1. Critical review of current MPS guidelines and management.
- Author
-
Stapleton M, Hoshina H, Sawamoto K, Kubaski F, Mason RW, Mackenzie WG, Theroux M, Kobayashi H, Yamaguchi S, Suzuki Y, Fukao T, Tadao O, Ida H, and Tomatsu S
- Subjects
- Australia, Brazil, Clinical Trials as Topic, Genetic Therapy, Glycosaminoglycans metabolism, Humans, Japan, Mucopolysaccharidoses therapy, Disease Management, Enzyme Replacement Therapy, Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, Mucopolysaccharidosis II therapy, Practice Guidelines as Topic
- Abstract
Mucopolysaccharidoses (MPS) are a group of lysosomal storage disorders that impair degradation of glycosaminoglycans (GAG). The specific GAGs that accumulate depend on the type of MPS, leading to unique characteristic clinical features. Development of guidelines for treatment of MPS has traditionally been multifaceted and largely based on palliative care. In the last three decades, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and enzyme replacement therapy have been developed based on experimental and clinical studies. Guidelines have been established with the accumulation of the clinical data from natural history of the disease and therapeutic consequences, mainly sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. In recent years, committees in three countries, Australia (2015), Japan (2017), and Brazil (2018) have adopted guidelines for the treatment of MPS II, sponsored and authorized by each government. As novel treatments for MPS including substrate reduction therapy, pharmacological chaperone therapy, and gene therapy become clinically available, it is increasingly necessary to establish the optimal guideline for each type of MPS, considering multiple factors including therapeutic efficacy, adverse effects, age, disease stage, prognosis, feasibility and availability of access to treatment, and cost- performance. In this article, we discuss the historical guidelines for specific MPS types and the most recently adopted guidelines for MPS II and propose the development of future guidelines without conflict of interest and bias leading to mutual benefits to all parties including patients and families, professionals, tax payers, and governments., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF