Efficacy of early haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus enzyme replacement therapy on neurological progression in severe Hunter syndrome: Case report of siblings and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hunter syndrome is a neurodegenerative lysosomal storage disorder with limited treatment options to halt the progressive neurocognitive decline. Whilst Intravenous enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) does not cross the blood brain barrier; Intrathecal ERT, in clinical studies, did not demonstrate significant effect on cognition, despite having better CNS delivery. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has the potential to treat CNS disease. We reviewed the literature and outline our experience of treating two siblings with severe Hunter syndrome: 'Sibling A' with intravenous and intrathecal ERT and 'Sibling B' with Early HSCT. A literature review identified 8 articles reporting on the comparative efficacy of both treatments. Our clinical outcomes indicate that Sibling B performed better than Sibling A in relation to early developmental milestones as well as neurocognition, activities of daily living, quality of life and neurophysiological outcomes in mid childhood. Sibling A's developmental trajectory fell within the extremely low range and Sibling B's development trajectory fell within the low-average to average range. This suggests HSCT had a disease modifying effect and highlights the efficacy of early HSCT in moderating the CNS progression in Hunter syndrome. Long term follow up is needed to elucidate the efficacy of HSCT on neurological progression.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".