CC BY
4©2023 The Author(s).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International L
ORIGINAL PAPER
Genotype Mutations in Palestinian Children with Familial Mediterranean Fever: Clinical Profile, and Response to Colchicine Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Oadi N. Shrateh1*, Mariam Thalji1*, Afnan W.M. Jobran1, Aml M. Brakat2, Abdelrahman M. Attia3, Fawzy M. Abunejma1,456
1Faculty of Medicine, Al-Quds University, Jerusalem, Palestine, 2Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Ash Sharqia Governorate, Egypt, 3Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt, 4Department of Paediatric Rheumatology, Palestinian Red Crescent Society Hospitals, Hebron, Palestine, 5Department of Paediatric Rheumatology, Al Ahli Hospital, Hebron, Palestine, 6Paediatric Department, Faculty of Medicine, Hebron University, Palestine Contributed equally as first co-authors
ABSTRACT
Background: Familial Mediterranean fever is a hereditary autoinflammatory disease affecting mainly Arabs, Turks, Armenians, and Jews with genotype-phenotype heterogeneity, presenting as recurrent episodes of fever along with polyserositis and rash. To date, more than 370 mutations in the MEFV gene have been recognized to cause the disease. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 124 patients in Hebron, Palestine, diagnosed with FMF at the Al-Ahli, and Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) Hospitals. Results: The median age of diagnosis was five years, presenting as abdominal pain (76.6%), fever (67.7%), joint pain and arthritis. Regarding MEFV gene mutations, we had 62 patients (50%) with heterozygous genotypes, 40 patients (32.3%) with homozygous phenotypes, 21 patients (16.9%) with compound heterozygous genotypes, and one was a missing state. Regarding variant frequencies, M694V was the most common one (43.4%), followed by E148Q (15.6%), V726A (5.7%), A744S (4.1%), and R202Q (4.1%). Positive family history was detected in 59 patients (54.6%), and there was no significant difference in zygosity regarding characteristics, consanguinity, and family history. Conclusions: We affirm in this study of 124 children with FMF, abdominal pain, followed by fever, joint pain and arthritis were the main manifestations. Further, M694V, E148Q, V726A, A744S, and R202Q were the most frequent mutations, and carrying the M649V mutations is associated with a predisposition to other comorbidities. We believe that this study gives a pervasive overview of FMF in Palestinian patients. Looking forward, future studies on a larger number of patients could precisely highlight the genotype-phenotype association among FMF patients.
Mediterr J Rheumatol 2023;34(3):332-41 https://doi.org/10.31138/mjr.20230912.stm
Article Submitted: 12 Jul 2023; Revised Form: 8 Sep 2023; Article Accepted: 8 Sep 2023; Available Online: 12 Sep 2023
Keywords: Familial Mediterranean fever, Palestinian, genetics, clinical presentation, colchicine
Corresponding Author:
Oadi N. Shrateh
Faculty of Medicine, Al-Quds University
57 Ramallah Lod Str., Ramallah
West Bank, Palestine
Tel.: +97 259 365 6364
Fax: +97 022 986 311
E-mail: oadi.shrateh@students.alquds.edu
332 Cite this article as: Shrateh ON, Thalji M, Jobran AWM, Brakat AM, Attia AM, Abunejma FM. Genotype Mutations in Palestinian Children with Familial Mediterranean Fever: Clinical Profile, and Response to Colchicine Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Mediterr J Rheumatol 2023;34(3):332-41.
Abbreviations:
AID: Absolute Iron Deficiency FMF: Familial Mediterranean Fever HSP: Henoch-Schonlein Purpura IBD: Inflammatory Bowel Diseases MEFV: Mediterranean Fever PCR: Polymerase Chain Reaction PRCS: Palestinian red crescent SAA: Serum Amyloid A SNP: Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms
INTRODUCTION
Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is considered the most common inherited monogenic autoinflammatory periodic fever condition. FMF is additionally known as 'periodic peritonitis'. Although FMF can affect any individual from different areas in the world, it frequently involves those originating from the East Mediterranean region and its surroundings including Arabs, Armenians, Turks, and Jews.1-2 FMF usually follows an autosomal recessive inheritance pattern which means that both alleles (homozygosity) should be mutated. Nevertheless, many patients have been diagnosed with FMF while having only one genetic mutation (heterozygosity) with significant response to the treatment. 3 This genetic abnormality results in gaining of a new function in the MEFV gene.4
FMF is characterized by recurrent attacks of fever, poly-serositis, arthritis, and rash, while Amyloidosis remains the most dreaded complication, especially if complicated by renal impairment.5-6 Episodic complaints begin before the age of 20, with each episode lasting from several hours to a few days. Headache is an accompanying complaint besides fever.7
The most recent criteria were published in 2020 entitled 'Eurofever/PRINTO Classification Criteria', which combines clinical manifestation and genetic finding together, making it more sensitive (96%) than Tel Hashomer (88.4%) and Yalcinkaya-Ozen criteria (93.4%), but less specific. According to Eurofever/PRINTO Classification Criteria, diagnosis of FMF can be established by the presence of confirmatory MEFV genotype and at least one of the following: (1) duration of episodes 1-3 days, (2) Chest pain, (3) Arthritis, (4) Abdominal pain or presence of non-confirmatory MEFV genotype and at least two of the following: (1) Duration of episodes 1-3 days, (2) Chest pain, (3) Arthritis, (4) Abdominal pain.8 Genetic and molecular analysis plays a fundamental role in establishing the diagnosis of clinically suspected FMF patients. The MEFV gene is located on the short arm of chromosome 16 and is considered the responsible gene in FMF.9 Approximately 370 variants of the MEFV gene have been discovered. Among these sequence variants, mutations in the M694I, M694V, E148Q, V726A, and
