Clinical results of enzyme replacement therapy in Fabry disease: a comprehensive review of literature.

Enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has been used to treat Fabry disease - a progressive lysosomal storage disorder - since 2001. Two preparations of the enzyme alpha-galactosidase A are available in Europe: agalsidase alpha, produced in a human cell line, and agalsidase beta, produced in Chinese hamster ovary cells. To review critically the published evidence for the clinical efficacy of these two enzyme preparations. A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify open or randomised controlled trials published on Fabry disease since 2001. Eleven trials fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in this review, of a total of 586 references on Fabry disease. To date, no direct comparisons exists between the two available enzyme preparations. Significant clinical benefits compared with placebo, however, have been demonstrated with ERT, with positive effects on the heart, kidneys, nervous system and quality of life. The quality of most of these publications was less than optimal. Further prospective studies are required to confirm the long-term clinical benefits of ERT. More studies are also needed on the effects of ERT in women and on the use of ERT early in the course of Fabry disease, to prevent organ damage. Large national and international outcomes databases will also be invaluable in evaluating treatment effects and safety.

Discrepancies between office and ambulatory blood pressure: clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials have documented no benefit from small reductions in blood pressure measured in the clinical office. However, ambulatory blood pressure is a better predictor of cardiovascular events than office-based blood pressure. We assessed control of ambulatory blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk. METHODS: We selected 4729 patients from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Registry. Patients were aged >/=55 years and presented with at least one of the following co-morbidities: coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes with end-organ damage. An average of 2 measures of blood pressure in the office was used for analyses. Also, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure was recorded at 20-minute intervals with a SpaceLabs 90207 device. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 69.6 (+/-8.2) years, and 60.8% of them were male. Average time from the diagnosis of hypertension to recruitment into the Registry was 10.9 (+/-8.4) years. Mean blood pressure in the office was 152.3/82.3 mm Hg, and mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure was 133.3/72.4 mm Hg. About 60% of patients with an office-pressure of 130-139/85-89 mm Hg, 42.4% with office-pressure of 140-159/90-99 mm Hg, and 23.3% with office-pressure > or =160/100 mm Hg were actually normotensive, according to 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure criteria (<130/80 mm Hg). CONCLUSION: We suggest that the lack of benefit of antihypertensive therapy in some trials may partly be due to some patients having normal pressure at trial baseline. Ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure may allow for a better assessment of trial eligibility.

Impact of recommendation updates in well-controlled patients on nonrecommended antiretroviral therapies: the Swiss HIV cohort study.

BACKGROUND: HIV treatment recommendations are updated as clinical trials are published. Whether recommendations drive clinicians to change antiretroviral therapy in well-controlled patients is unexplored. METHODS: We selected patients with undetectable viral loads (VLs) on nonrecommended regimens containing double-boosted protease inhibitors (DBPIs), triple-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), or didanosine (ddI) plus stavudine (d4T) at publication of the 2006 International AIDS Society recommendations. We compared demographic and clinical characteristics with those of control patients with undetectable VL not on these regimens and examined clinical outcome and reasons for treatment modification. RESULTS: At inclusion, 104 patients were in the DBPI group, 436 in the triple-NRTI group, and 19 in the ddI/d4T group. By 2010, 28 (29%), 204 (52%), and 1 (5%) patient were still on DBPIs, triple-NRTIs, and ddI plus d4T, respectively. 'Physician decision,' excluding toxicity/virological failure, drove 30% of treatment changes. Predictors of recommendation nonobservance included female sex [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1 to 7.26; P = 0.01] for DPBIs, and undetectable VL (aOR 3.53, 95% CI 1.6 to 7.8; P = 0.002) and lack of cardiovascular events (aOR 2.93, 95% CI 1.23 to 6.97; P = 0.02) for triple-NRTIs. All patients on DBPIs with documented diabetes or a cardiovascular event changed treatment. Recommendation observance resulted in lower cholesterol values in the DBPI group (P = 0.06), and more patients having undetectable VL (P = 0.02) in the triple-NRTI group. CONCLUSION: The physician's decision is the main factor driving change from nonrecommended to recommended regimens, whereas virological suppression is associated with not switching. Positive clinical outcomes observed postswitch underline the importance of observing recommendations, even in well-controlled patients.

Governor's Office of Drug Control Policy, Notification Letter, July 25, 2005

State Audit Reports - Notification Letter