SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Expanding the Neurological Phenotype of Anderson-Fabry Disease: Proof of Concept for an Extrapyramidal Neurodegenerative Pattern and Comparison with Monogenic Vascular Parkinsonism.

Cells · 2024-06-29

DOI: 10.3390/cells13131131PMID: 38994983

Open accessComparative Study; review-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Anderson-Fabry disease (AFD) is a genetic sphingolipidosis involving virtually the entire body. Among its manifestation, the involvement of the central and peripheral nervous system is frequent. In recent decades, it has become evident that, besides cerebrovascular damage, a pure neuronal phenotype of AFD exists in the central nervous system, which is supported by clinical, pathological, and neuroimaging data. This neurodegenerative phenotype is often clinically characterized by an extrapyramidal component similar to the one seen in prodromal Parkinson's disease (PD). We analyzed the biological, clinical pathological, and neuroimaging data supporting this phenotype recently proposed in the literature. Moreover, we compared the neurodegenerative PD phenotype of AFD with a classical monogenic vascular disease responsible for vascular parkinsonism and cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL). A substantial difference in the clinical and neuroimaging features of neurodegenerative and vascular parkinsonism phenotypes emerged, with AFD being potentially responsible for both forms of the extrapyramidal involvement, and CADASIL mainly associated with the vascular subtype. The available studies share some limitations regarding both patients' information and neurological and genetic investigations. Further studies are needed to clarify the potential association between AFD and extrapyramidal manifestations.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.