Israel Medical Association Journal

Idiopathic eosinophilic vasculitis is a newly recognized form of hypereosinophilic syndrome. While little is understood about the condition, criteria for its definition have been proposed. We aimed to determine whether three patients with eosinophilia and vasculitis could be retrospectively diagnosed with this condition. We performed a retrospective descriptive analysis on three cases with hypereosinophilia and vasculitis who were treated in Sheba Medical Center, Sourasky Medical Center, and Meir Medical Center in Israel between 2009 and 2021. A thorough review of all three cases was conducted. The findings were compared to the suggested criteria for idiopathic eosinophilic vasculitis.

All patients shared the symptoms of progressive limb ischemia, eosinophilic rash, and peripheral neuropathy that are consistent with vasculitis. No lower or upper respiratory abnormalities or the presence of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA) autoantibodies associated with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis were detected. Primary monoclonal abnormalities, drug interactions, infections, allergy, and other secondary causes of hypereosinophilia were excluded. After a thorough review, we suggest that our three patients with previously unexplained hypereosinophilia and vasculitis fit the diagnosis of idiopathic eosinophilic vasculitis. These results highlight the existence of this novel condition and the importance of its recognition and consideration as part of the differential diagnosis in patients with marked eosinophilia and vasculitis. Further research for elucidating the mechanisms and treatment approach for this potentially severe condition is urgently needed.

Background: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an autoimmune disease of the peripheral nervous system with a typical presentation of acute paralysis and hyporeflexia. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and plasma exchange (PLEX) are treatments that have proven to expedite recuperation and recovery of motor function.

Objectives: To describe our experience at one tertiary medical center treating GBS with IVIG and to compare the efficacy of IVIG as the sole treatment versus combined therapy of IVIG and plasma exchange.

Methods: We reviewed the records of all patients diagnosed with GBS and treated with IVIG at the Sheba Medical Center from 2007 to 2015 and collected data on patient demographics, disease onset and presentation, and treatments delivered. The motor disability grading scale (MDGS) was used to evaluate the motor function of each patient through the various stages of the disease and following therapy.

Results: MDGS improvement from admission until discharge was statistically significant (P < 0.001), as was the regainment of motor functions at 3 and 12 months follow-up compared to the status during the nadir of the disease. The effectiveness of second-line treatment with IVIG following PLEX failure and vice versa was not statistically significant (P > 0.15).

Conclusions: The majority of patients included in this study experienced a significant and rapid improvement of GBS following treatment with IVIG. Combined therapy of PLEX and IVIG was not proven to be effective in patients who encountered a failure of the first-line treatment.

Background: Anti-BLyS treatment with the human belimumab monoclonal antibody was shown to be a safe and effective therapeutic modality in lupus patients with active disease (i.e., without significant neurological/renal involvement) despite standard treatment.

Objectives: To evaluate the “real-life” safety and efficacy of belimumab added to standard therapy in patents with active lupus in five Israeli medical centers.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective open-labeled study of 36 lupus patients who received belimumab monthly for at least 1 year in addition to standard treatment. Laboratory tests (C3/C4, anti dsDNA autoantibodies, chemistry, urinalysis and complete blood count) were done every 3–4 months. Adverse events were obtained from patients’ medical records. Efficacy assessment by the treating physicians was defined as excellent, good/partial, or no response.

Results: The study group comprised 36 lupus patients (8 males, 28 females) with a mean age of 41.6 } 12.2 years. Belimumab was given for a mean period of 2.3 } 1.7 years (range 1–7). None of the patients discontinued belimumab due to adverse events. Four patients (11.1%) had an infection related to belimumab. Only 5 patients (13.9%) stopped taking belimumab due to lack of efficacy. The response was excellent in 25 patients (69.5%) and good/partial in the other 6 (16.6%). Concomitantly, serological response (reduction of C3/C4 and anti-dsDNA autoantibodies) was also observed. Moreover, following belimumab treatment, there was a significant reduction in the usage of corticosteroids (from 100% to 27.7%) and immunosuppressive agents (from 83.3% to 8.3%).

Conclusions: Belimumab, in addition to standard therapy, is a safe and effective treatment for active lupus patients.