OR2-002 – The risk of FMF in MEFV heterozygotes

International audienc

International Retrospective Chart Review of Treatment Patterns in Severe Familial Mediterranean Fever, Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor–Associated Periodic Syndrome, and Mevalonate Kinase Deficiency/Hyperimmunoglobulinemia D Syndrome

Objective: Periodic fever syndrome (PFS) conditions are characterized by recurrent attacks of fever and localized inflammation. This study examined the diagnostic pathway and treatments at tertiary centers for familial Mediterranean fever (FMF), tumor necrosis factor receptor–associated periodic syndrome (TRAPS), and mevalonate kinase deficiency (MKD)/hyperimmunoglobulinemia D syndrome (HIDS). Methods: PFS specialists at medical centers in the US, the European Union, and the eastern Mediterranean participated in a retrospective chart review, providing de‐identified data in an electronic case report form. Patients were treated between 2008 and 2012, with at least 1 year of followup; all had clinical and/or genetically proven disease and were on/eligible for biologic treatment. Results: A total of 134 patients were analyzed: FMF (n = 49), TRAPS (n = 47), and MKD/HIDS (n = 38). Fever was commonly reported as severe across all indications. Other frequently reported severe symptoms were serositis for FMF patients and elevated acute‐phase reactants and gastrointestinal upset for TRAPS and MKD/HIDS. A long delay from disease onset to diagnosis was seen within TRAPS and MKD/HIDS (5.8 and 7.1 years, respectively) compared to a 1.8‐year delay in FMF patients. An equal proportion of TRAPS patients first received anti–interleukin‐1 (anti‐IL‐1) and anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti‐TNF) biologic agents, whereas IL‐1 blockade was the main choice for FMF patients resistant to colchicine and MKD/HIDS patients. For TRAPS patients, treatment with anakinra versus anti‐TNF treatments as first biologic agent resulted in significantly higher clinical and biochemical responses (P = 0.03 and P < 0.01, respectively). No significant differences in responses were observed between biologic agents among other cohorts. Conclusion: Referral patterns and diagnostic delays highlight the need for greater awareness and improved diagnostics for PFS. This real‐world treatment assessment supports the need for further refinement of treatment practices

International periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis, cervical adenitis syndrome cohort: description of distinct phenotypes in 301 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe the clinical features of periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis and cervical adenitis (PFAPA) and identify distinct phenotypes in a large cohort of patients from different countries. METHODS: We established a web-based multicentre cohort through an international collaboration within the periodic fevers working party of the Pediatric Rheumatology European Society (PReS). The inclusion criterion was a diagnosis of PFAPA given by an experienced paediatric rheumatologist participating in an international working group on periodic fever syndromes. RESULTS: Of the 301 patients included from the 15 centres, 271 had pharyngitis, 236 cervical adenitis, 171 oral aphthosis and 132 with all three clinical features. A total of 228 patients presented with additional symptoms (131 gastrointestinal symptoms, 86 arthralgias and/or myalgias, 36 skin rashes, 8 neurological symptoms). Thirty-one patients had disease onset after 5 years and they reported more additional symptoms. A positive family history for recurrent fever or recurrent tonsillitis was found in 81 patients (26.9%). Genetic testing for monogenic periodic fever syndromes was performed on 111 patients, who reported fewer occurrences of oral aphthosis or additional symptoms. Twenty-four patients reported symptoms (oral aphthosis and malaise) outside the flares. The CRP was &gt;50 mg/l in the majority (131/190) of the patients tested during the fever. CONCLUSION: We describe the largest cohort of PFAPA patients presented so far. We confirm that PFAPA may present with varied clinical manifestations and we show the limitations of the commonly used diagnostic criteria. Based on detailed analysis of this cohort, a consensus definition of PFAPA with better-defined criteria should be proposed

Development of the autoinflammatory disease damage index (ADDI)

OBJECTIVES: Autoinflammatory diseases cause systemic inflammation that can result in damage to multiple organs. A validated instrument is essential to quantify damage in individual patients and to compare disease outcomes in clinical studies. Currently, there is no such tool. Our objective was to develop a common autoinflammatory disease damage index (ADDI) for familial Mediterranean fever, cryopyrin-associated periodic syndromes, tumour necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic fever syndrome and mevalonate kinase deficiency. METHODS: We developed the ADDI by consensus building. The top 40 enrollers of patients in the Eurofever Registry and 9 experts from the Americas participated in multiple rounds of online surveys to select items and definitions. Further, 22 (parents of) patients rated damage items and suggested new items. A consensus meeting was held to refine the items and definitions, which were then formally weighted in a scoring system derived using decision-making software, known as 1000minds. RESULTS: More than 80% of the experts and patients completed the online surveys. The preliminary ADDI contains 18 items, categorised in the following eight organ systems: reproductive, renal/amyloidosis, developmental, serosal, neurological, ears, ocular and musculoskeletal damage. The categories renal/amyloidosis and neurological damage were assigned the highest number of points, serosal damage the lowest number of points. The involvement of (parents of) patients resulted in the inclusion of, for example, chronic musculoskeletal pain. CONCLUSIONS: An instrument to measure damage caused by autoinflammatory diseases is developed based on consensus building. Patients fulfilled a significant role in this process