4.0 Article

Impact on bone microarchitecture and failure load in a patient with type I Gaucher disease who switched from Imiglucerase to Eliglustat

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymgmr.2020.100606

关键词

Gaucher disease; Bone disease; High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography; Finite element analysis; Enzyme replacement therapy; Substrate replacement therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gaucher disease (GD; OMIM 230800) is a lysosomal storage disorder caused by a deficiency in acid beta-glucosidase as a result of mutation in the GBA gene. Type 1 GD (GD1) is the most common form and its clinical manifestations include severe hematological, visceral and bone disease. The goal of disease-modifying treatments for GD1 is to reduce substrate storage and hence toxicity from the disease. The two common therapeutic routes for managing GD1 are enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) and substrate reduction therapy (SRT). These therapies have shown to improve hematological and visceral aspects of the disease. However, quantitative investigations into how these therapies may help prevent or improve the progression of bone disease is limited. This case involves a patient diagnosed with GD1 in childhood, who began ERT in young adulthood. Following over 20 years of treatment with ERT, the patient switched to SRT. This case report examined the novel application of high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) in a patient who switched from ERT to SRT. Using bone microarchitecture measurements from HR-pQCT, we applied finite element analysis techniques to calculate the failure load which estimates the resistance to fracture. Over the course of one year following the switch from ERT to SRT therapy, failure load improved in the patient's lower limb. In conclusion, failure load can be computed in the short term in a patient who made a switch from ERT to SRT. Further exploration of failure load in study design to look at interventions that impact bone quality in GD may be considered.

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

4.0
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