Search

The Marburg I polymorphism (G511E) in FSAP gene was listed as one of the risk factor for idiopathic DVT among the western population. The frequency of Marburg I polymorphism in India is presently not known. Fifty DVT cases and 50 healthy controls were tested for Marburg I polymorphism using ARMS-PCR technique. The thrombophilic risk factors (Protein C, Protein S, Antithrombin III, Factor V Leiden and antiphospholipid antibodies) were also determined. Marburg I polymorphism (heterozygous) was found in 2 patients (4%) but not in control subjects. These two cases did not have any other thrombophilia markers. Among the thrombophilic markers, heterozygous FVL mutation, PS, PC, AT deficiencies and antiphospholipid antibodies were seen in 10%, 10%, 6%, 6% and 8% of the patients respectively. The controls showed only the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies in 6% of subjects. Marburg I polymorphism among Indians DVT patients was determined for the first time. Its incidence was found in 4% of cases and not in controls. Although not statically significant this may be considered as one of the contributory risk factors for the development of DVT. A larger study is required for the validation of data.

There is paucity of data on infusion related hypersensitivity reactions (IRHR) pattern of bio-similar rituximab in B-cell lymphoma patients. As bio-similar molecules are independently developed monoclonal antibodies, they are likely to differ in immunogenicity and therefore, the hypersensitivity data of the innovator rituximab may not be directly applicable to patients treated with the biosimilar rituximab molecule. We analysed our data of 256 patients of B cell lymphoid neoplasm who received bio-similar rituximab (Reditux) based chemo-immunotherapy for their treatment. Total 56/256 (21.8%) patients had ≥ grade II IRHR with first dose of rituximab. Grade II reactions were seen in 32/256 (12.5%) cases, grade III and grade IV reactions were seen in 21/256 (8.2%) and 3/256 (1.2%) cases, respectively. Rituximab was withdrawn from all further therapy in only 2 patients due to grade IV IRHR after attempting re-challenge of the drug under intensive monitoring. There was no difference in complete response rates in patients with or without IRHR during their first rituximab infusion. The IRHRs with bio-similar rituximab noted in our study were comparable with the previously published reactions associated with the original rituximab.

Hypereosinophilia is part of a group of complex disorders with multisystem involvement. A 23 year old male was admitted to our centre with bilateral popliteal artery and venous thrombosis and impending gangrene of the left forefoot along with deep venous thrombosis of the right lower extremity. Investigations revealed marked peripheral blood eosinophilia (27,669/μL). Bone marrow showed increased eosinophils & eosinophil precursors and no evidence of a clonal disorder. Skin biopsy from the ulcerated lesions showed small vessel vasculitis with intense eosinophilic infiltration. Investigations to look for secondary causes of hypereosinophilia in the form of Antinuclear Antibody, P-Anti Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody (ANCA) and C-ANCA and FIP1L1-PDGFRA, Bcr-Abl and JAK2V617F mutations were negative. The arterial and venous thrombosis and cutaneous vasculitis were linked to the presence of hypereosinophilic syndrome. The patient’s illness responded to high dose corticosteroids leading to complete resolution of symptoms. We reviewed the literature on the lesser known entity of eosinophilic vasculitis and its association with thrombosis.