Twenty-three studies were included. Different skin manifestations were described in FD patients. Fifteen studies described angiokeratomas, five studied telangiectasias, 13 studied sweat abnormalities (anhidrosis/hypohidrosis/hyperhidrosis), nine described lymphoedema, and two reported hair abnormalities. Sweat abnormalities were the most common skin manifestation, affecting 57.6% of patients with FD; angiokeratomas were observed in 51.5% of patients. A high prevalence (16.5%) of lymphoedema was seen in a large study (n = 5487). Skin involvement appeared age-dependent and increased with age. Quality assessment showed high or unclear risk of bias in 19/23 studies. We summarized data on skin manifestations in 10 757 FD patients. The pathogenesis of sweat abnormalities and the occurrence of cutaneous vascular lesions, such as angiokeratomas and telangiectasias, in only half of FD patients remains poorly understood. Enzyme replacement therapy generally did not reduce skin manifestations in FD patients. Direct comparisons between studies were challenging due to variations in reported outcomes.
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.