摘要
AIM To describe the frequency and clinical characteristics of patients with undifferentiated periodic fever(UPF) and to investigate whether a clinical classification of UPF based on the PRINTO-Eurofever score can help predicting the response to treatment and the outcome at follow-up.METHODS Clinical and therapeutic information of patients with recurrent fever who presented at a single pediatric rheumatology center from January 2006 through April 2016 were retrospectively collected. Patients with a clinical suspicion of hereditary periodic fever(HPF) syndrome and patients with clinical picture of periodic fever, aphthae, pharingitis, adenitis(PFAPA) who were refractory to tonsillectomy underwent molecular analysis of five HPF-related genes: MEFV(NM_000243.2), MVK(NM_000431.3), TNFRSF1 A(NM_001065.3), NLRP3(NM_001079821.2), NLRP12(NM_001277126.1). All patients who had a negative genetic result were defined as UPF and further investigated. PRINTO-Eurofever score for clinical diagnosis of HPF was calculated in all cases. RESULTS Of the 221 patients evaluated for periodic fever, twelve subjects with a clinical picture of PFAPA who were refractory to tonsillectomy and 22 subjects with a clinical suspicion of HPF underwent genetic analysis. Twenty-three patients(10.4%) resulted negative and were classified as UPF. The median age at presentation of patients with UPF was 9.5 mo(IQR 4-24). Patients with UPF had a higher frequency of aphthae(52.2% vs 0%, P = 0.0026) and musculoskeletal pain(65.2% vs 18.2%, P = 0.0255) than patients with genetic confirmed HPF. Also, patients with UPF had a higher frequency of aphthous stomatitis(52.2% vs 10.7%, P < 0.0001), musculoskeletal pain(65.2% vs 8,0%, P < 0.0001), and abdominal pain(52.2% vs 4.8%, P < 0.0001) and a lower frequency of pharyngitis(56.6% vs 81.3%, P = 0.0127) compared with typical PFAPA in the same cohort. Twenty-one of 23 patients with UPF(91.3%) received steroids, being effective in 16; 13(56.2%) were given colchicine, which was effective in 6. Symptoms resolution occurred in 2 patients with UPF at last follow-up. Classification according to the PRINTOEurofever score did not correlate with treatment response and prognosis. CONCLUSION UPF is not a rare diagnosis among patients with periodic fever. Clinical presentation place UPF half way on a clinical spectrum between PFAPA and HPF. The PRINTOEurofever score is not useful to predict clinical outcome and treatment response in these patients.
AIM To describe the frequency and clinical characteristics of patients with undifferentiated periodic fever(UPF) and to investigate whether a clinical classification of UPF based on the PRINTO-Eurofever score can help predicting the response to treatment and the outcome at follow-up.METHODS Clinical and therapeutic information of patients with recurrent fever who presented at a single pediatric rheumatology center from January 2006 through April 2016 were retrospectively collected. Patients with a clinical suspicion of hereditary periodic fever(HPF) syndrome and patients with clinical picture of periodic fever, aphthae, pharingitis, adenitis(PFAPA) who were refractory to tonsillectomy underwent molecular analysis of five HPF-related genes: MEFV(NM_000243.2), MVK(NM_000431.3), TNFRSF1 A(NM_001065.3), NLRP3(NM_001079821.2), NLRP12(NM_001277126.1). All patients who had a negative genetic result were defined as UPF and further investigated. PRINTO-Eurofever score for clinical diagnosis of HPF was calculated in all cases. RESULTS Of the 221 patients evaluated for periodic fever, twelve subjects with a clinical picture of PFAPA who were refractory to tonsillectomy and 22 subjects with a clinical suspicion of HPF underwent genetic analysis. Twenty-three patients(10.4%) resulted negative and were classified as UPF. The median age at presentation of patients with UPF was 9.5 mo(IQR 4-24). Patients with UPF had a higher frequency of aphthae(52.2% vs 0%, P = 0.0026) and musculoskeletal pain(65.2% vs 18.2%, P = 0.0255) than patients with genetic confirmed HPF. Also, patients with UPF had a higher frequency of aphthous stomatitis(52.2% vs 10.7%, P < 0.0001), musculoskeletal pain(65.2% vs 8,0%, P < 0.0001), and abdominal pain(52.2% vs 4.8%, P < 0.0001) and a lower frequency of pharyngitis(56.6% vs 81.3%, P = 0.0127) compared with typical PFAPA in the same cohort. Twenty-one of 23 patients with UPF(91.3%) received steroids, being effective in 16; 13(56.2%) were given colchicine, which was effective in 6. Symptoms resolution occurred in 2 patients with UPF at last follow-up. Classification according to the PRINTOEurofever score did not correlate with treatment response and prognosis. CONCLUSION UPF is not a rare diagnosis among patients with periodic fever. Clinical presentation place UPF half way on a clinical spectrum between PFAPA and HPF. The PRINTOEurofever score is not useful to predict clinical outcome and treatment response in these patients.
基金
Supported by the Institute for Maternal and Child Health IRCCS Burlo Garofolo,No.RC36/11
