4.2 Article

Early enzyme replacement therapy enables a successful hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in mucopolysaccharidosis type IH: Divergent clinical outcomes in two Japanese siblings

期刊

BRAIN & DEVELOPMENT
卷 41, 期 6, 页码 546-550

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.braindev.2019.01.008

关键词

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; Enzyme replacement therapy; Mucopolysaccharidosis type IH; Central nervous system deterioration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mucopolysaccharidosis type IH (MPS IH, Hurler syndrome) is a progressive, multisystem autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disorder resulting in the consequent accumulation of glycosaminoglycans. It is well recognized that early hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) prevents neurocognitive decline in MPS IH. We followed the divergent clinical course in two Japanese siblings with MPS IH. The elder sister (proband) received a diagnosis of MPS IH at 6 months old. At the time of this diagnosis enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) was not available in Japan. She developed severe and recurrent respiratory disease and died at 1 year 10 months of age. Her younger sister also received a diagnosis of MPS IH, but at 18 days of age, and started ERT at 34 days of age. ERT continued until 8 months of age and prevented the progression of somatic manifestations of MPS IH. She received HSCT at 9 months old. Five years after HSCT she had no symptoms of MPS IH except for mild signs of dysostosis multiplex and mild cardiac valvular disease. Her neurological function was generally preserved compared with her elder sister. The prognosis and quality of life differed significantly between the sisters. Therefore, early HSCT can preserve neurocognition by preventing the neurodegeneration from MPS IH. In addition, ERT initiated during the asymptomatic period prevented the patient from developing somatic manifestations and enabled successful HSCT in this case. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Society of Child Neurology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据