New insights from the application of the FAbry STabilization indEX in a large population of Fabry cases.

Fabry disease disease progression disease stability organ dysfunction scores α-galactosidase A/α-galactosidase A deficiency

Journal

Clinical kidney journal
ISSN: 2048-8505
Titre abrégé: Clin Kidney J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101579321

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Historique:
received: 24 07 2018
accepted: 17 09 2018
entrez: 26 3 2019
pubmed: 25 3 2019
medline: 25 3 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The FAbry STabilization indEX (FASTEX) is an innovative index allowing the assessment of clinical stability over time in Fabry disease patients. This index was developed in a population of 28 male patients with the classical form of Fabry disease. The aim of the study was to test the accuracy of the FASTEX in evaluating Fabry disease stability in 132 male and female patients with classical and non-classical Fabry disease from nine Italian centres and it also aimed to define the sensitivity and specificity of this new tool. In particular, we aimed to investigate the correlation between the FASTEX and clinical judgement in a large-scale cohort of the study population. Statistical methods applied to this investigation included the calculation of accuracy, specificity and sensitivity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and Cohen's κ index related to the FASTEX and clinical judgement. The patient population included 58 males (43.9%). The mean age of the overall population was 46.3 ± 15. 1 years (range 31.2-61.4). The median interval between the two multidisciplinary evaluations used for FASTEX calculation was 398 days. Since no gold standard method is available to define the overall clinical condition of Fabry patients over time, the results of the FASTEX were compared with clinical judgements given by the physicians involved in this study. In this way, the FASTEX classified 121 of 132 (92%) patients correctly. In particular, the FASTEX correctly identified 93% (41/44) of clinically 'unstable' and 91% (80/88) of clinically 'stable' patients. The area under the curve of the ROC related to the FASTEX index cut-off (20) was equal to 0.967, very close to its theoretical maximum (1), which means that it is an excellent test for classifying patients as 'stable' or 'unstable' compared with clinical judgement. In addition, the FASTEX cut-off >20 provides the most acceptable balance between sensitivity and specificity. The Cohen's κ index value obtained in our study was 0.82, showing a highly statistically significant P-value < 0.01 related to the agreement between the FASTEX and clinical judgement. The FASTEX is demonstrated here to be a specific and sensitive tool. When applied to a large cohort of Fabry patients, it was shown to be a valid instrument in helping physicians to discriminate objectively the clinical stability of individual Fabry patients.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The FAbry STabilization indEX (FASTEX) is an innovative index allowing the assessment of clinical stability over time in Fabry disease patients. This index was developed in a population of 28 male patients with the classical form of Fabry disease.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to test the accuracy of the FASTEX in evaluating Fabry disease stability in 132 male and female patients with classical and non-classical Fabry disease from nine Italian centres and it also aimed to define the sensitivity and specificity of this new tool. In particular, we aimed to investigate the correlation between the FASTEX and clinical judgement in a large-scale cohort of the study population.
METHODS METHODS
Statistical methods applied to this investigation included the calculation of accuracy, specificity and sensitivity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and Cohen's κ index related to the FASTEX and clinical judgement.
RESULTS RESULTS
The patient population included 58 males (43.9%). The mean age of the overall population was 46.3 ± 15. 1 years (range 31.2-61.4). The median interval between the two multidisciplinary evaluations used for FASTEX calculation was 398 days. Since no gold standard method is available to define the overall clinical condition of Fabry patients over time, the results of the FASTEX were compared with clinical judgements given by the physicians involved in this study. In this way, the FASTEX classified 121 of 132 (92%) patients correctly. In particular, the FASTEX correctly identified 93% (41/44) of clinically 'unstable' and 91% (80/88) of clinically 'stable' patients. The area under the curve of the ROC related to the FASTEX index cut-off (20) was equal to 0.967, very close to its theoretical maximum (1), which means that it is an excellent test for classifying patients as 'stable' or 'unstable' compared with clinical judgement. In addition, the FASTEX cut-off >20 provides the most acceptable balance between sensitivity and specificity. The Cohen's κ index value obtained in our study was 0.82, showing a highly statistically significant P-value < 0.01 related to the agreement between the FASTEX and clinical judgement.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The FASTEX is demonstrated here to be a specific and sensitive tool. When applied to a large cohort of Fabry patients, it was shown to be a valid instrument in helping physicians to discriminate objectively the clinical stability of individual Fabry patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30906541
doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfy108
pii: sfy108
pmc: PMC6425459
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Comment

Langues

eng

Pagination

65-70

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentOn
Type : ErratumIn

Références

Circulation. 2002 Mar 26;105(12):1407-11
pubmed: 11914245
Nature. 1961 Apr 22;190:372-3
pubmed: 13764598
Clin Genet. 2004 Apr;65(4):299-307
pubmed: 15025723
J Med Genet. 2006 Apr;43(4):347-52
pubmed: 16227523
Mol Genet Metab. 2008 Feb;93(2):112-28
pubmed: 18037317
J Med Genet. 2009 Aug;46(8):548-52
pubmed: 19473999
Genet Med. 2009 Nov;11(11):790-6
pubmed: 19745746
Mol Genet Metab. 2010 Mar;99(3):283-90
pubmed: 19951842
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2010 Nov 22;5:30
pubmed: 21092187
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013 Nov-Dec;34(11):E117-27
pubmed: 23907247
Eur Heart J. 2014 Oct 14;35(39):2733-79
pubmed: 25173338
Genet Med. 2015 May;17(5):323-30
pubmed: 25232851
Clin Kidney J. 2016 Oct;9(5):739-47
pubmed: 27679722
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 May;28(5):1631-1641
pubmed: 27979989
Mol Genet Metab. 2018 Apr;123(4):416-427
pubmed: 29530533
Mol Genet Metab. 2018 Jul;124(3):189-203
pubmed: 30017653
Kidney Int Suppl (2011). 2017 Dec;7(3):e1
pubmed: 30681074
N Engl J Med. 1995 Aug 3;333(5):288-93
pubmed: 7596372

Auteurs

Renzo Mignani (R)

Nephrology and Dialysis Department, Infermi Hospital, Italy.

Maurizio Pieroni (M)

Cardiovascular Department, San Donato Hospital, Italy.

Antonio Pisani (A)

Department of Nephrology, University Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Marco Spada (M)

Department of Pediatrics, University of Torino, Italy.

Yuri Battaglia (Y)

Department of Nephrology, University of Ferrara, Italy.

Elena Verrecchia (E)

Department Internal Medicine, Gemelli Policlinic, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.

Mario Mangeri (M)

Nephrology and Dialysis Department, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo, Italy.

Sandro Feriozzi (S)

Nephrology and Dialysis Department, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo, Italy.

Ilaria Tanini (I)

Department of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Italy.

Gianluca De Danieli (G)

Medical Affairs Department, Sanofi-Genzyme, Italy.

Federico Pieruzzi (F)

Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca and Nephrology and Dialysis Department, ASST Monza, Italy.

Classifications MeSH