M680I genes are responsible for the vast majority of FMF cases. 10% of patients diagnosed with FMF based on their clinical manifestations had been found to have no MEFV gene mutation.10-13
Since the 1970s, Colchicine has been considered the treatment of choice for FMF.14 The main goal of colchicine administration is to decrease and prevent the attacks frequency, making the patient symptoms-free between the episodes, and to prevent and halt amyloidosis development and progression.15 The severity of symptoms and treatment response are strongly correlated to the genetic variant, with the homozygous M694V mutation tend to have very severe disease and more colchicine resistance.16
This study aims to detect the genetic background of FMF, determine the most frequent MEFV mutations among Palestinians, and evaluate the clinical profile and the response to colchicine treatment with different genetic variants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The current study is a double-centre, retrospective cohort survey that included 124 children and adolescents of both sexes (<18 years) with the ascertained diagnosis of FMF according to their clinical manifestations and molecular basis, throughout their routine follow-up visits at the Rheumatology Outpatient Clinics of the paediat-ric department, Al-Ahli and Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) hospitals, Hebron, Palestine. The study was carried out during the last two weeks of May 2022. This study aims to investigate the genetic background of FMF among our included patients and identify the most frequent MEFV genetic mutations, to study how different genetic mutations could affect the phenotypic expression of the disease, to detect the most frequent presenting manifestation, and to evaluate patient's response to colchicine treatment with different genetic variants.
Diagnosis of FMF was established referring to the most recent criteria published in 2020 entitled 'Eurofever/ PRINTO Classification Criteria' which combines clinical manifestation and genetic findings together. Patients who did not meet the criteria were excluded from the study.
All patients had a comprehensive personal and family history, physical and laboratory assessment, and after obtaining the approval to conduct this study, authors electronically reviewed and validated the data from the medical records. In case of incomplete or missing data, patients were reevaluated. The outcomes of MEFV molecular analysis were documented. Subsequently, our patients were divided into either having homozygous (both alleles of the gene are affected), heterozygous (only one allele of the gene is affected) or compound heterozygous (mutated alleles on different
genes). Genetic analysis was performed, to recognize the 11 most prevalent MEFV mutations; the M694V, M694I, E148Q, R202Q, M680I, R329H, V726A, P369S, SCN9A, A744S and A408G.
DNA was extracted from blood using QIAamp DNA mini kit followed by FMF targeted variants detection using FMF Multiplex real time PCR kit (Cat. No: 11R-20-13) from SNP Biotechnology.
Data collection process
Medical records of patients were collected electronically from the hospital system, while some patients were face-to-face interviewed and re-evaluated.
Statistical analysis
We evaluated the normality of the distribution of quantitative variables using the Shapiro-Wilks test. Data were statistically described in terms of median and interquartile range for quantitative variables with nonnormal distribution, and frequency and percentage for qualitative variables. In the absence of normal distribution, non-parametric tests used for the Comparison of numerical variables between the study groups were done using the Kruskal Wallis test followed by post hoc pairwise comparisons between groups using the Bonferroni adjustment method after significant effects have been found for comparing categorical data, the Chi-square (x2) test was performed. A P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We did all statistical calculations using R language programming software version 4.1.2 and Microsoft Excel 365.
RESULTS
The omitted data has been presented in Table 1 to elucidate any discrepancies or incongruities with the data presented in other tables. We identified 124 cases with familial Mediterranean fever and according to gene mutations and allele status, we classified our patients into three groups: the first group (homozygous group) included 40 patients of whom 16 (40%) were males and 24 (60%) were females, second group (heterozygous group) included 62 patients of whom 27 (43.5%) were males and 35 (56.5%) were females and third group (Compound Heterozygous) included 21 patients of whom 12 (60%) were males and 8 (40%) were females. The median age [IQR] of our population and median age at diagnosis of all study populations were 9.00 [6.00, 13.00], and 5.00 [3.00, 8.00] years respectively.
Comparing characteristics, consanguinity, and family history between different genetic zygosity, none of the parameters was statistically significant. Positive family history was reported in a higher percentage among Heterozygous 30 (56.6%), which was not significant. Most of our patients received colchicine therapy (n= 92, 74%); with a median dose of 1.00 [0.50, 1.00] mg/day,
Table 1. Missing data.
Variable Overall Missing
(n=124) data
Age (years) (Median [IQR]) 9.00 [6.00, 13.00] 3
Gender n(%)
Female 67 (54.5) 1
Male 56 (45.5)
Consanguinity n (%)
1st degree 7 (6.3)
2nd degree 5 (4.5) 13
None 99 (8.2)
Family History of FMF n (%)
Negative 49 (45.4) 16
Positive 59 (54.6)
Age of presentation, 5.00 [3.00, 1
(Median [IQR]) 8.00]
Regimen mg/day 1.00 [0.50, 29
(Median [IQR]) 1.00]
and 64 (69.6%) of our patients reported improvement. Homozygous and compound heterozygous patients were more likely to receive a higher dose of colchicine than heterozygous patients (median dose 1 vs. 0.88 mg/ day) (Table 2).
