Síndrome de VEXAS: manifestaciones clínicas, diagnóstico y tratamiento / VEXAS syndrome: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment

El síndrome de VEXAS (Vacuolas, enzima E1, ligado al X, Autoinflamatorio, Somático) es un síndrome autoinflamatorio de inicio en la edad adulta que se caracteriza por mutaciones somáticas en el gen UBA1 y se considera el prototipo de enfermedad hematoinflamatoria. Los pacientes con síndrome de VEXAS exhiben manifestaciones inflamatorias y hematológicas que pueden conducir a diagnósticos clínicos como policondritis recidivante, poliarteritis nodosa, síndrome de Sweet y síndrome mielodisplásico. El diagnóstico requiere la evaluación de la médula ósea en búsqueda de vacuolas citoplásmicas en precursores mieloides y eritroides. Sin embargo, la confirmación genética de las mutaciones en UBA1 es necesaria. El tratamiento es un desafío y a menudo incluye glucocorticoides e inmunosupresores, con respuestas variables. Las terapias hipometilantes y el trasplante alogénico de células progenitoras hematopoyéticas se consideran terapias prometedoras. El pronóstico es influido por factores genéticos y clínicos. El objetivo de esta revisión es proporcionar una visión general sobre la patogénesis, la presentación clínica, el tratamiento y el pronóstico del síndrome de VEXAS para la comunidad médica latinoamericana.(AU)

VEXAS (Vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X-linked, Autoinflammatory, Somatic) syndrome is an adult-onset autoinflammatory syndrome characterized by somatic mutations in the UBA1 gene and is considered the prototype of hematoinflammatory diseases. Patients with VEXAS syndrome exhibit inflammatory and hematological manifestations that can lead to clinical diagnoses such as relapsing polychondritis, polyarteritis nodosa, Sweet syndrome, and myelodysplastic syndrome. Diagnosis requires bone marrow evaluation to identify cytoplasmic vacuoles in myeloid and erythroid precursors. However, genetic confirmation of mutations in UBA1 is necessary. Treatment is challenging and often involves glucocorticoids and immunosuppressants with variable responses. Hypomethylating agents and allogenic haemopoietic stem cell transplant are considered promising therapies. Prognosis is influenced by genetic and clinical factors. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, treatment, and prognosis of VEXAS syndrome for the Latin American medical community.(AU)

VEXAS syndrome: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment.

VEXAS (Vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X-linked, Autoinflammatory, Somatic) syndrome is an adult-onset autoinflammatory syndrome characterized by somatic mutations in the UBA1 gene and is considered the prototype of hematoinflammatory diseases. Patients with VEXAS syndrome exhibit inflammatory and hematological manifestations that can lead to clinical diagnoses such as relapsing polychondritis, polyarteritis nodosa, Sweet syndrome, and myelodysplastic syndrome. Diagnosis requires bone marrow evaluation to identify cytoplasmic vacuoles in myeloid and erythroid precursors. However, genetic confirmation of mutations in UBA1 is necessary. Treatment is challenging and often involves glucocorticoids and immunosuppressants with variable responses. Hypomethylating agents and allogenic haemopoietic stem cell transplant are considered promising therapies. Prognosis is influenced by genetic and clinical factors. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, treatment, and prognosis of VEXAS syndrome for the Latin American medical community.

Are delays in diagnosis and treatment of acute leukemia in a middle-income country associated with poor outcomes? A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute leukemias (ALs) are aggressive diseases that lead to death without medical attention. We evaluated the association between delays in diagnosis and poor outcomes in AL by evaluating the symptom onset to treatment intervals in adults with newly diagnosed AL and their effect on an early death (ED). METHODS: We assessed adults diagnosed with AL between 2015 and 2020 and evaluated baseline characteristics, the patient interval (PI), diagnostic interval (DI), treatment interval (TI) and the total time interval (TTI) to determine ED-associated factors. MAIN RESULTS: We assessed 102 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), 57 with acute myeloblastic leukemia (AML) and 29 with acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). Median interval days were PI 14, DI 10, TI 4 and TTI 31.5. The TI and TTI intervals were lower in APL than in ALL and AML; TI 1 vs. 4 and 3 (p = 0.001) and TTI 21 vs. 31 and 35 (p = 0.016). The 30-day and 60-day EDs were 13.8% and 20.7%, mainly infections. ECOG > 2 (OR = 15.0) and PI < 7 days (OR = 4.06) were associated with 30-day ED; AML (OR = 2.69), high-risk (OR = 3.34), albumin < 3.5 g/dl (OR = 5) and platelets < 20 × 103/uL (OR = 2.71) with a 60-day ED. CONCLUSION: None of the interval-delays were associated with an ED. Intervals seemed to be longer in patients without an ED, except for the TI, probably because of "the waiting time paradox." Aggressive manifestations of disease may lead to shorter diagnostic intervals, but increased mortality.

