A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Enzyme Replacement Therapy in Late-Onset Pompe Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pompe disease (PD) is a glycogen storage disorder caused by deficient activity of acid alpha-glucosidase (GAA). We sought to review the latest available evidence on the safety and efficacy of recombinant human GAA enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) for late-onset PD (LOPD). METHODS: We systematically searched the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane databases for prospective clinical studies evaluating ERT for LOPD on pre-specified outcomes. A meta-analysis was also performed. RESULTS: Of 1601 articles identified, 22 were included. Studies were heterogeneous and with very low certainty of evidence for most outcomes. The following outcomes showed improvements associated with GAA ERT, over a mean follow-up of 32.5 months: distance walked in the 6-min walking test (6MWT) (mean change 35.7 m (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.78, 63.75)), physical domain of the SF-36 quality of life (QOL) questionnaire (mean change 1.96 (95% CI 0.33, 3.59)), and time on ventilation (TOV) (mean change -2.64 h (95% CI -5.28, 0.00)). There were no differences between the pre- and post-ERT period for functional vital capacity (FVC), Walton and Gardner-Medwin Scale score, upper-limb strength, or total SF-36 QOL score. Adverse events (AEs) after ERT were mild in most cases. CONCLUSION: Considering the limitations imposed by the rarity of PD, our data suggest that GAA ERT improves 6MWT, physical QOL, and TOV in LOPD patients. ERT was safe in the studied population. PROSPERO register: 135102.
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 | 0.013 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".