ArticlePublic health genomics2026
Sex-Specific Diagnostic Inequality in Fabry Disease: Lessons Learned from Analysis of Newborn Screening and Cascade Testing in Tennessee from 2017 to 2024.
Article in Public health genomics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFabry disease (FD) is an X-linked lysosomal storage disease caused by alpha-galactosidase A (aGAL) deficiency. Newborn screening (NBS) programs for FD have been implemented in several US states; however, its effectiveness in identifying affected females remains uncertain. We hypothesized that sex-specific inequality of NBS-based detection of FD results in different diagnostic pathways for males and females with FD.
methodsWe compared diagnostic approaches for males and females with FD using Tennessee NBS results and Vanderbilt Lysosomal Storage Disorders Database (VLSDD). Sex-specific detection differences were assessed using Fisher's exact test (α = 0.05).
resultsTennessee NBS identified 25 males but no females with FD from 2017 to 2024. In VLSDD, among 81 individuals with FD, sex distribution was nearly equal (42 males, 39 females). Among males, 26/42 (62%) were diagnosed via NBS, 7/42 (17%) through known family history, and 9/42 (21%) based on clinical symptoms. All 16 males diagnosed through non-NBS were born before its implementation. In contrast, none of the 39 females were diagnosed through NBS (p value <0.05). Of these, 13/39 (33%) were diagnosed through cascade testing following their sons' detection by NBS, with a median age at diagnosis of 28 years (25th-75th percentile: 24.5-34.0). Of the remaining 26 females, 12/26 (46%) were diagnosed after a family member was diagnosed through clinical symptoms and 14/26 (54%) were diagnosed through clinical symptoms.
conclusionsNBS effectively identifies affected males but fails to detect females with FD, though it can indirectly facilitate diagnosis of older female relatives.
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.