Regarding the clinical features, abdominal pain was the most common presenting feature in 95 (76.6%) cases, followed by fever in 84 (67.7%). Joint pain and arthritis were common in both heterozygotes and the homozygotes groups and were documented in 16 (25.8%) and 17 (42.5%) patients, respectively (Figure 1). Regarding the consanguinity of the study population, 7 (6.3%) had consanguineous parents; 3 (5.3%) were heterozygous; 2 (5.7%) were homozygous, and 2 (11.1%) were compound heterozygous. We recorded a positive family history of FMF in 59 patients (54.6 %), of whom 30 (56.6%) were heterozygous and 19 (51.4%) were homozygous.
The most common seven mutations in our patients were (M694V, E148Q, V726A, A744S, R202Q, M694I, M694V + V726A, and M694V + R202Q). M694V was the most prevalent variant in the overall cohort 53 (43.4%) The M694V genotype distribution was homozygous in 32 (82.1%) and heterozygous in 21 (33.9%). The mutation E148Q was identified in 19 cases (15.6%), and all of these instances were found to be in a heterozygous state (30.6%) (Table 3).
FMF was associated with other disorders such as:
Table 2. Demographic data showing differences between homozygotes, heterozygotes, and compound heterozygotes.
Variable Homozygous Compound Heterozygous (n=21) Heterozygous (n=62) p-value
(n=40)
Age (years) (Median [IQR]) 9.75 [6.75, 13.00] 8.00 [6.75, 10.00] 8.50 [6.00, 13.00] 0.774
Gender n (%) Female Male 24 (60.0) 16 (40.0) 8 (40.0) 12 (60.0) 35 (56.5) 27 (43.5) 0.321
Consanguinity n (%) 1st degree 2nd degree none 2 (5.7) 3 (8.6) 30 (85.7) 2 (11.1) 0 (0.0) 16 (88.9) 3 (5.3) 2 (3.5) 52 (91.2) 0.55
Family History of FMF n (%) Negative Positive 18 (48.6) 19 (51.4) 8 (47.1) 9 (52.9) 23 (43.4) 30 (56.6) 0.88
Age of presentation (Median [IQR]) 5.00 [2.00, 7.00] 5.00 [3.00, 9.00] 5.00 [4.00, 8.00] 0.399
Regimen mg/day (Median [IQR]) 1.00 [1.00, 1.00] 1.00 [1.00, 1.00] 0.88 [0.50, 1.00] 0.01*
*P-value less than 0.05 is considered statistically significant; post-hoc testing using Bonferroni adjustment showed that the significance was between heterozygous and homozygous only (p=0.022). IQR: interquartile range; n: number of patients.
Table 3. Gene mutations and Alleles analysis in FMF patients.
Total N (%) Compound Heterozygous Heterozygous Homozygous p value
Mutated gene (%) A744S 5(4.1) 0 (0.0) 5 (8.1) 0 (0.0) <0.001*
E148Q 19 (15.6) 0 (0.0) 19 (30.6) 0 (0.0)
M694I 4 (3.3) 0 (0.0) 3 (4.8) 1 (2.6)
M694V 53 (43.4) 0 (0.0) 21 (33.9) 32 (82.1)
M694V + R202Q 3 (2.5) 3 (14.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
M694V + V726A 4 (3.3) 4 (19.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
R202Q 5 (4.1) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.6) 4 (10.3)
V726A 7 (5.7) 0 (0.0) 7 (11.3) 0 (0.0)
*P-values less than 0.05 are considered statistically significant.
juvenile idiopathic arthritis (J I A) in 3 patients having the M694V mutation; severe form of Henoch-Schoenlein purpura (HSP) was found in one patient having the M694V mutation; osteomyelitis was found in one patient having the V726A and E148Q
Figure 1. Clinical features of all patients of the different genetic zygosity.
Table 4. Demographic and clinical data, and response to colchicine in the most frequent mutations detected.
