| Literature DB >> 35241128 |
C Tornero1,2, V Navarro-Compán3, A Buño4, K E Heath5,6,7, M Díaz-Almirón8, A Balsa3, J A Tenorio6,7, J Quer9, P Aguado3,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypophosphatasia (HPP) is a rare and underdiagnosed condition characterized by deficient bone and teeth mineralization. The aim of this study was first, to evaluate the diagnostic utility of employing alkaline phosphatase (ALP) threshold levels to identify adults with variants in ALPL among individuals with persistently low ALP levels and second, to determine the value of also including its substrates (serum pyridoxal-5'-phosphate-PLP-and urinary phosphoetanolamine-PEA) for this purpose in order to create a biochemical algorithm that could facilitate the diagnostic work-up of HPP.Entities:
Keywords: ALPL; Alkaline phosphatase; Hypophosphatasaemia; Hypophosphatasia; Metabolic bone diseases
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35241128 PMCID: PMC8896389 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-022-02253-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis ISSN: 1750-1172 Impact factor: 4.123
Demographics and clinical baseline characteristics of the two subgroups
| +GT (n = 40) | −GT (n = 37) | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caucasian race, n (%) | 39 (97.5) | 37 (100%) | 0.8 |
| Median age (IQR), years | 52.8 (38.8–61.2) | 46.6 (40.1–49.9) | 0.2 |
| Female sex, n (%) | 27 (67.5%) | 32 (86.8%) | 0.05 |
| Median BMI (IQR), kg/m2 | 25.2 (23–29) | 22.6 (20.6–24.6) | < 0.01 |
| Musculoskeletal pain, n (%) | 28 (70%) | 18 (48.6%) | < 0.05 |
| Dental abnormalities, n (%) | 16 (40%) | 4 (11%) | < 0.001 |
| Premature teeth loss or multiple extractions, n (%) | 3 (7.5%) | 1 (2.7%) | 0.3 |
| Calcific periarthritis, n (%) | 7 (18%) | 4 (10.8%) | 0.4 |
| PH of fractures, n (%) | 16 (40%) | 14 (37.8%) | 0.5 |
| PH of stress fractures, n (%) | 6 (15%) | 1 (2.7%) | 0.06 |
Significant values are shown in bold
+GT positive genetic test, −GT negative genetic test, PH personal history
Evolution of serum alkaline phosphatase, serum piridoxal-5-phosphate and urinary phosphoetanolamine levels in both groups
| Baseline | 6 months | 1 year | 18 months | 2 years | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −GT | +GT | −GT | +GT | −GT | +GT | −GT | +GT | −GT | +GT | |
| ALP, IU/L | 31 (27–36) | 26 (22–30)* | 30 (26–35.8) | 25 (20.5–27.5* | 30.5 (26–37) | 24.5 (21–29)* | 31 (27–40) | 25 (21.8–29)* | 33 (27–40) | 26 (20.75–30.25)* |
| PLP (nmol/L) | 79.49 (57.7–124.4) | 200 (132.75–270.9)* | 99.54 (52.2–141.92) | 345.35 (242.67–573.28)* | 82.26 (56.18–143.49) | 293.9 (207.5–479.2)* | ||||
| PEA µmol/g. creatinine | 13.5 (8.25–26.5) | 40.5 (18.5–67.8)* | 16 (11–22) | 41.5 (25.5–75.5)* | 18 (12.5–24) | 22 (16–44)* | ||||
Data are expressed as median (interquartile range); *p value < 0.001 in the comparison of biochemical parameters between the +GT and −GT groups during the visits assessed
+GT positive genetic test, −GT negative genetic test, Bsl baseline, m months, y years, ALP alkaline phosphatase
Fig. 1Individual ALP and substrates measurements at baseline, 1- and 2-year visits. Abbreviations: ALP alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), PLP serum pyridoxal-5′-phosphate (nmol/L), PEA urinary phosphoetanolamine (µmol/g creatinine). Red lines represent the proposed threshold levels for ALP (< 25 IU/L) and substrates (PLP > 180 nmol/L and PEA > 30 µmol/g creatinine)
Diagnostic utility measures for different ALP thresholds during the two-year follow up evolution
| ALP levels (IU/L) | S (%) | Sp (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | +LR | −LR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| < 20 | 10.0 | 97.3 | 80.0 | 50.0 | 3.70 | 0.92 |
