4.6 Article

Evaluation of a low dose, after a standard therapeutic dose, of agalsidase beta during enzyme replacement therapy in patients with Fabry disease

期刊

GENETICS IN MEDICINE
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 256-264

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181981d82

关键词

Fabry disease; agalsidase beta; alpha-galactosidase A; globotriaosylceramide; enzyme replacement therapy

资金

  1. Genzyme Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Fabry disease, a genetic deficiency of a-galactosidase A, is characterized by pathogenic cellular accumulation of globotriaosylceramide. During clinical trials, recombinant human a-galactosidase A (agalsidase beta; Fabrazyme(R), Genzyme Corporation, Cambridge, MA), infused intravenously at 1.0 mg/kg every 2 weeks for 6 months, cleared or reduced globotriaosylceramide in renal, cardiac, and dermal microvascular endothelia and other cells, with results sustained for up to 5 years in most patients evaluated. This study explored whether a lower dose could maintain globotriaosylceramide clearance achieved with 1.0 mg/kg. Methods: Cellular globotriaosylceramide levels were assessed histologically in kidney and skin biopsies from 21 adult Fabry males treated for 6 months at 1.0 mg/kg/2 weeks followed by 18 months at 0.3 mg/kg/2 weeks. Results: In kidney interstitial capillary endothelium, the primary endpoint, globotriaosylceramide clearance was achieved in 100% of patients with 1.0 mg/kg and maintained in 90% with 0.3 mg/kg. In seven other renal cell types and superficial dermal capillary endothelium, globotriaosylceramide reduction or clearance was maintained with 0.3 mg/kg in similar to 70% of patients. Conclusions: A lower dose of agalsidase beta may be sufficient in some, but not all, patients with Fabry disease to maintain the cellular globotriaosylceramide clearance achieved with 1.0 mg/kg/2 weeks. Long-term clinical effects of transitioning to the lower dose have not been evaluated. Genet Med 2009:11(4):256-264.

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