Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Screening patients referred to a metabolic clinic for lysosomal storage disorders
  1. Maria Fuller1,
  2. Justin N Tucker1,
  3. Debbie L Lang1,
  4. Caroline J Dean1,
  5. Michael J Fietz2,
  6. Peter J Meikle3,
  7. John J Hopwood1
  1. 1Lysosomal Diseases Research Unit, SA Pathology at Women's and Children's Hospital, North Adelaide, SA, Australia
  2. 2National Referral Laboratory, SA Pathology at Women's and Children's Hospital, North Adelaide, SA, Australia
  3. 3Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Maria Fuller, Lysosomal Diseases Research Unit, SA Pathology at Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Road, North Adelaide, SA 5006, Australia; maria.fuller{at}adelaide.edu.au

Background Lysosomal protein profiling is being developed as a high throughput method to screen populations for lysosomal storage disorders (LSD).

Design 1415 blood spots from patients referred to a metabolic clinic for LSD were screened using a single multiplex assay for 14 proteins in a dried blood spot.

Results All patients with Pompe disease, metachromatic leukodystrophy, and mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) type I, IIIA, IIIB and VI were identified by reduced lysosomal protein. Five samples were identified as possible pseudo-arylsulfatase A deficiency; four were confirmed. One multiple sulfatase deficiency patient was identified with multiple reduced sulfatase proteins. There were 10 MPS II patients identified with reduced iduronate 2-sulfatase, and one MPS II patient with iduronate 2-sulfatase in the unaffected range. For Fabry disease, 10 male patients were identified with reduced α-galactosidase and 2/6 female Fabry heterozygotes returned α-galactosidase concentrations in the male Fabry range. All 10 mucolipidosis II/III patients were identified with multiple raised proteins. For 79 blood spots with chitotriosidase >3.4 mg/l, a follow-up one-plex chitotriosidase assay enabled identification of all nine Gaucher patients.

Conclusion This study demonstrates the sensitivity and specificity of this technology to accurately identify 99% of LSD patients, with the exception of one MPS II false negative.

  • Lysosomal storage disorder
  • multiplex immune quantification, lysosomal protein
  • screening
  • diagnostics
  • metabolic disorders

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Background Lysosomal protein profiling is being developed as a high throughput method to screen populations for lysosomal storage disorders (LSD).

Design 1415 blood spots from patients referred to a metabolic clinic for LSD were screened using a single multiplex assay for 14 proteins in a dried blood spot.

Results All patients with Pompe disease, metachromatic leukodystrophy, and mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) type I, IIIA, IIIB and VI were identified by reduced lysosomal protein. Five samples were identified as possible pseudo-arylsulfatase A deficiency; four were confirmed. One multiple sulfatase deficiency patient was identified with multiple reduced sulfatase proteins. There were 10 MPS II patients identified with reduced iduronate 2-sulfatase, and one MPS II patient with iduronate 2-sulfatase in the unaffected range. For Fabry disease, 10 male patients were identified with reduced α-galactosidase and 2/6 female Fabry heterozygotes returned α-galactosidase concentrations in the male Fabry range. All 10 mucolipidosis II/III patients were identified with multiple raised proteins. For 79 blood spots with chitotriosidase >3.4 mg/l, a follow-up one-plex chitotriosidase assay enabled identification of all nine Gaucher patients.

Conclusion This study demonstrates the sensitivity and specificity of this technology to accurately identify 99% of LSD patients, with the exception of one MPS II false negative.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval This study was conducted with the approval of the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Women's and Children's Hospital, North Adelaide, Australia.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.