A744S (n=5) E148Q (n=19) M694I (n=4) M694V (n=53) M694V + R202Q (n=3) M694V + V726A (n=4) R202Q (n=5) V726A (n=7) p-value
Age (years) (median [IQR]) 8.00 [5.00, 8.50] 12.00 [9.25, 14.00] 10.25 [9.50, 11.62] 9.00 [6.00, 13.00] 7.00 [6.50, 8.50] 10.00 [7.50, 11.00] 8.00 [7.00, 10.00] 7.00 [5.50, 10.25] 0.784
Gender n (%) Female Male 2 (40.0) 3 (60.0) 10 (52.6) 9 (47.4) 3 (75.0) 1 (25.0) 31 (58.5) 22 (41.5) 1 (33.3) 2 (66.7) 1 (25.0) 3 (75.0) 4 (80.0) 1 (20.0) 4 (57.1) 3(42.9) 0.693
Fever(%) 3 (60.0) 10 (52.6) 1 (25.0) 35 (66.0) 2 (66.7) 3 (75.0) 5 (100.0) 7 (100.0) 0.422
Abdominal pain (%) 5 (100.0) 15 (78.9) 3 (75.0) 37 (69.8) 2 (66.7) 4 (100.0) 5 (100.0) 7 (100.0) 0.308
Joint pain and/or arthritis (%) 1 (20.0) 4 (21.1) 1 (25.0) 21 (39.6) 2 (66.7) 1 (25.0) 1 (20.0) 2 (28.6) 0.614
Chest pain (%) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.3) 0 (0.0) 7 (13.2) 1 (33.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (14.3) 0.224
Regimen mg/day (median [IQR]) 0.75 [0.50, 1.00] 1.00 [0.62, 1.00] 0.75 [0.38, 1.00] 1.00 [0.50, 1.00] 1.00 [1.00, 1.00] 1.00 [0.88, 1.00] 1.00 [0.88, 1.00] 0.50 [0.50, 0.50] 0.422
Follow up (%) Improving Unchanged Worsening 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (100.0) 5 (71.4) 0 (0.0) 2 (28.6) 2 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 17 (63.0) 3 (11.1) 7 (25.9) 1 (50.0) 0(0.0) 1 (50.0) 2 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (50.0) 0.989
Consanguinity (%) 1st degree 2nd degree None 1 (20.0) 0(0.0) 4 (80.0) 1 (5.6) 1 (5.6) 16 (88.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (100.0) 1 (2.2) 2 (4.3) 43 (93.5) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (100.0) 1 (20.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (80.0) 1 (16.7) 0 (0.0) 5 (83.3) 0.015*
Family history of FMF (%) Negative Positive 2 (40.0) 3 (60.0) 11 (64.7) 6 (35.3) 1 (25.0) 3 (75.0) 16 (34.8) 30 (65.2) 2 (66.7) 1 (33.3) 1 (33.3) 2 (66.7) 4 (80.0) 1 (20.0) 4 (66.7) 2 (33.3) 0.329
Age of presentation (years) (median [IQR]) 7.50 [4.00, 8.00] 7.00 [4.00, 9.00] 8.00 [6.25, 10.00] 5.00 [2.50, 6.50] 3.00 [2.95, 4.50] 3.50 [2.75, 5.25] 4.00 [4.00, 7.00] 4.00 [3.00, 7.70] 0.792
*P-values less than 0.05 are considered statistically significant. IQR: interquartile range; n: number of patients.
mutations; Crohn's disease was found in 3 patients having the M694V mutation; one patient had JIA and ankylosing spondylitis with the M694V mutation, and one patient had hypothyroidism with the V726A mutation. 32 (26.9%) of our cohort had microcytic anaemia, and most of them were either homozygous or heterozygous. Overall, 39 (69.6%) reported improvement during the follow-up (Repetitive sentence); 8 (80%) of them were Compound Heterozygous; 17 (68%) were heterozygotes, and 14 (66.7%) were homozygotes. 17 (63%) of M694V patients reported improvement and 7(25.9%) had worsened clinical presentation, while Five patients with E148Q mutation reported improvement in their symptoms 5 (71.4%). Patients with M694V and R202Q
mutations were more likely to present at a younger age than those with other mutations (Table 4). We employed Direct DNA sequencing to examine the exons of all individuals diagnosed with FMF, aiming to identify any mutations potentially responsible for the disease. Among the FMF patients, 80 exhibited an exon 10 mutation, primarily involving four variants: M694V, M694I, V726A, and M680I, which collectively accounted for the majority of cases. In addition, we detected 27 cases with mutations outside of exon 10. Notably, 15 individuals displayed a combination of mutations, encompassing both exon-10 and non-exon-10 mutations. According to laboratory findings, elevated inflammatory markers were noticed more apparently in those with exon-10 mutations
Table 5. Phenotypic comparison between FMF patients carrying exon-10 mutations and those carrying non-exon-10 mutations.
Exon-10 (n= 80) Mixed (n=15) Non-exon-10 (n=27) p
Physical examination
Fever(%) 55 (68.8) 10 (66.7) 18 (66.7) 0.973
Abdominal pain (%) 62 (77.5) 10 (66.7) 22 (81.5) 0.542
Joint pain and/or arthritis (%) 30 (37.5) 5 (33.3) 5 (18.5) 0.192
Chest pain (%) 10 (12.5) 2 (13.3) 1 (3.7) 0.413
Normal (%) 58 (72.5) 7 (50.0) 16 (61.5) 0.193
Swollen ankle (%) 3 (3.8) 1 (7.1) 0 (0.0) 0.456
Abdominal distension and tenderness (%) 2 (2.5) 2 (14.3) 3 (11.5) 0.083
Tender joint + limited movement (%) 7 (8.8) 1 (7.1) 1 (3.8) 0.711
Laboratory investigation
Insignificant (%) 37 (46.2) 3 (21.4) 9 (37.5) 0.199
High CRP (%) 30 (37.5) 4 (28.6) 7 (29.2) 0.66
High ESR (%) 32 (40.0) 6 (42.9) 9 (37.5) 0.947
Microcytic anemia (%) 24 (30.0) 4 (28.6) 3 (12.5) 0.227
Genetic zygosity (%) Compound Heterozygous 9 (11.2) 12 (80.0) 0 (0.0) <0.001
Heterozygous 37 (46.2) 3 (20.0) 22 (81.5)
Homozygous 34 (42.5) 0 (0.0) 5 (18.5)
than others as outlined in Table 5. When reviewing the physical examination records, instances of abdominal pain were most frequently reported in the exon 10 mutant group (62 cases, 77.5%), followed by the non-exon mutation group (22 cases, 81.5%), and the mixed group (10 cases, 66.7%). Similarly, concerning fever, the exon 10 mutation group (55 cases, 68.8%), exhibited a higher frequency of reported occurrences compared to the non-exon 10 group (18 cases, 66.7%), as illustrated in Figures 2 and 3.