| < 25 | 37.5 | 83.8 | 71.4 | 55.4 | 2.31 | 0.75 |
| < 30 | 72.5 | 64.9 | 69.0 | 68.6 | 2.07 | 0.42 |
| < 35 | 90.0 | 37.8 | 61.0 | 77.8 | 1.45 | 0.26 |
| < 20 | 18.2 | 96.4 | 85.7 | 50.0 | 5.06 | 0.85 |
| < 25 | 48.5 | 85.7 | 80.0 | 58.5 | 3.39 | 0.60 |
| < 30 | 78.8 | 50.0 | 65.0 | 66.7 | 1.58 | 0.42 |
| < 35 | 87.9 | 35.7 | 61.7 | 71.4 | 1.37 | 0.34 |
| < 20 | 17.9 | 100 | 100 | 51.5 | ∞ | 0.82 |
| < 25 | 48.7 | 91.2 | 86.4 | 60.8 | 5.53 | 0.56 |
| < 30 | 76.9 | 61.8 | 69.8 | 70.0 | 2.01 | 0.37 |
| < 35 | 89.7 | 26.5 | 58.3 | 69.2 | 1.22 | 0.39 |
| < 20 | 14.7 | 96.3 | 83.3 | 47.3 | 3.97 | 0.89 |
| < 25 | 47.1 | 89.0 | 84.2 | 57.1 | 4.24 | 0.60 |
| < 30 | 82.4 | 55.6 | 70.0 | 71.4 | 1.86 | 0.32 |
| < 35 | 91.2 | 37.0 | 64.6 | 76.9 | 1.45 | 0.24 |
| < 20 | 17.4 | 96.3 | 83.3 | 47.3 | 3.97 | 0.89 |
| < 25 | 41.2 | 92.6 | 87.5 | 55.6 | 5.57 | 0.63 |
| < 30 | 70.6 | 66.7 | 72.7 | 64.3 | 2.12 | 0.44 |
| < 35 | 91.2 | 44.4 | 67.4 | 80.0 | 1.64 | 0.20 |
ALP alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), S sensitivity, Sp specificity, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, LR likelihood ratio
Logistic regression models and diagnostic utility measures to identify individuals with ALPL variants
| Variables included | B | Odds ratio (95% CI) | P value | Diagnostic utility measures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1: | ALP < 25 | ALP: − 1.62 | 0.2 (0.05–0.54) | < 0.01 | S: 57%; Sp: 85%; PPV: 80%; NPV: 66%; +LR: 3.99; −LR:0.5; AC: 71% |
| C: − 0.72 | 0.48 (0.18–0.99) | 0.06 | |||
| Model 2: | ALP < 25 + PEA > 30 | ALP: − 1.82 | 0.16 (0.04–0.54) | < 0.01 | S: 71%; Sp: 86%; PPV: 83%; NPV: 75%; +LR: 4.99; −LR: 0.33; AC: 79% |
| PEA: − 2.43 | 0.09 (0.02–0.27) | < 0.001 | |||
| C: − 1.42 | 0.24 (0.07–0.63) | < 0.01 | |||
| Model 3: | ALP < 25 + PLP > 180 | ALP: − 1.38 | 0.25 (0.05–0.93) | 0.02 | S: 100%; Sp: 86%; PPV:88%; NPV: 100%; +LR: 6.99; −LR:0; AC: 93% |
| PLP: − 2.81 | 0.06 (0.01–0.22) | 0.04 | |||
| C: − 1.51 | 0.22 (0.04–0.65) | < 0.001 | |||
| Model 4: | ALP < 25 + PLP > 180 + PEA > 30 | ALP: − 2.3 | 0.1 (0.01–0.29) | 0.02 | S: 100%; Sp: 86%; PPV:88%; NPV: 100%; + LR: 6.99; −LR:0; AC: 93% |
| PLP: − 3.30 | 0.04 (0.01–0.2) | < 0.01 | |||
| PEA: − 2.94 | 0.05 (0.01–0.25) | < 0.01 | |||
| C: − 2.83 | 0.06 (0.01–0.29) | < 0.01 | |||
| Model 5: | ALP < 25 + PLP > 180 + PEA > 30 + C. Pain + Dental ab | ALP: − 2.27 | 0.02 | ||
| PLP: − 3.72 | < 0.01 | ||||
| PEA: − 3.82 | < 0.02 | ||||
| CP:2.34 | 0.16 | ||||
| DA: − 0.76 | 0.55 | ||||
| C: − 3.27 |
ALP alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), PLP serum pyridoxal-5′-phosphate (nmol/L), PEA urinary phosphoetanolamine (µmol/g creatinine), C. pain chronic pain, Dental ab dental abnormalities, C constant, S sensitivity, Sp specificity, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, LR likelihood ratio, AC accuracy
Bootstrapping method descriptive results of the 500 resamples for the different biochemical models assessed
| Variables included | AUC ROC curve | |
|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | ALP < 25 | 0.68 (0.63–0.72) |
| Model 2 | ALP < 25 + PEA > 30 | 0.87 (0.82–0.9) |
| Model 3 | ALP < 25 + PLP > 180 | 0.87 (0.82–0.91) |
| Model 4 | ALP < 25 + PLP > 180 + PEA > 30 | 0.94 (0.91–0.97) |
ALP alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), PLP serum pyridoxal-5′-phosphate (nmol/L), PEA urinary phosphoetanolamine (µmol/g creatinine), AUC area under the curve, ROC curve receiver operating characteristic curve
Fig. 2Flowchart describing screening and selection process. Abbreviations: ALP alkaline phosphatase (IU/L), +GT positive genetic test, −GT negative genetic test, VUS variant of unknown significance, P pathogenic variant, LP likely pathogenic variant, HTZs heterozygotes