Chen Xin-Guang1, Zhao Yong-Qiang1, Wang Shu-Jie1, Fan Lian-Kai1, Cai Hua-Cong2. 1. Department of Hematology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Hematology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China bjcaihc2005@yahoo.com.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Factor V (FV) Leiden mutation-related activated protein C resistance (APCR) is one of the common inherited risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in caucasian population. Although APCR could be identified in some of the Chinese healthy people and patients with VTE, it was not related to FV Leiden mutation. In 2008, we have identified a novel FV mutation (FV E666D) in exon 13 in a hereditary APCR family. And we presumed that the novel mutation might be a genetic defect of APCR in the Chinese population. The aim of our study was to evaluate the prevalence of FV E666D mutation and its correlation with APCR in the Chinese population in a larger series. METHODS: From June 2009 to January 2011, 163 consecutive patients who underwent thrombophilia tests in our hospital were recruited. The clinical data were retrospectively reviewed. Thrombophilia tests included APCR, anticoagulant proteins, and antiphospholipid antibodies. Factor V E666D mutation was detected. RESULT: Of the 163 patients, 6 (3.7%) were identified as APCR positive, 2.9% for patients without thrombosis and 5.1% for patients with thrombosis or thrombosis history. Factor V E666D mutation was not detectable in all the 163 patients including 6 APCR-positive patients. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of APCR either in the nonthrombotic patients or in the patients with thrombosis was lower than that reported in other Chinese studies. Our study couldn't provide illustration whether FV E666D mutation is correlated with APCR in the Chinese population.
BACKGROUND: Factor V (FV) Leiden mutation-related activated protein C resistance (APCR) is one of the common inherited risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in caucasian population. Although APCR could be identified in some of the Chinese healthy people and patients with VTE, it was not related to FV Leiden mutation. In 2008, we have identified a novel FV mutation (FV E666D) in exon 13 in a hereditary APCR family. And we presumed that the novel mutation might be a genetic defect of APCR in the Chinese population. The aim of our study was to evaluate the prevalence of FV E666D mutation and its correlation with APCR in the Chinese population in a larger series. METHODS: From June 2009 to January 2011, 163 consecutive patients who underwent thrombophilia tests in our hospital were recruited. The clinical data were retrospectively reviewed. Thrombophilia tests included APCR, anticoagulant proteins, and antiphospholipid antibodies. Factor V E666D mutation was detected. RESULT: Of the 163 patients, 6 (3.7%) were identified as APCR positive, 2.9% for patients without thrombosis and 5.1% for patients with thrombosis or thrombosis history. Factor V E666D mutation was not detectable in all the 163 patients including 6 APCR-positive patients. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of APCR either in the nonthrombotic patients or in the patients with thrombosis was lower than that reported in other Chinese studies. Our study couldn't provide illustration whether FV E666D mutation is correlated with APCR in the Chinese population.