Are accessory spleen screening and resection in refractory immune cytopenia an effective strategy or a waste of resources?

Splenectomy remains an effective treatment for refractory immune cytopenia (RIC), which encompasses immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) and autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA). Accessory spleens (AS) have been described without identifying specific risk factors. We retrospectively analyzed patients with RIC after splenectomy who underwent splenic scintigraphy (SS) at our institution. Seventy-one patients were included. Sixty-two patients had ITP, five had AIHA, and four had Evans syndrome. Seventy-five percent (n = 53) were women. Eleven patients (15.5%) had an AS detected by SS. A complete response (CR) to first-line steroids (odds ratio (OR) 5.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37-24.14, p = 0.017) and the absence of Howell-Jolly bodies (HJB) in peripheral blood smear (PBS) (OR 11.37, 95% CI 2.70-47.85, p = 0.001) were found to be risk factors. Patients with both elements had a higher rate of AS (83.3%) when compared to those with one or no factors (p < 0.001). Eight patients (73%) underwent an accessory splenectomy: seven (87.5%) achieved a CR, and none had perioperative complications. The presence of HJB in PBS changed from 25 to 87.5% after accessory splenectomy. We recommend the search for an AS via SS in patients with RIC due to ITP, who had a CR to corticosteroids and the absence of HJB in PBS. Accessory splenectomy is a safe and effective procedure.

Circulating HMGB1 is increased in myelodysplastic syndrome but not in other bone marrow failure syndromes: proof-of-concept cross-sectional study.

Background: Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is associated with persistent immune activation. High mobility group box-1 (HMGB1) is a ubiquitous, functionally diverse, non-histone intranuclear protein. During acute and chronic inflammatory states, HMGB1 is actively released by inflammatory cells, further amplifying the inflammatory response. A role in MDS and other hypoplastic bone marrow (BM) disorders is incompletely understood. Objectives: The objective of the study is to evaluate whether circulating HMGB1 is elevated in patients with MDS and other BM failure syndromes [namely, aplastic anemia (AA) and paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH)]. Design: This is a observational, cross-sectional, single-center, exploratory study. Methods: We evaluated circulating concentrations of HMGB1, interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α in patients with MDS and age-matched hematologically healthy controls as well as patients with AA and PNH. Results: We included 66 patients with MDS and 65 age-matched controls as well as 44 patients with other BM failures (AA = 27, PNH = 17). Circulating levels of HMGB1 were higher in patients with MDS [median, 4.9 ng/ml; interquartile range (IQR): 2.3-8.1] than in AA (median, 2.6 ng/ml; IQR: 1.7-3.7), PNH (median, 1.7 ng/ml; IQR: 0.9-2.5), and age-matched healthy individuals (median, 1.9 ng/ml; IQR: 0.9-2.5) (p = 0.0001). We observed higher concentrations of HMGB1 in the very low/low-risk MDS patients than in the intermediate/high/very high-risk ones (p = 0.046). Finally, in comparison with patients with AA, those with hypocellular MDS (h-MDS) had significantly higher levels of circulating HMGB1 (n = 14; median concentration, 5.6 ng/ml, IQR: 2.8-7.3; p = 0.006). We determined a circulating HMGB1 value of 4.095 ng/ml as a diagnostic cutoff differentiator between h-MDS and AA. Conclusion: These observations indicate that circulating HMGB1 is increased in patients with MDS. HMGB1 (but not IL-1ß or TNF-α) differentiated between MDS and other BM failures, suggesting that HMGB1 may be mechanistically involved in MDS and a druggable target to decrease inflammation in MDS.

Treating Acute Leukemia During the COVID-19 Pandemic in an Environment With Limited Resources: A Multicenter Experience in Four Latin American Countries.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic is a colossal challenge for global health; nonetheless, specific subgroups face considerably higher risks for infection and mortality. Among patients with malignant diseases, those with hematologic neoplasms are at a higher risk for poor outcomes. The objective of this study was to register treatment modifications associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and their short-term consequences in Latin America. METHODS: Multicenter, prospective, observational, cohort study including patients older than 14 years from 14 centers in four countries (Mexico, Peru, Guatemala, and Panama) who had a confirmed diagnosis of acute leukemia, and who were undergoing active treatment since the first COVID-19 case in each country until the cutoff on July 15, 2020. RESULTS: We recruited 635 patients. Treatment modifications because of the COVID-19 pandemic were reported in 40.8% of cases. The main reason for such modifications was logistic issues (55.0%) and the most frequent modification was chemotherapy delay (42.0%). A total of 13.1% patients developed COVID-19 disease, with a mortality of 37.7%. Several factors were identified as independently associated with mortality, including a diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia (odds ratio 2.38 [95% CI, 1.47 to 3.84]; P < .001), while the use of telemedicine was identified as a protective factor (odds ratio 0.36 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.82]; P = .014). CONCLUSION: These results highlight the collateral damage of COVID-19 in oncology patients.