for agalsidase alfa is 0.2 mg/kg and for agalsidase beta it is 1.0 mg/kg body weight. Approval for both agents was based on Orphan Drug provisions with the use of surrogate end points, 8 such as clearing of vascular endothelial deposits, 11 and symptomatic improvement of pain scores. 12 Furthermore, when ERT was initiated in patients with relatively mild disease, there appeared to be favorable responses in terms of slowing or preventing serious organ dysfunction. 12,13 Less favorable results have been reported in open-label, longitudinal studies in patients with more advanced kidney disease, particularly with overt proteinuria. 14,15 These concerns are echoed by the recently published results of a Phase IV, randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled trial, in which 82 patients with initial glomerular filtration rate (GFR) values 55 mL/min/1.73 m 2 did quite well compared with their placebo control group, but those with more severe disease and proteinuria were not as clearly benefited by ERT. 16 Interpretation of this study is complicated by a baseline imbalance in the urine protein excretion between the placebo group and the agalsidase beta group, 16 and the relatively small number of patients included in what was designed to be an outcome study. 17 Proteinuria has emerged as an important risk factor for progression of kidney involvement in a number of kidney diseases, 18 including Fabry disease. 13 The significance of proteinuria in patients with Fabry disease and the limitations of ERT in addressing this issue have recently been examined. A common thread in all of the published outcome studies with agalsidase alfa 15,19 and agalsidase beta 11,13,14,16,20 is that ERT at the currently approved doses simply does not impact urinary protein excretion. The association between pathologic changes (eg, focal and global glomerular sclerosis, tubular atrophy, interstitial fibrosis) and proteinuria is not surprising. 20,21 To date, however, there has been no systematic attempt to reduce the proteinuria and slow the progression of kidney GFR decline in Fabry disease with antiproteinuric therapy, as has been so successful in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus and other forms of proteinuric kidney disease. 22,23 A number of patients in the various trials 11,13‐16,19,20 were treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), but in none of these studies was systematic reduction of urinary protein excretion identified as a primary or secondary objective. 16 Post hoc analysis of the Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan Study would stongly support the primary goal of reducing urinary protein and albumin excretion to a target level, perhaps even more importantly than achieving a fixed goal for systolic