Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with single and combined effects of Factor V Leiden, Prothrombin 20210A and Methylenetethraydrofolate reductase C677T: a meta-analysis involving over 11,000 cases and 21,000 controls

Genetic and environmental factors interact in determining the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The risk associated with the polymorphic variants G1691A of factor V (Factor V Leiden, FVL), G20210A of prothrombin (PT20210A) and C677T of methylentetrahydrofolate reductase (C677T MTHFR) genes has been investigated in many studies. We performed a pooled analysis of case–control and cohort studies investigating in adults the association between each variant and VTE, published on Pubmed, Embase or Google through January 2010. Authors of eligible papers, were invited to provide all available individual data for the pooling. The Odds Ratio (OR) for first VTE associated with each variant, individually and combined with the others, were calculated with a random effect model, in heterozygotes and homozygotes (dominant model for FVL and PT20210A; recessive for C677T MTHFR). We analysed 31 databases, including 11,239 cases and 21,521 controls. No significant association with VTE was found for homozygous C677T MTHFR (OR: 1.38; 95 % confidence intervals [CI]: 0.98–1.93), whereas the risk was increased in carriers of either heterozygous FVL or PT20210 (OR = 4.22; 95 % CI: 3.35–5.32; and OR = 2.79;95 % CI: 2.25–3.46, respectively), in double heterozygotes (OR = 3.42; 95 %CI 1.64-7.13), and in homozygous FVL or PT20210A (OR = 11.45; 95 %CI: 6.79-19.29; and OR: 6.74 (CI 95 % 2.19–20.72), respectively). The stratified analyses showed a stronger effect of FVL on individuals ≤ 45 years (p value for interaction = 0.036) and of PT20210A in women using oral contraceptives (p-value for interaction = 0.045). In this large pooled analysis, inclusive of large studies like MEGA, no effect was found for C677T MTHFR on VTE; FVL and PT20210A were confirmed to be moderate risk factors. Notably, double carriers of the two genetic variants produced an impact on VTE risk significantly increased but weaker than previously thought

Cyclophosphamide vs rituximab for eradicating inhibitors in acquired hemophilia A: A randomized trial in 108 patients

International audienceBACKGROUND: Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is a rare autoimmune disorder due to autoantibodies against Factor VIII, with a high mortality risk. Treatments aim to control bleeding and eradicate antibodies by immunosuppression. International recommendations rely on registers and international expert panels. METHODS: CREHA, an open-label randomized trial, compared the efficacy and safety of cyclophosphamide and rituximab in association with steroids in patients with newly diagnosed AHA. Participants were treated with 1 mg/kg prednisone daily and randomly assigned to receive either 1.5-2 mg/kg/day cyclophosphamide orally for 6 weeks, or 375 mg/m(2) rituximab once weekly for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was complete remission over 18 months. Secondary endpoints included time to achieve complete remission, relapse occurrence, mortality, infections and bleeding, and severe adverse events. RESULTS: Recruitment was interrupted because of new treatment recommendations after 108 patients included (58 cyclophosphamide, 50 rituximab). After 18 months, 39 cyclophosphamide patients (67.2 %) and 31 rituximab patients (62.0 %) were in complete remission (OR 1.26; 95 % CI, 0.57 to 2.78). In the poor prognosis group (FVIII < 1 IU/dL, inhibitor titer > 20 BU mL(-1)), significantly more remissions were observed with cyclophosphamide (22 patients, 78.6 %) than with rituximab (12 patients, 48.0 %; p = 0.02). Relapse rates, deaths, severe infections, and bleeding were similar in the 2 groups. In patients with severe infection, cumulative doses of steroids were significantly higher than in patients without infection (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Cyclophosphamide and rituximab showed similar efficacy and safety. As first line, cyclophosphamide seems preferable, especially in poor prognosis patients, as administered orally and less expensive. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number: NCT01808911