DISCUSSION
FMF is the most common hereditary autoinflamma-tory disease, affecting Arabs, Turks, Armenians, and non-Ashkenazi Jews from the East Mediterranean region and surrounding areas.17-18 Although this disease affects Arab societies, there is no sufficient data regarding the prevalence of FMF in Arab countries, including Palestine, where the study was done.19 In this study, we aim to
identify the most frequent MEFV mutations as well as to evaluate the clinical profile and response to colchicine treatment in patients with genetic variance. Our analysis involved 124 paediatric patients, 67 female (54.5%) and 56 male (45.5%), diagnosed with FMF and positive MEFV mutations. In agreement with Talaat et al. and Du§unsel et al.20-21 female-to-male ratio was found to be high (1.2:1) compared to other studies that reported a male predominance with a male-to-female ratio of 1.2: 1 in Turkish populations,22-23 or equal prevalence between Arab males and females.24
It is of interest that the median age of diagnosis in our study was five years old, which is consistent with other studies that diagnosed FMF before the age of 10.25 Meanwhile, studies conducted in Egypt and Turkey have reported 7 and 10 years old as the median age of diagnosis.20-21,26 Surprisingly, two FMF patients in this study were diagnosed before the age of one year, which was challenging due to the lack of verbal milestones ex-
Physical examination among FMF patients earring exon 10, mixed and non exon 10
mutations
Figure 2. Differences in the physical findings among FMF patients carrying exon-10, mixed, and non-exon-10 mutations.
pressing their complaints on top of the ambiguous presentation. Hence, diagnosing FMF in younger paediatric age groups, particularly in endemic regions, is crucial to decrease late comorbidities.27
Various genotypes are reflected in FMF patients with different ethnicities. To date, more than 370 MEFV genes are involved in the development of the disease.13 In the Middle East, M694I, M694V, V726A, E148Q, and
M680I gene variants are responsible for most FMF cases, and the allele frequency for these genes is highly variable even between the same country.12 Our study has revealed M694V (43.4%) as the most frequent mutation, followed by E148Q (15.6%), V726A (5.7%), A744S (4.1%), R202Q (4.1%), M694I (3.3%), and M694V + V726A (3.3%). This somehow corresponds to a survey conducted on a Lebanese population with the same
Laboratory investigation among FMF patients earring exon 10, mixed and non exon
10 mutations
Figure 3. Differences in the laboratory findings among FMF patients carrying exon-10, mixed, and non-exon-10 mutations.
mutational profile but with different frequencies, where M694V (20.6%) was found to be the most common mutation, followed by E148Q (17.9%) and V726A (16.0%). R202Q (12.6%), M694I (11.8%), and A744S (10.7%).28 Similarly, previous reports in various Arab countries, including Syria, Jordan, Morocco, and Tunisia,29-33 found that the M694V variant was the predominant genotype among FMF patients.
Compared with a previous Palestinian study,34 we discovered that M694V was the leading mutation, followed by V726A, M694I, E148Q, and M680I mutations. However, there were some discrepancies in frequencies; for example, the E148Q mutation, which was the second most prevalent variant in our study (15.6%), was found to be the fourth most prevalent variant in the Palestinian study (8.5%).34 Another notable point is that the R202Q genotype among Arabs was only documented in our study and another study conducted on Lebanese patients. Further, the same R202Q genotype was reported in a study done by Co§kun et al. and Gunesacar et al. for Turkish patients.35-36 In comparison, studies from Egypt revealed different results, with E148Q and M694I mutations being the most observed.37-38 A positive family history of FMF was documented in 59 patients (54.6 %), of whom 30 were heterozygous, and 19 were homozygous. These findings appear to be high when compared to studies performed by Jarjoure and Al Berrawi,30 and Talaat et al.20 who detected a positive family history in 32 (31 %) out of their 103 Syrian patients, and 21 (22.11%) out of their 95 Egyptian patients, respectively.
