Crescentic glomerulonephritis and eosinophilic interstitial infiltrates in a patient with hypereosinophilic syndrome

Clinical and morphologic spectrum of renal involvement in idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome

BACKGROUND

To explore the clinical and pathological features of renal lesions in patients with kidney involvement in idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (IHES).

METHODS

The demographic, clinical, and pathological characteristics and the treatment and follow-up data were analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified 18 patients with IHES and renal involvement. Eleven patients presented with nephrotic syndrome, and 6 patients had impaired renal function. 15 patients underwent renal biopsy, and the pathological findings included the following: membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis in 3 patients; minimal-change disease in 3; mesangial proliferative nephritis in two; IgA nephropathy in 2; membranous nephropathy in two; chronic interstitial nephritis in two; focal segmental sclerosis in one; and eosinophil infiltration into the renal interstitium in 11 and into the glomerulus in 3. After treatment with glucocorticoids, the eosinophil count decreased. 15 patients were followed up, and 14 showed a decrease in urinary protein or renal function recovery. When glucocorticoids were discontinued, eosinophil increased (8 cases), urine protein increased (1 case), and 1 patient progressed to end-stage renal disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrotic syndrome with or without renal insufficiency is the main clinical manifestation. A wide spectrum of renal lesions can be observed in patients with IHES. Eosinophil infiltration into the renal interstitium was common in these patients. Most patients have a good prognosis after glucocorticoid therapy.

Acute kidney injury secondary to thrombotic microangiopathy associated with idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome: a case report and review of the literature

Background

Renal involvement in idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome is uncommon. The mechanism of kidney damage can be explained as occurring via two distinct pathways: (1) thromboembolic ischemic changes secondary to endocardial disruption mediated by eosinophilic cytotoxicity to the myocardium and (2) direct eosinophilic cytotoxic effect to the kidney.

Case presentation

We present a case of a 63-year-old Caucasian man who presented to our hospital with 2 weeks of progressively generalized weakness. He was diagnosed with idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome with multiorgan involvement and acute kidney injury with biopsy-proven thrombotic microangiopathy. Full remission was achieved after 8 weeks of corticosteroid therapy.

Conclusion

Further studies are needed to investigate if age and absence of frank thrombocytopenia can serve as a prognostic feature of idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome, as seen in this case.

Hypereosinophilia, mastectomy, and nephrotic syndrome in a male patient: A case report

BACKGROUND

Hypereosinophilia (HE) is a heterogeneous disease of unknown etiology in which tissue and organ injury is inflicted by excess numbers of circulating or infiltrating eosinophils. Herein, we describe a patient with rare organ damage due to HE and review the pertinent literature.

CASE SUMMARY

A 43 year-old Chinese man with a 13-year history of eosinophilia and shortness of breath for 7 d presented to our hospital. During the course of his illness, the patient variably presented with gastrointestinal symptoms, eczema, vitiligo, mastitis, joint symptoms, nephrotic syndrome, and interstitial pneumonia. The chronic mastitis proved burdensome, necessitating bilateral mastectomy. HE was diagnosed by repeat bone marrow biopsy, and a kidney biopsy showed focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Intermittent steroidal therapy is typically initiated to relieve such symptoms, although relapse and organ involvement often ensue once treatment is withdrawn. We administered methylprednisolone sodium succinate (40 mg/d) intravenously for 3 d, followed by oral tablets at the same dose. Subsequent computed tomography (CT) of the chest CT showed relative improvement of the interstitial pneumonia. The patient is currently on a continuous regimen of oral steroid, and his condition is stable.

CONCLUSION

HE is heterogeneous condition. This is the first reported case of bilateral mastectomy in a male patient with longstanding HE.

The FIP1L1-PDGFRalpha fusion tyrosine kinase in hypereosinophilic syndrome and chronic eosinophilic leukemia: implications for diagnosis, classification, and management

Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) and chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL) comprise a spectrum of indolent to aggressive diseases characterized by unexplained, persistent hypereosinophilia. These disorders have eluded a unique molecular explanation, and therapy has primarily been oriented toward palliation of symptoms related to organ involvement. Recent reports indicate that HES and CEL are imatinib-responsive malignancies, with rapid and complete hematologic remissions observed at lower doses than used in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). These BCR-ABL-negative cases lack activating mutations or abnormal fusions involving other known target genes of imatinib, implicating a novel tyrosine kinase in their pathogenesis. A bedside-to-benchtop translational research effort led to the identification of a constitutively activated fusion tyrosine kinase on chromosome 4q12, derived from an interstitial deletion, that fuses the platelet-derived growth factor receptor-alpha gene (PDGFRA) to an uncharacterized human gene FIP1-like-1 (FIP1L1). However, not all HES and CEL patients respond to imatinib, suggesting disease heterogeneity. Furthermore, approximately 40% of responding patients lack the FIP1L1-PDGFRA fusion, suggesting genetic heterogeneity. This review examines the current state of knowledge of HES and CEL and the implications of the FIP1L1-PDGFRA discovery on their diagnosis, classification, and management.

[Spectrum of hypereosinophilia syndrome based on 2 clinical case reports]

BACKGROUND

Two severe cases of hypereosinophilic syndrome with cardiopulmonary symptoms, erythema nodosum, eosinophilic ileocolitis and paresthesia are reported. Definition, etiology, pathophysiological mechanisms, types, complications and therapeutic approaches of this relatively rare clinical disorder are discussed on the basis of these two cases. The distinction between eosinophilia and hypereosinophilic syndrome is clearly defined.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

The 2 cases of hypereosinophilic syndrome demonstrate the difficulty to decide whether they represent the idiopathic or the reactive type of hypereosinophilic syndrome. If the assumption is made in favor of the reactive type of hypereosinophilic syndrome the assumed prognosis could eventually be too promising. In case of an assumed idiopathic type of hypereosinophilic syndrome the search for causing factors like allergens could be left out. The decision concerning the type of hypereosinophilic syndrome of the 2 cases reported was made with high probability. In the case of idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome, eosinophilic leukemia was excluded by bone marrow biopsy.

CONCLUSION

In order to be able to make a diagnosis it is necessary to search carefully for causing and influencing factors of the hypereosinophilic syndrome such as allergens or medicaments and to eliminate them. The hypereosinophilic syndrome must be put under frequent control in order to avoid complications or to start with therapeutic approaches in time.