4.0 Article

Atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: Korean pediatric series

期刊

PEDIATRICS INTERNATIONAL
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 431-438

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/ped.12549

关键词

anti-complement factor H autoantibody; Asian; atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome; complement factor H; mutation

资金

  1. Korean Health Technology R&D Project, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [HI12C0014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundAtypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) is a rare disease with a genetic predisposition. Few studies have evaluated the disease in the Asian population. We studied a Korean pediatric cohort to delineate the clinical characteristics and genotypes. MethodsA multicenter cohort of 51 Korean children with aHUS was screened for mutations using targeted exome sequencing covering 46 complement related genes. Anti-complement-factor-H autoantibody (anti-CFH) titers were measured. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay was performed to detect deletions in the complement factor-H related protein genes (CFHR) in the patients as well as in 100 healthy Korean controls. We grouped the patients according to etiology and compared the clinical features using Mann-Whitney U-test and chi-squared test. ResultsFifteen patients (group A, 29.7%) had anti-CFH, and mutations were detected in 11 (group B, 21.6%), including one with combined mutations. The remaining 25 (group C, 49.0%) were negative for both. The prevalence of anti-CFH was higher than the worldwide level. Group A had a higher onset age than group B, although the difference was not significant. Group B had the worst renal outcome. Gene frequencies of homozygous CFHR1 deletion were 73.3%, 2.7% and 1% in group A, group B + C and the control, respectively. ConclusionsThe incidence of anti-CFH in the present Korean aHUS cohort was high. Clinical outcomes largely conformed to the previous reports. Although the sample size was limited, this cohort provides a reassessment of clinicogenetic features of aHUS in Korean children.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据