Abstract

Case reports might have a prominent role in the rare diseases field, due to the small number of patients affected by one such disease. A previous systematic review regarding the efficacy of laronidase therapy in patients with mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS-I) who initiated enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) in adult age has been published. The review included a meta-analysis of 19 clinical studies and the description of eleven case reports. It was of interest to perform a meta-analysis of those case reports to explore the role of such meta-analyses as a tool for evidence-based medicine in rare diseases. The study included all case reports with standard treatment regimen. Primary analysis was the percentage of case reports showing an improvement in a specific outcome. Only when that percentage was statistically higher than 5%, the improvement was confirmed as such. The outcomes that accomplished this criterion were ranked and compared to the GRADE criteria obtained by those same outcomes in the previous meta-analysis of clinical studies. There were three outcomes that had a significant improvement: Urine glycosaminoglycans, liver volume and 6-minute walking test. Positive and negative predictive values, sensitivity and specificity for the results of the meta-analysis of case reports as compared to that of clinical studies were 100%, 88.9%, 75% and 100%, respectively. Accordingly, absolute (Rho=0.82, 95%CI: 0.47 to 0.95) and relative agreement (Kappa=0.79, 95%CI: 0.593 to 0.99) between the number of case reports with improvement in a specific outcome and the GRADE evidence score for that outcome were good. Sensitivity analysis showed that agreement between the meta-analysis of case reports and that of the clinical studies were good only when using a strong confirmatory strategy for outcome improvement in case reports. We found an agreement between the results of meta-analyses from case reports and from clinical studies in the efficacy of laronidase therapy in patients with MPS-I who initiated ERT in adult age. This agreement suggests that combining case reports quantitatively, rather than analyzing them separately or qualitatively, may improve conclusions in the field of rare diseases.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.