While parental consanguinity was evident in 6.3 % of our study population, this had no effect on genetic zygosity. However, Jarjoure and Al Berrawi,30 and Talaat et al.20 reported a higher consanguinity rate in their population as (39.8 %), and 37.89%, respectively. Several studies found an association between FMF and other inflammatory diseases, most notably juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), Henoch-Schönlein purpura (HSP), and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD).39-41 Approximately 7.25% of FMF patients in this study had other concomitant diseases, corresponding to a study done by Ayaz et al.42 This could be attributed to the persistence of a subclinical inflammatory state between the attacks,22,40-44 promoting generalized inflammation and triggering the onset of other auto-inflammatory diseases. Our results indicated that FMF was associated with JIA in 3 patients (2.41%), Crohn's disease in 3 patients (2.41%), a severe form of HSP in one patient (0.8%), both JIA and ankylosing spondylitis in one patient (0.8%) and hypothyroidism in one patient (0.8%). Carrying exon 10 mutations, such as the M694V mutation, appears to predispose FMF patients to the development of certain inflammatory diseases, which was consistent with our findings. According to Yildiz et al., 18.9% of
their Turkish FMF patients have a co-existing condition, the most prevalent of which were uveitis (n = 12, 1.7%), asthma (n=29, 4.2%), JIA (n=42, 6.1%), IgA vasculitis (n = 20, 2.9%), and inflammatory bowel disease (n=10, 1.4%). However, only IBD and asthma patients had the MEFV gene mutation.46 In contrast to our results, a study among 95 Egyptian patients mentioned that 13.68% of their patients had other inflammatory conditions such as JIA (n=4, 4.21%), HSP in (n=3, 3.16%), SLE (n=3,3.16%), and IBD (n=2, 2.11%), while the most frequent correlated mutation was M680I followed by E148Q, V726A and M694V mutations.20
About 26.9% of our patients had microcytic anaemia, while anaemia in FMF patients can be functional, due to chronic inflammation, absolute iron deficiency (AID), or a combination of both, differentiating between them is essential, as iron therapy alone is adequate to improve anaemia in FMF patients with AID, but not in the other types.47 Further, Celkan et al.28 mentioned that Colchicine therapy has a role in the treatment of anaemia via suppression of the active inflammatory process. Regarding the clinical presentation of FMF, abdominal pain is the known presenting complaint among Arab patients.25 These observations are in agreement with our study in 95 (76.6%) of cases, followed by fever in 84 (67.7%), which is similar to other studies conducted in Syria and Turkey.22-23,30 Joint pain and arthritis were a shared feature in both heterozygotes and homozygotes group, and were documented in 16 (25.8%), and 17 (42.5%) patients, respectively. However, fever was the most common complaint among 109 Egyptian patients (96.84%) in a study done by Talaat et al.20 followed by abdominal pain (94.74%), and arthritis (78.95%). Our aim regarding treatment is to prevent recurrent attacks, reduce the inflammatory condition and minimise the risk of developing late complications. Since 1972, colchicine has been the cornerstone of treatment due to its effectiveness in reducing the number and the severity of attacks as well as preventing complications such as amyloidosis.15,22,49 The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) guidelines recommend a dose of: 0.5 mg/day for children under 5 years of age, 0.5-1.0 mg/day in children 5-10 years: and 1.0-1.5 mg/ day for children >10 years and adults.50 Most of our patients received colchicine therapy (n= 92, 74%); with a median dose of 1.00 [0.50, 1.00] mg/day, and 64 (69.6%) of our patients reported improvement. Homozygous and compound heterozygous patients were more likely to receive a higher dose of colchicine than heterozygous patients (median dose 1 vs. 0.88 mg/day). Homozygotes and Compound Heterozygous have found required a higher dose to control attacks 1.00 [1.00, 1.00] mg/day, as compared to heterozygotes 0.88 [0.50, 1.00] mg/day (p-value= 0.01). Overall, 39 (69.6%) reported improvement during the follow-up; 8 (80%) of them were
Compound Heterozygous; 17 (68%) were heterozygotes, and 14 (66.7%) were homozygotes. Similarly, an Egyptian study conducted among 70 patients revealed that the required dose for attacks control was significantly lower in heterozygotes than homozygotes, with a better response to colchicine in the heterozygous group.51 We recognise that there are some limitations to our study. First, the small sample size as we cannot find data consistent with ours in terms of detailed clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment at other hospitals. Second, the exclusion of many patients diagnosed with FMF due to incompliance with the therapeutic regimen and follow-up visits. Eventually, prospective studies on larger scales are needed to screen for other unique and newly addressed variants as well as scrutinise those of ambiguous significance in order to obtain a more precise diagnosis of FMF and thus provide patients with individualised treatment and enhanced disease management outcomes.
CONCLUSION
M694V, E148Q, V726A, A744S, and R202Q were the most common mutations in our patients. Specifically, M694V was the most prevalent variant in the overall cohort. Approximately half of our patients were found to a have heterozygote state. Further, Abdominal pain was the presenting feature among our patients, while Fever, joint pain, and arthritis were also observed as clinical manifestations. FMF syndrome may be associated with other autoimmune diseases as a result of the persisting inflammatory state. Regardless of our current FMF knowledge, we recommend further investigation of a larger number of patients in order to further clarify the genotype-phenotype correlation among Palestinian FMF paediatric patients.
ETHICS APPROVAL AND CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE
All methods were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the declaration of Helsinki / Accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Ethical approval for this study was sought from the Palestinian Ministry of Health for data collection and also from the Research Ethics Committee — faculty of medicine, Al-Quds University. The objectives of the study were clarified to the participants Confirming that their contribution is completely voluntary and will not affect any treatment or health services that participants or their relatives receive.
The data were collected anonymously without subjects or gender identification. All responses were encoded, used primarily for statistical analysis, and treated confidentially. According to the culture and traditions where the study was conducted, there were no social risks or harm. Before reviewing of the patient's medical records, written informed consents were obtained from the participants,
the parents/guardians of the minors (minors are considered anyone under the age of 16), and also from legal guardians of the illiterate participants. Verbal informed consent to participate was also obtained from the illiterate participants.
AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS
The dataset used and analysed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
All authors declare no conflict of interest.
FUNDING
No funding was received for this study. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank all participants who took part in the survey.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
OS and MT contributed to design of the study, data analysis, data interpretation, and drafting of the manuscript. AJ, AB, and AA contributed to design of the study, data collection, data entry, and data interpretation. FA contributed to design of the study, data interpretation, drafting of the manuscript, and supervision of the work. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. Each author has participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content.
REFERENCES
1. Daniels M, Shohat T, Brenner-Ullman A, Shohat M. Familial Mediterranean fever: high gene frequency among the non-Ashkenazic and Ashkenazic Jewish populations in Israel. Am J Med Genet 1995;55(3):311-4.
2. Rigante D, A developing portrait of hereditary periodic fevers in childhood. Expert Opin Orphan Drugs 2018;6(1):47-55.
