Search

Background: Variable disease progression confounds accurate prognosis in Fabry disease. Evidence supports the long-term benefit of early intervention with disease-specific therapy, but current guidelines recommend treatment initiation based on signs that may present too late to avoid irreversible organ damage. Findings from the 'PRoposing Early Disease Indicators for Clinical Tracking in Fabry Disease' (PREDICT-FD) initiative included expert consensus on 27 early indicators of disease progression in Fabry disease and on drivers of and barriers to treatment initiation in Fabry disease. Here, we compared the PREDICT-FD indicators with guidance from the European Fabry Working Group and various national guidelines to identify differences in signs supporting treatment initiation and how guidelines themselves might affect initiation. Finally, anonymized patient histories were reviewed by PREDICT-FD experts to determine whether PREDICT-FD indicators supported earlier treatment than existing guidance.Results: Current guidelines generally aligned with PREDICT-FD on indicators of renal involvement, but most lacked specificity regarding cardiac indicators. The prognostic significance of neurological indicators such as white matter lesions (excluded by PREDICT-FD) was questioned in some guidelines and excluded from most. Some PREDICT-FD patient-reported signs (e.g., febrile crises) did not feature elsewhere. Key drivers of treatment initiation in PREDICT-FD were: (A) male sex, young age, and clinical findings (e.g., severe pain, organ involvement), (B) improving clinical outcomes and preventing disease progression, and (C) a family history of Fabry disease (especially if outcomes were severe). All guidelines aligned with (A) and several advocated therapy for asymptomatic male patients. There was scant evidence of (B) in current guidance: for example, no countries mandated ancillary symptomatic therapy, and no guidance advocated familial screening with (C) when diagnosis was confirmed. Barriers were misdiagnosis and a lack of biomarkers to inform timing of treatment. Review of patient histories generally found equal or greater support for treatment initiation with PREDICT-FD indicators than with other guidelines and revealed that the same case and guideline criteria often yielded different treatment recommendations.Conclusions: Wider adoption of PREDICT-FD indicators at a national level could promote earlier treatment in Fabry disease. Clearer, more concise guidance is needed to harmonize treatment initiation in Fabry disease internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gene therapy is the delivery of a therapeutic gene for endogenous cellular expression with the goal of rescuing a disease phenotype. It has been used to treat an increasing number of human diseases with many strategies proving safe and efficacious in clinical trials. Gene delivery may be viral or non-viral, performed in vivo or ex vivo , and relies on gene integration or transient expression; all of these techniques have been applied to the treatment of Fabry disease. Fabry disease is a genetic disorder of the α-galactosidase A gene, GLA , that causes an accumulation of glycosphingolipids in cells leading to cardiac, renal and cerebrovascular damage and eventually death. Currently, there are no curative treatments available, and the therapies that are used have significant drawbacks. These treatment concerns have led to the advent of gene therapies for Fabry disease. The first Fabry patients to receive gene therapy were treated with recombinant lentivirus targeting their hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Adeno-associated virus treatments have also begun. Alternatively, the field of gene-editing is a new and rapidly growing field. Gene-editing has been used to repair disease-causing mutations or insert genes into cellular DNA. These techniques have the potential to be applied to the treatment of Fabry disease provided the concerns of gene-editing technology, such as safety and efficiency, were addressed. This review focuses on the current state of gene therapy as it is being developed for Fabry disease, including progresses and challenges as well as an overview of gene-editing and how it may be applied to correct Fabry disease-causing mutations in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]