Long-term effectiveness of agalsidase alfa enzyme replacement in Fabry disease: A Fabry Outcome Survey analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outcomes from 5 years of treatment with agalsidase alfa enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) for Fabry disease in patients enrolled in the Fabry Outcome Survey (FOS) were compared with published findings for untreated patients with Fabry disease. Data were extracted from FOS, a Shire-sponsored database, for comparison with data from three published studies. Outcomes evaluated were the annualized rate of change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and left ventricular mass indexed to height (LVMI) as well as time to and ages at a composite morbidity endpoint and at death. FOS data were extracted for 740 treated patients who were followed for a median of ~ 5 years. Compared with no treatment, patients treated with agalsidase alfa demonstrated slower decline in renal function and slower progression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Treated male patients with baseline eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) had a mean (standard error of the mean [SEM]) annualized change in eGFR of - 2.86 (0.53) mL/min/1.73 m(2)/y compared with - 6.8 (1.5) in the published untreated cohort. The mean (SEM) rate of LVMI increase with treatment was 0.33 (0.10) g/m(2.7)/y in males and 0.48 (0.09) in females, compared with 4.07 (1.03) in untreated males and 2.31 (0.81) in untreated females. Morbidity occurred later in treated patients, with ~ 16% risk of a composite morbidity event (26% in males) after 24 months with ERT versus ~ 45% without treatment, with first events and deaths also occurring at older ages in patients administered ERT (e.g., estimated median survival in treated males was 77.5 years versus 60 years in untreated males). Findings from these retrospective comparisons of observational data and published literature support the long-term benefits of ERT with agalsidase alfa for Fabry disease in slowing the progression of renal impairment and cardiomyopathy. Treatment also appeared to delay the onset of morbidity and mortality. Interpretation of these findings should take into account that they are based on retrospective comparisons with previously published data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".