3. Ozen S, Batu ED. The myths we believed in familial Mediterranean fever: what have we learned in the past years? Semin Immunopathol 2015 Jul;37(4):363-9.
4. Schnappauf O, Chae JJ, Kastner DL, Aksentijevich I. The pyrin inflammasome in health and disease. Front Immunol. 2019 Aug 7;10:1745.
5. The French FMF Consortium. Localization of the familial Mediterranean fever gene (FMF) to a 250-kb interval in non-Ashkenazi Jewish founder haplotypes. Am J Hum Genet 1996;59(3):603-12.
6. Van Gorp H, Huang L, Saavedra P, Vuylsteke M, Asaoka T, Prencipe G, et al. Blood-based test for diagnosis and functional subtyping of familial Mediterranean fever. Ann Rheum Dis 2002;79(7):960-8.
7. Migita K, Asano T, Sato S, Koga T, Fujita Y, Kawakami A. Familial Mediterranean fever: overview of pathogenesis, clinical features and management. Immunol Med 2018 Apr 3;41(2):55-61.
8. Sag E, Demirel D, Demir S, Atalay E, Akca U, Bilginer Y, et al. Performance of the new 'Eurofever/PRINTO classification criteria' in FMF patients. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2020;50(1):172-5.
9. French FMF Consortium, Bernot A, Clepet C, Dasilva C, Devaud C, Petit JL, et al. A candidate gene for familial Mediterranean fever. Nature Genet 1997;17(1) 25-31.
10. The International FMF Consortium. Ancient missense mutations in a new member of the RoRet gene family are likely to cause familial Mediterranean fever. Cell 1997;90(4):797-807.
11. Touitou I, The spectrum of familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) mutations. Eur J Human Genet 2001;9(7):473-83.
12. Ben-Chetrit E, Touitou I. Familial Mediterranean fever in the world. Arthritis Care Res 2009;61(10):1447-53.
13. Tufan A, Lachmann H. Familial Mediterranean fever, from pathogenesis to treatment: a contemporary review. Turk J Med Sci 2020;50(10):1591-610.
1 4. Ben-Chetrit E, Levy M. Familial mediterranean fever. Lancet 1998;351(9103):659-64.
15. Goldfinger S. Colchicine for familial Mediterranean fever. N Engl J Med 1972 Dec 21;287(25):1302.
16. Soylemezoglu O, Arga M, Fidan K, Gonen S, Emeksiz HC, Hasanoglu E, et al. Unresponsiveness to colchicine therapy in patients with familial Mediterranean fever homozygous for the M694V mutation. J Rheumatol 2010;37(1):182-9.
17. Sohar E, Gafni J, Pras M, Heller H. Familial Mediterranean fever: a survey of 470 cases and review of the literature. Am J Med 1967 Aug 1;43(2):227-53.
18. Berkun Y, Eisenstein EM. Diagnostic criteria of familial Mediterranean fever. Autoimmun Rev 2014;13(4-5):388-90.
19. Assouad E, El Hage S, Safi S, El Kareh A, Mokled E, Salameh P. Familial Mediterranean fever research activity in the Arab world: the need for regional and international collaborations. East Mediterr Health J 2021;27(10):984-92.
20. Talaat HS, Sheba MF, Mohammed RH, Gomaa MA, El Rifaei N, Ibrahim MF. Genotype mutations in Egyptian children with familial mediterranean fever: clinical profile, and response to Colchicine. Mediterr J Rheumatol 2020 Jun;31(2):206.
21. Du§unsel R, Dursun I, Gunduz Z, Poyrazoglu MH, Gurgoze MK, Dundar M. Genotype-phenotype correlation in children with familial Mediterranean fever in a Turkish population. Pediatr Int 2008 Apr;50(2):208-12.
22. Tunca M, Ozdogan H, Kasapcopur O, Yalcinkaya F, Tutar E, Topaloglu R, et al. Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) in Turkey: results of a nationwide multicenter study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2005;84(1):1-1.
23. Ozlu SG, Erguven M, Hamzah OY. Genotype and Phenotype correlations in children with Familial Mediterranean Fever. Turkish J Pediatr Dis 2015;3:171-5.
24. El-Shant, H, Majeed HA, El-Khateeb M. Familial mediterranean fever in Arabs. Lancet, 2006;367(9515):1016-24.
25. Majeed HA, Rawashdeh M, El-Shanti H, Qubain H, Khuri-Bulos N, Shahin HM. Familial Mediterranean fever in children: the expanded clinical profile. QJM 1999 Jun 1;92(6):309-18.
26. Etem E, Deveci SD, Erol D, Yuce H, Elyas H. Familial Mediterranean fever: a retrospective clinical and molecular study in the East of Anatolia region of Turkey. Open Rheumatol J 2010;4:1.
27. Keskindemirci G, Aktay Ayaz N, Aldemir E, Aydogmu? Q, Aydogan G, Kavuncuoglu S. Familial mediterranean fever: diagnosing as early as 3 months of age. Case Rep Pediatr 2014 Mar 27;2014.
28. El Roz A, Ghssein G, Khalaf B, Fardoun T, Ibrahim JN. Spectrum of MEFV variants and genotypes among clinically diagnosed FMF patients from Southern Lebanon. Med Sci 2020 Aug 17;8(3):35.
