ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Newborn Screening in Fabry Disease.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Clinical and Biochemical Improvement After Switching From Agalsidase Alfa to Beta in a Boy With Classic Fabry Disease: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fabry disease (FD) is an X-linked genetic disease caused by deficient α galactosidase A activity, leading to a lysosomal storage disorder of globotriaosylceramide, causing organ damages. There are two most common clinical manifestations of the disease: classic FD with a typical onset of symptoms in childhood in males, and later-onset variants which may include female heterozygotes. The highly heterogeneous and nonspecific nature of FD's symptoms and limited physicians' awareness result in a significant diagnostic and therapeutic delay. Even though the implementation of newborn screening (NBS) gives us an opportunity for early diagnosis and timely treatment, it has not yet been universally adopted. Over twenty pilot studies and screening programs worldwide have been published, showing that FD is more prevalent than previously estimated, exceeding 1 in 40,000 males, mainly due to the high incidence of variants of unknown significance (VUSs). They also raised controversies regarding the diagnostic methods, results interpretation, ethical issues, clinical approach, and economic burden. This review analyzes recent studies of NBS for FD; examines the screening methods, prevalence findings, and natural history data; and assesses the benefits and risks of NBS. We conclude with suggestions for the screening program design and research priorities to ensure that screening leads to improved health outcomes with acceptable costs and psychosocial impact.
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.