TAFRO syndrome with renal biopsy successfully treated with steroids and cyclosporine: a case report

Increase in Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Expression and the Pathogenesis of iMCD-TAFRO

TAFRO (thrombocytopenia (T), anasarca (A), fever (F), reticulin fibrosis (F/R), renal failure (R), and organomegaly (O)) is a heterogeneous clinical subtype of idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD) associated with a significantly poorer prognosis than other subtypes of iMCD. TAFRO symptomatology can also be seen in pathological contexts outside of iMCD, but it is unclear if those cases should be considered representative of a different disease entity or simply a severe presentation of other infectious, malignant, and rheumatological diseases. While interleukin-6 (IL-6) is an established driver of iMCD-TAFRO pathogenesis in a subset of patients, the etiology is unknown. Recent case reports and literature reviews on TAFRO patients suggest that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and the interplay of VEGF and IL-6 in concert, rather than IL-6 as a single cytokine, may be drivers for iMCD-TAFRO pathophysiology, especially renal injury. In this review, we discuss the possible role of VEGF in the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations of iMCD-TAFRO. In particular, VEGF may be involved in iMCD-TAFRO pathology through its ability to activate RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK and PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathways. Further elucidating a role for the VEGF-IL-6 axis and additional disease drivers may shed light on therapeutic options for the treatment of TAFRO patients who do not respond to, or otherwise relapse following, treatment with IL-6 targeting drugs. This review investigates the potential role of VEGF in the pathophysiology of iMCD-TAFRO and the potential for targeting related signaling pathways in the future.

A case of TAFRO syndrome after vaccination, successfully treated with cyclosporine

BACKGROUND

TAFRO syndrome is a rare disorder that causes thrombocytopenia, generalized oedema, fever, organ enlargement, and renal impairment. Few reports have suggested an association with vaccines, and few cases have undergone renal biopsy. TAFRO syndrome is often severe and fatal, and its cause is unknown. We report a case of TAFRO syndrome that occurred after vaccination with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine.

CASE PRESENTATION

An 82-year-old woman received two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine 3 weeks apart. Two weeks later, she was admitted to the hospital with oedema, accompanied with renal failure and thrombocytopenia. After close examination, she was diagnosed with TAFRO syndrome. She was treated with steroids, cyclosporine, and thrombopoietin receptor agonists. The patient was discharged after several months in remission.

CONCLUSIONS

Although an incident of TAFRO syndrome after COVID-19 vaccination has been previously reported, this is a rare case in which the patient went into remission and was discharged. A renal biopsy was also performed in this case, which was consistent with previous reports. The favorable treatment course for TAFRO syndrome provides valuable insights.

TAFRO syndrome is associated with anti-SSA/Ro60 antibodies, in contrast to idiopathic castleman disease

TAFRO syndrome is an acute systemic inflammatory disease characterized by thrombocytopenia, anasarca, fever, reticulin fibrosis/renal dysfunction, and organomegaly. There have been increasing reports that TAFRO is a disease distinct from idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease and that TAFRO patients may be positive for anti-SSA antibodies. To assess anti-SSA antibody positivity and the clinical characteristics of the two diseases, we retrospectively compared 7 TAFRO and 10 iMCD patients in our hospital. The mean age of onset of TAFRO and iMCD was 48.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 41-53) and 45.0 (IQR, 35-53) years, respectively. The TAFRO and iMCD groups had 6 (86%) and 4 (40%) male patients, respectively, and the following pretreatment laboratory values: platelet count, 3.8 (IQR, 2.2-6.4) and 35.5 (IQR, 22.2-42.8) × 104/μL, respectively; C-reactive protein, 10.2 (IQR, 6.8-21.4) and 9.5 (IQR, 6.2-13.6) mg/dL, respectively; IgG, 1431 (IQR, 1112-1815) and 4725 (IQR, 3755-5121) mg/dL, respectively. RNA immunoprecipitation (5 cases for anti-SSA) or protein array (5 cases for anti-SSA/Ro60) detected anti-SSA antibodies in six (86%) TAFRO patients but not in iMCD patients; it did not detect anti-SSB antibodies in any of the patients. None of the patients were diagnosed with Sjögren syndrome. All iMCD patients treated with tocilizumab (TCZ) responded well. Meanwhile, two of six TAFRO patients treated with TCZ showed inadequate responses; thus, both patients were switched to rituximab, following which they achieved remission. TAFRO and iMCD have different clinical features. TAFRO may be categorized as a severe phenotype of the anti-SSA antibody syndrome.

Unmet Clinical Needs in the Management of Idiopathic Multicentric Castleman Disease: A Consensus-based Position Paper From an ad hoc Expert Panel

Castleman disease describes a group of heterogeneous clinicopathological disorders now included in the tumor-like lesions with B-cell predominance of the World Health Organization classification. Managing idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD) is challenging, because few systematic studies or comparative randomized clinical trials have been conducted. International, consensus evidence-based guidelines for iMCD were published in 2018, but gaps in the therapeutic options for difficult-to-treat patients, who do not respond to siltuximab and other conventional therapies, still exist. This article presents the results of group discussion among an ad hoc constituted Panel of Italian experts to identify and address unmet clinical needs (UCNs) in managing iMCD. Recommendations on the appropriateness of clinical decisions and proposals for new research concerning the identified UCNs were issued through formalized multiple-step procedures after a comprehensive analysis of the scientific literature. The following key UCNs were addressed: strengthening the diagnostic certainty in iMCD patients before planning first-line therapy; management of siltuximab therapy; choice and management of immune-modulating, or chemotherapy agents in patients resistant/intolerant to siltuximab therapy. While most of the conclusions reached by the Panel are consistent with the existing guidelines, some alternative therapeutic options were stressed, and the discussion contributed to bringing forth the issues that need further investigation. Hopefully, this comprehensive overview will improve the practice of iMCD and inform the design and implementation of new studies in the field.