29. Habahbeh LA, Al Hiary M, Al Zaben SF, Al-Momani A, Khasawneh R, Abu Mallouh M, et al. Genetic profile of patients with familial Mediterranean fever (FMF): single center experience at King Hussein Medical Center (KHMC). Medical Archives 2015;69(6):417.
30. Jarjour RA Al-Berrawi S. Familial Mediterranean fever in Syrian children: phenotype-genotype correlation. Rheumatol Int 2015;35(4):629-34.
31. Medlej-Hashim M, Serre JL, Corbani S, Saab O, Jalkh N, Delague V, et al. Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) in Lebanon and Jordan: a population genetics study and report of three novel mutations. Eur J Med Genet 2005;48(4):412-20.
32. Chaabouni HB, Ksantini M, M'rad R, Kharrat M, Chaabouni M, Maazoul F, et al. MEFV mutations in Tunisian patients suffering
from familial Mediterranean fever. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2007;36(6):397-401.
33. Belmahi L, Cherkaoui IJ, Hama I, Sefiani A. MEFV mutations in Moroccan patients suffering from familial Mediterranean Fever. Rheumatol Int 2012 Apr;32(4):981-4.
34. Ayesh SK, Nassar SM, Al-Sharef WA, Abu-Libdeh BY, Darwish HM. Genetic screening of familial Mediterranean fever mutations in the Palestinian population. Saudi Med J 2005 May 1;26(5):732-7.
35. Co§kun S, Ustyol L, Bayram Y, Bekta§ MS, Gulsen S, Qim A, et al. The spectrum of MEFV gene mutations and genotypes in Van province, the eastern region of Turkey, and report of a novel mutation (R361T). Gene 2015;562(1):128-31.
36. Gunesacar R, Celik MM, Arica V, Elmacioglu S, Ozturk OH. Frequency of MEFV gene mutations in Hatay province, Mediterranean region of Turkey and report of a novel missense mutation (I247V). Gene 2014 Aug 10;546(2):195-9.
37. El Gezery DA, Abou-Zeid AA, Hashad DI, El-Sayegh HK. MEFV gene mutations in Egyptian patients with familial Mediterranean fever. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 2010 Apr 1;14(2):263-8.
38. Mansour AR, El-Shayeb A, El Habachi N, Khodair MA, Elwazzan D, Abdeen N, et al. Molecular patterns of MEFV gene mutations in Egyptian patients with familial Mediterranean fever: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Inflam 2019 Feb 13;2019:2578760.
39. Özgakar ZB, Qakar N, Uncu N, Qelikel BA, Yalginkaya F. Familial Mediterranean fever-associated diseases in children. QJM 2017 May 1;110(5):287-90.
40. Ozer E, Seker D, Taner E, Adrovic A, Sahin S, Barut K, Kasapcopur O. Paediatric rheumatology the frequency of juvenile spondyloarthropathies in childhood familial Mediterranean fever. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2018;36:141-5.
41. Ozdogan H, Arisoy N, Kasapcapur O, Sever L, Cali§kan S, Tuzuner N, et al. Vasculitis in familial Mediterranean fever. J Rheumatol 1997;24(2):323-7.
42. Ayaz NA, Tanatar A, Karadag §G, Qakan M, Keskindemirci G, Sönmez HE. Comorbidities and phenotype-genotype correlation in children with familial Mediterranean fever. Rheumatol Int 2021 Jan;41(1):113-20.
43. Direskeneli H, Ozdogan H, Korkmaz CE, Akoglu T, Yazici H. Serum soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 and interleukin 8 levels in familial Mediterranean fever. J Rheumatol 1 999 Sep 1;26(9):1983-6.
44. Saatgi Ü, Ozen S, Özdemir S, Bakkaloglu A, Besbas N, Topaloglu R, et al. Familial Mediterranean fever in children: report of a large series and discussion of the risk and prognostic factors of amyloidosis. Eur J Pediatr 1997;156:619-23.
45. Gangemi S, Manti S, Procopio V, Casciaro M, Di Salvo E, Cutrupi M, et al. Lack of clear and univocal genotype-phenotype correlation in familial Mediterranean fever patients: A systematic review. Clin Genet 2018;94(1):81-94.
46. Yildiz M, Adrovic A, Tasdemir E, Baba-Zada K, Aydin M, Koker O, et al. valuation of co-existing diseases in children with familial Mediterranean fever. Rheumatol Int 2020;40(1): 57-64.
47. Gezgin Yildirim D, Kaya Z, Bakkaloglu SA. Utility of new red cell parameters for distinguishing functional iron deficiency from absolute iron deficiency in children with familial Mediterranean fever. Int J Lab Hematol 2019;41(2):293-7.
48. Celkan T, Celik M, Kasapgopur Ö, Özkan A, Apak H, Ocak S, et al. The anemia of familial Mediterranean fever disease. Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2005;22(8):657-65.
49. Zemer D, Revach M, Pras M, Modan B, Schor S, Sohar E, et al. A controlled trial of colchicine in preventing attacks of familial Mediterranean fever. NEJM 1974;291(18):932-4.
50. Ozen S, Demirkaya E, Erer B, Livneh A, Ben-Chetrit E, Giancane G, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of familial Mediterranean fever. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75(4):644-51.
51. Talaat HS, Mohamed MF, El Rifai NM, Gomaa MA. The expanded clinical profile and the efficacy of colchicine therapy in Egyptian children suffering from familial Mediterranean fever: a descriptive study. Ital J Pediatr 2012;Dec;38(1):1-8.
