Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD), a rare lysosomal storage disease, is an autosomal recessive genetic disorder caused by different SMPD1 mutations. Historically, ASMD has been classified as Niemann-Pick disease (NPD) types A (NPD A) and B (NPD B). NPD A is associated with a uniformly devastating disease course, with rapidly progressing psychomotor degeneration, leading to death typically by the age of 3 years, most often from respiratory failure. In contrast, the clinical phenotype and life expectancy of patients with NPD B may vary widely. Almost all patients have hepatosplenomegaly and an atherogenic lipid profile, and most patients have interstitial lung disease with progressive impairment of pulmonary function and hematologic abnormalities including cytopenias. Other common clinical manifestations include liver dysfunction, heart disease, skeletal abnormalities and growth delays. Some patients with ASMD who survive beyond early childhood have intermediate phenotypes (variant NPD B) characterized by combinations of non-neurologic and mild to severe neurologic symptoms. The physical and psychosocial burden of illness in patients with NPD B is substantial. Common symptoms include shortness of breath, joint or limb pain, abdominal pain, bleeding and bruising. The disease often leads to chronic fatigue, limited physical or social activity and difficulties in performing daily activities or work. Many patients die before or in early adulthood, often from pneumonia/respiratory failure or liver failure. Available treatments are limited to symptom management and supportive care. An enzyme replacement therapy currently in clinical development is expected to be the first treatment addressing the underlying pathology of the disease. Early diagnosis and appropriate management are essential for reducing the risk of complications. While knowledge about ASMD is evolving, more evidence about ASMD and the natural history across the disease spectrum is needed, to improve disease recognition, timely diagnosis and appropriate disease management.

Objective: To compare data on the practices of molecular genetic testing (MGT) in laboratories in the United States with those in 18 other countries. Methods: A Web-based survey of MGT laboratory directors (n = 827; response rate 63%) in 18 countries on three continents was carried out, and the response from U.S. laboratories compared to all others. Quality assurance and reporting indices were developed and calculated for each responding laboratory. Results: A comparison of U.S. results with all other countries identified differences in laboratory setting, personnel qualifications, and the specific tests being offered, but similar rates of adherence to MGT quality standards and reporting practices were found. The survey also documented substantial transborder flow of specimens, most commonly due to the lack of availability of the test in the United States or because the test was available only through a research protocol, highlighting the need for common reporting and practice guidelines for the international MGT community. Conclusion: The findings presented here provide further support for the need to consider the application of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Guidelines and the establishment of compatible accreditation programs or equivalent mechanisms across national borders to ensure the quality of laboratory services and the clinical usefulness of molecular genetic test reports for referred specimens.