| Literature DB >> 21698285 |
Andreas D Kistler1, Justyna Siwy, Frank Breunig, Praveen Jeevaratnam, Alexander Scherl, William Mullen, David G Warnock, Christoph Wanner, Derralynn A Hughes, Harald Mischak, Rudolf P Wüthrich, Andreas L Serra.
Abstract
Female patients affected by Fabry disease, an X-linked lysosomal storage disorder, exhibit a wide spectrum of symptoms, which renders diagnosis, and treatment decisions challenging. No diagnostic test, other than sequencing of the alpha-galactosidase A gene, is available and no biomarker has been proven useful to screen for the disease, predict disease course and monitor response to enzyme replacement therapy. Here, we used urine proteomic analysis based on capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry and identified a biomarker profile in adult female Fabry patients. Urine samples were taken from 35 treatment-naïve female Fabry patients and were compared to 89 age-matched healthy controls. We found a diagnostic biomarker pattern that exhibited 88.2% sensitivity and 97.8% specificity when tested in an independent validation cohort consisting of 17 treatment-naïve Fabry patients and 45 controls. The model remained highly specific when applied to additional control patients with a variety of other renal, metabolic and cardiovascular diseases. Several of the 64 identified diagnostic biomarkers showed correlations with measures of disease severity. Notably, most biomarkers responded to enzyme replacement therapy, and 8 of 11 treated patients scored negative for Fabry disease in the diagnostic model. In conclusion, we defined a urinary biomarker model that seems to be of diagnostic use for Fabry disease in female patients and may be used to monitor response to enzyme replacement therapy.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21698285 PMCID: PMC3115947 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020534
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Clinical characteristics of all studied female Fabry patients.
| cohort | training | validation | ERT |
| N | 35 | 17 | 11 |
| age (years) | 40.9±12.6 | 35.7±12.8 | 36.4±16.4 |
|
| |||
| GFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) | 87±23 | 91±13 | 85±20 |
| urine protein (mg/g crea), median (range) | 65 (20–1364) | 59 (44–1248) | 55 (50–195) |
| urine albumin (mg/g crea), median (range) | 14 (3–864) | 10 (5–258) | 8 (5–106) |
| microalbuminuria, N (%) | 7 (21%) | 4 (24%) | 1 (9%) |
| macroalbuminuria, N (%) | 3 (9%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
|
| |||
| LVMI (g/m2) | 83±29 | 81±19 | 111±77 |
| LVH, N (%) | 5 (14%) | 1 (6%) | 3 (27%) |
| arrhythmia, N (%) | 1 (3%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
|
| |||
| stroke, N (%) | 2 (6%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (18%) |
| acroparesthesia, N (%) | 13 (41%) | 8 (47%) | 11 (100%) |
|
| |||
| angiokeratoma, N (%) | 4 (13%) | 2 (12%) | 1 (9%) |
| hypohydrosis, N (%) | 6 (19%) | 1 (6%) | 4 (36%) |
ERT, enzyme replacement therapy; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; LVMI, left ventricular mass index; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy (defined as LVMI≥110 g/m2). Data are mean ± SD, unless otherwise stated.
Figure 1Compiled urinary protein profiles of female Fabry patients (a) and healthy controls (b) included in the training cohort.
Normalized MS molecular weight (800–20,000 Da) in logarithmic scale is plotted against normalized CE migration time (18–45 min). The mean signal intensity of polypeptides is given as peak height. 3-D contour plots of the 64 diagnostic markers in the Fabry (c) and healthy control (d) patient cohort with 5× zoom compared to (a) and (b).
Figure 2ROC curves for differentiation of Fabry female patients and female healthy controls in the training set upon complete take-one-out crossvalidation (a) and in the independent validation set (b).
Specificity of the biomarker model for differentiating Fabry disease from other renal, metabolic and cardiovascular diseases.
| Disease | Age | False positive/total N | Specificity (%) |
| ADPKD | 31±8 | 6/78 | 92 |
| diabetic nephropathy | 58±13 | 0/47 | 100 |
| FSGS | 42±23 | 0/27 | 100 |
| heart failure | 68±10 | 1/9 | 89 |
| hypertension | 66±11 | 1/17 | 94 |
| IgA nephropathy | 35±13 | 0/24 | 100 |
| cardiovascular disease | 66±7 | 3/47 | 94 |
| minimal change disease | 42±10 | 0/12 | 100 |
| membranous nephropathy | 54±20 | 0/9 | 100 |
| kidney stones | 56±8 | 0/8 | 100 |
| renal cell carcinoma | 64±11 | 0/42 | 100 |
| bladder cancer | 66±11 | 4/46 | 91 |
| systemic lupus erythematodes | 41±11 | 0/19 | 100 |
| ANCA vasculitis | 67±6 | 0/27 | 100 |
ADPKD, autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease; FSGS, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis; ANCA, anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies. Data are mean ± SD, unless otherwise stated.
Duration, dose and timing of ERT in the analyzed treated patients.
| age (years) | body weight (kg) | ERT product and dose/2 weeks | interval from last ERT dose to urine sampling (days) | treatment duration (years) | biomarker score |
| 62 | 72 | agalsidase alfa 0.22 mg/kg | 13 | 0.6 | −1.999 (neg) |
| 28 | 60 | agalsidase alfa 0.18 mg/kg | 1 | 3.6 | −1.436 (neg) |
| 25 | 49 | agalsidase alfa 0.21 mg/kg | 7 | 3.8 | −1.129 (neg) |
| 17 | 51 | agalsidase alfa 0.20 mg/kg | 13 | 2.4 | −0.601 (neg) |
| 43 | 51 | agalsidase alfa 0.28 mg/kg | 5 | 1.1 | −0.563 (neg) |
| 59 | 52 | agalsidase alfa 0.20 mg/kg | 2 | 5.6 | −0.313 (neg) |
| 22 | 59 | agalsidase alfa 0.20 mg/kg | 7 | 5.6 | −0.245 (neg) |
| 34 | 63 | agalsidase alfa 0.22 mg/kg | 6 | 0.1 | 0.060 (neg) |
| 33 | 55 | agalsidase beta 1.27 mg/kg | 13 | 6.4 | 0.241 (pos) |
| 20 | 45 | agalsidase alfa 0.20 mg/kg | 1 | 5.9 | 0.316 (pos) |
| 57 | 58 | agalsidase alfa 0.12 mg/kg | 17 | 2.3 | 0.455 (pos) |
ERT, enzyme replacement therapy. The diagnostic cut off value for the biomarker score is 0.1.
Figure 3Compiled urinary protein profiles of ERT treated female Fabry patients (a).
Normalized MS molecular weight (800–20,000 Da) in logarithmic scale is plotted against normalized CE migration time (18–45 min). The mean signal intensity of polypeptides is given as peak height. (b) 3-D contour plots of the 64 specific markers in the treated Fabry cohort with 5× zoom compared to (a). Note that the proteomic pattern resembles more that of healthy controls (Figure 1b and d) than that of untreated female Fabry patients (Figure 1a and c).