Reduced hip bone mineral density is associated with high levels of calciprotein particles in patients with Fabry disease.

Calciprotein particles (CPP) are nanoscale mineralo-protein aggregates that help stabilize excess mineral in the circulation. We examined the relationship between CPP and bone mineral density in Fabry disease patients. We found an inverse correlation with total hip and femoral neck density, but none with lumbar spine. PURPOSE: Calciprotein particles (CPP) are colloidal mineral-protein complexes made up primarily of the circulating glycoprotein fetuin-A, calcium, and phosphate. They form in extracellular fluid and facilitate the stabilization, transport, and clearance of excess minerals from the circulation. While most are monomers, they also exist in larger primary (CPP-I) and secondary (CPP-II) form, both of which are reported to be raised in pathological states. This study sought to investigate CPP levels in the serum of patients with Fabry disease, an X-linked systemic lysosomal storage disorder that is associated with generalized inflammation and low bone mineral density (BMD). METHODS: We compared serum CPP-I and CPP-II levels in 59 patients with Fabry disease (37 female) with levels in an age-matched healthy adult cohort (n=28) and evaluated their association with BMD and biochemical data obtained from routine clinical review. RESULTS: CPP-I and CPP-II levels were higher in male Fabry disease patients than female sufferers as well as their corresponding sex- and age-matched controls. CPP-II levels were inversely correlated with BMD at the total hip and femoral neck, but not the lumbar spine. Regression analyses revealed that these associations were independent of common determinants of BMD, but at the femoral neck, a significant association was only found in female patients. CONCLUSION: Low hip BMD was associated with high CPP-II in patients with Fabry disease, but further work is needed to investigate the relevance of sex-related differences and to establish whether CPP measurement may aid assessment of bone disease in this setting.

Standardising clinical outcomes measures for adult clinical trials in Fabry disease: A global Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have witnessed a considerable increase in clinical trials of new investigational agents for Fabry disease (FD). Several trials investigating different agents are currently in progress; however, lack of standardisation results in challenges to interpretation and comparison. To facilitate the standardisation of investigational programs, we have developed a common framework for future clinical trials in FD. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A broad consensus regarding clinical outcomes and ways to measure them was obtained via the Delphi methodology. 35 FD clinical experts from 4 continents, representing 3389 FD patients, participated in 3 rounds of Delphi procedure. The aim was to reach a consensus regarding clinical trial design, best treatment comparator, clinical outcomes, measurement of those clinical outcomes and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Consensus results of this initiative included: the selection of the adaptative clinical trial as the ideal study design and agalsidase beta as ideal comparator treatment due to its longstanding use in FD. Renal and cardiac outcomes, such as glomerular filtration rate, proteinuria and left ventricular mass index, were prioritised, whereas neurological outcomes including cerebrovascular and white matter lesions were dismissed as a primary or secondary outcome measure. Besides, there was a consensus regarding the importance of patient-related outcomes such as general quality of life, pain, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Also, unity about lysoGb3 and Gb3 tissue deposits as useful surrogate markers of the disease was obtained. The group recognised that cardiac T1 mapping still has potential but requires further development before its widespread introduction in clinical trials. Finally, patients with end-stage renal disease or renal transplant should be excluded unless a particular group for them is created inside the clinical trial. CONCLUSION: This consensus will help to shape the future of clinical trials in FD. We note that the FDA has, coincidentally, recently published draft guidelines on clinical trials in FD and welcome this contribution.