4.5 Article

Improved inflammatory bowel disease, wound healing and normal oxidative burst under treatment with empagliflozin in glycogen storage disease type Ib

期刊

ORPHANET JOURNAL OF RARE DISEASES
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13023-020-01503-8

关键词

Glycogen storage disease type Ib; Neutropenia; Neutrophil dysfunction; Empagliflozin; Wound healing; Inflammatory bowel disease; Oxidative burst; Glucose-6-phosphate transporter

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Glycogen storage disease type Ib (GSD Ib) is a rare inborn error of glycogen metabolism due to mutations inSLC37A4. Besides a severe form of fasting intolerance, the disorder is usually associated with neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction causing serious infections, inflammatory bowel disease, oral, urogenital and perianal lesions as well as impaired wound healing. Recently, SGLT2 inhibitors such as empagliflozin that reduce the plasma levels of 1,5-anhydroglucitol have been described as a new treatment option for the neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction in patients with GSD Ib. Results We report on a 35-year-old female patient with GSD Ib who had been treated with G-CSF for neutropenia since the age of 9. She had a large chronic abdominal wound as a consequence of recurrent operations due to complications of her inflammatory bowel disease. Treatment with 20 mg empagliflozin per day resulted in normalisation of the neutrophil count and neutrophil function even after termination of G-CSF. The chronic abdominal wound that had been unchanged for 2 years before the start of empagliflozin nearly closed within 12 weeks. No side effects of empagliflozin were observed. Conclusion SGLT2 inhibitors are a new and probably safe treatment option for GSD Ib-associated neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction. We hypothesize that restoration of neutrophil function and normalisation of neutrophil apoptosis leads to improvement of wound healing and ameliorates symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease.

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

4.5
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