4.6 Article

Disease-specific markers for the mucopolysaccharidoses

期刊

PEDIATRIC RESEARCH
卷 56, 期 5, 页码 733-738

出版社

INT PEDIATRIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC
DOI: 10.1203/01.PDR.0000141987.69757.DD

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unprecedented demands are now placed on clinicians for early diagnosis as we enter into an era of advancing treatment opportunities for the mucopolysacchari doses (MPS). Biochemical monitoring of any therapeutic avenue will also be prerequisite. To this end, we aimed to identify a range of urinary oligosaccharides that could be used to identify and characterize patients with MPS. We analyzed 94 urine samples from 68 patients with MPS and 26 control individuals for oligosaccharides derived from glycosaminoglycans using electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry. The oligosaccharide profile for each patient group was compared with that of the control group. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to measure the difference between each patient group and the controls for each analyte. Urine samples from patients before and at successive times after bone marrow transplantation were also evaluated. A number of oligosaccharides were identified in the urine of each NIPS subtype, and for each of these, specific oligosaccharide profiles were formulated. These profiles enabled the identification of all 68 patients and their subtypes with the exception of MPS IIIB and IIIC. Selected oligosaccharides were used to assess three individuals after a bone marrow transplant, and, in each case, a substantial reduction in the level of diagnostic oligosaccharides, posttransplantation, was observed. The identification and measurement of glycosaminoglycan-derived oligosaccharides in urine provides a sensitive and specific screen for the early identification of individuals with MPS. The resulting oligosaccharide profiles not only characterize subtype but also provide a disease-specific fingerprint for the biochemical monitoring of current and proposed therapies.

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

4.6
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