Enzyme replacement therapy for Anderson-Fabry disease: A complementary overview of a Cochrane publication through a linear regression and a pooled analysis of proportions from cohort studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anderson-Fabry disease (AFD) is an X-linked recessive inborn error of glycosphingolipid metabolism caused by a deficiency of alpha-galactosidase A. Renal failure, heart and cerebrovascular involvement reduce survival. A Cochrane review provided little evidence on the use of enzyme replacement therapy (ERT). We now complement this review through a linear regression and a pooled analysis of proportions from cohort studies. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ERT for AFD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For the systematic review, a literature search was performed, from inception to March 2016, using Medline, EMBASE and LILACS. Inclusion criteria were cohort studies, patients with AFD on ERT or natural history, and at least one patient-important outcome (all-cause mortality, renal, cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, and adverse events) reported. The pooled proportion and the confidence interval (CI) are shown for each outcome. Simple linear regressions for composite endpoints were performed. RESULTS: 77 cohort studies involving 15,305 participants proved eligible. The pooled proportions were as follows: a) for renal complications, agalsidase alfa 15.3% [95% CI 0.048, 0.303; I2 = 77.2%, p = 0.0005]; agalsidase beta 6% [95% CI 0.04, 0.07; I2 = not applicable]; and untreated patients 21.4% [95% CI 0.1522, 0.2835; I2 = 89.6%, p<0.0001]. Effect differences favored agalsidase beta compared to untreated patients; b) for cardiovascular complications, agalsidase alfa 28% [95% CI 0.07, 0.55; I2 = 96.7%, p<0.0001]; agalsidase beta 7% [95% CI 0.05, 0.08; I2 = not applicable]; and untreated patients 26.2% [95% CI 0.149, 0.394; I2 = 98.8%, p<0.0001]. Effect differences favored agalsidase beta compared to untreated patients; and c) for cerebrovascular complications, agalsidase alfa 11.1% [95% CI 0.058, 0.179; I2 = 70.5%, p = 0.0024]; agalsidase beta 3.5% [95% CI 0.024, 0.046; I2 = 0%, p = 0.4209]; and untreated patients 18.3% [95% CI 0.129, 0.245; I2 = 95% p < 0.0001]. Effect differences favored agalsidase beta over agalsidase alfa or untreated patients. A linear regression showed that Fabry patients receiving agalsidase alfa are more likely to have higher rates of composite endpoints compared to those receiving agalsidase beta. CONCLUSIONS: Agalsidase beta is associated to a significantly lower incidence of renal, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events than no ERT, and to a significantly lower incidence of cerebrovascular events than agalsidase alfa. In view of these results, the use of agalsidase beta for preventing major organ complications related to AFD can be recommended.
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 | 0.045 | 0.112 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".