4.6 Article

Impact of the type of SERPINC1 mutation and subtype of antithrombin deficiency on the thrombotic phenotype in hereditary antithrombin deficiency

期刊

THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
卷 111, 期 2, 页码 249-257

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1160/TH13-05-0402

关键词

Antithrombin deficiency; SERPINC1; mutation; venous thromboembolism; arterial thromboembolism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mutations in the antithrombin (AT) gene can impair the capacity of AT to bind heparin (AT deficiency type IIHBS), its target proteases such as thrombin (type IIRS), or both (type IIPE). Type II AT deficiencies are almost exclusively caused by missense mutations, whereas type I AT deficiency can originate from missense or null mutations. In a retrospective cohort study, we investigated the impact of the type of mutation and type of AT deficiency on the manifestation of thromboembolic events in 377 patients with hereditary AT deficiencies (133 from our own cohort, 244 reported in the literature). Carriers of missense mutations showed a lower risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) than those of null mutations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.58, p<0.001), and the risk of VTE was significantly decreased among patients with type IIHBS AT deficiency compared to patients with other types of AT deficiency (HR 0.23, 95%CI 0.13-0.41, p<0.001). The risk of pulmonary embolism complicating deep-vein thrombosis was lower in all type II AT deficiencies compared to type I AT deficiency (relative risk 0.69, 95%CI 0.56-0.84). By contrast, the risk of arterial thromboembolism tended to be higher in carriers of missense mutations than in those with null mutations (HR 6.08-fold, 95%CI 0.74-49.81, p=0.093) and was 5.9-fold increased (95%CI 1.22-28.62, p=0.028) in type IIHBS versus other types of AT deficiency. Our data indicate that the type of inherited AT defect modulates not only the risk of thromboembolism but also the localisation and encourage further studies to unravel this phenomenon.

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

4.6
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