A systematic review on safety and efficacy of Migalastat for the treatment of Fabry’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fabry’s disease (FD) is a genetic lysosomal storage disorder characterized by α-galactosidase A (α-Gal A) lost/reduced activity. We aim to systematically assess the safety and efficacy of Migalastat, an oral pharmacological chaperone, that has been approved for the treatment of FD in patients with amenable mutations. We conducted literature search following the PRISMA guidelines in major databases up to 4 February 2024, for studies that assessed the clinical outcomes of migalastat in patients with FD. The New Castle Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. A total of 2141 records were identified through database searches and register searches, amongst which 30 records were screened, and 12 of these were excluded. The remaining 20 reports were sought for retrieval. The 12 retrieved articles were assessed for eligibility and their quality was assessed. Amongst the included studies, 5 were of high quality, 6 were of medium quality, and 1 was of low quality. Migalastat showed varied effects on enzyme activity and substrate levels, with gender-specific differences noted in GL-3 substrate activity and eGFR. Overall, it improved cardiac and renal outcomes similarly to enzyme replacement therapy, with a comparable safety profile.
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 | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".