Published in

MDPI, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 4(9), p. 1008, 2020

DOI: 10.3390/jcm9041008

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Molecular Analysis of Prothrombotic Gene Variants in Venous Thrombosis: A Potential Role for Sex and Thrombotic Localization

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Background: Requests to test for thrombophilia in the clinical context are often not evidence-based. Aim: To define the role of a series of prothrombotic gene variants in a large population of patients with different venous thromboembolic diseases. Methods: We studied Factor V Leiden (FVL), FVR2, FII G20210A, Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T and A1298C, beta-fibrinogen -455 G>A, FXIII V34L, and HPA-1 L33P variants and PAI-1 4G/5G alleles in 343 male and female patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 164 with pulmonary embolism (PE), 126 with superficial vein thrombosis (SVT), 118 with portal vein thrombosis (PVT), 75 with cerebral vein thrombosis (CVT) and 119 with retinal vein thrombosis (RVT), and compared them with the corresponding variants and alleles in 430 subjects from the general population. Results: About 40% of patients with DVT, PE and SVT had at least one prothrombotic gene variant, such as FVL, FVR2 and FII G20210A, and a statistically significant association with the event was found in males with a history of PE. In patients with a history of PVT or CVT, the FII G20210A variant was more frequent, particularly in females. In contrast, a poor association was found between RVT and prothrombotic risk factors, confirming that local vascular factors have a key role in this thrombotic event. Conclusions: Only FVL, FVR2 and FII G20210A are related to vein thrombotic disease. Other gene variants, often requested for testing in the clinical context, do not differ significantly between cases and controls. Evidence of a sex difference for some variants, once confirmed in larger populations, may help to promote sex-specific prevention of such diseases.