ArticleRheumatology international2026
AA amyloidosis in familial Mediterranean fever: a comparative study of clinical and genetic features between Algerian probands and their relatives.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AA amyloidosis is the most severe complication of familial Mediterranean fever (FMF). Why some patients develop amyloidosis while genotype-identical relatives remain unaffected is unknown. We assessed whether genetic counseling helps to identify at-risk relatives and whether inflammatory activity, rather than MEFV genotype, drives amyloidosis. We conducted a single-center comparative study (1998-2025) including 52 Algerian FMF probands with biopsy-proven AA amyloidosis and 30 first- or second-degree relatives with biallelic MEFV mutations who also had FMF but no amyloidosis. All underwent clinical, laboratory and MEFV genotyping (exons 2,3,5,10). Only individuals with two MEFV mutations (homozygous or compound heterozygous) were included. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent predictors of amyloidosis. The M694I/M694I genotype was equally frequent in both groups (71.2% vs. 66.7%, p = 0.67). In univariable analysis, it was not associated with amyloidosis (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.48-3.16, p = 0.67). Independent drivers of amyloidosis were identified by multivariable logistic regression: attack duration > 72 h (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.21, 95% CI 1.41-7.31, p = 0.006), attack interval < 3 months (aOR 4.12, 95% CI 1.77-9.58, p < 0.001), and baseline CRP > 100 mg/L (aOR 2.91, 95% CI 1.23-6.88, p = 0.014). Only 9.6% of amyloidosis patients achieved normalised CRP (< 5 mg/L) under colchicine, compared to 86.7% of relatives (p < 0.001). Strikingly, among amyloidosis patients who achieved CRP normalisation, 57.7% required 1.5 mg/day of colchicine and 7.7% required 2 mg/day, whereas 86.7% of amyloid-free relatives achieved normalisation with only 1 mg/day, highlighting the higher inflammatory burden in patients who develop amyloidosis despite carrying the same MEFV genotype. Genetic counseling allowed screening of 30 relatives without amyloidosis. Inflammation, not MEFV genotype, dictates AA amyloidosis in FMF. Genetic counseling is essential to identify at-risk relatives. Treatment should target complete CRP normalisation regardless of genotype.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42696010What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.