Positivity for antiribonucleoprotein antibodies in rheumatic diseases: focus on scleroderma systematica
https://doi.org/10.14412/1996-7012-2017-4-48-55
Abstract
The review deals with the problem of antibody production in scleroderma systematica (SDS), with a focus on antiribonucleoprotein (RNP) antibodies: frequency, structure, and clinical associations. SDS is a progressive polysyndromic disease with characteristic lesion of the skin, locomotor apparatus, viscera (heart, lungs, digestive tract, and kidneys), and common vasospastic disorders as Raynaud's syndrome, the basis for which are the processes of connective tissue disorganization with a predominance of fibrosclerotic changes and vascular pathology as peculiar endarteritis obliterans. The presence of antibodies to different autoantigens is a distinguishing feature of SDS. Among the patients who meet the classification criteria for SDS, there is a subgroup of patients who are not found to have SDS-specific antinuclear antibodies, but have antibodies to soluble nuclear autoantigens, namely, antibodies to RNP. This type of autoantibodies is described in various systemic connective tissue diseases: systemic lupus erythematosus, dermatomyositis, polymyositis, and SDS. The detection rate of anti-RNP antibodies in SDS varies from 5 to 30% in different ethnic groups. In addition, positivity for anti-RNP antibodies is a characteristic feature of mixed connective tissue disease. A more detailed study of anti-U1-RNP antibody-positive patients with SDS, by identifying a new subtype of SDS, comparing, and searching for dissimilarities of anti-U1-RNP antibody carriers from other well-described phenotypes of SDS, is of interest today. This problem is relevant, by taking into account the personalized approach to following up patients, which is actively being elaborated in rheumatology.
About the Authors
R. U. Shayakhmetova
V.A. Nasonova Research Institute of Rheumatology, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
L. P. Ananyeva
V.A. Nasonova Research Institute of Rheumatology, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Гусева НГ. Системная склеродермия. В кн.: Сигидин ЯА, Гусева НГ,
2. Иванова ММ. Диффузные болезни соединительной ткани. Москва: Медицина; 2004. С. 343-487 [Guseva NG. Systemic scleroderma. In: Sigidin YaA, Guseva NG, Ivanova MM. Diffuznye bolezni soedinitel'noi tkani [Diffuse connective tissue diseases]. Moscow: Meditsina; 2004. P. 343-487].
3. Гусева НГ. Системная склеродермия и псевдосклеродермические синдромы. Москва: Медицина; 1993 [Guseva NG. Sistemnaya sklerodermiya i psevdosklerodermicheskie sindromy [Systemic scleroderma and pseudoscleroderma syndromes]. Moscow: Meditsina; 1993].
4. Desbois AC, Cacoub P. Systemic sclerosis: An update in 2016. Autoimmun Rev. 2016 May;15(5):417-26. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev. 2016.01.007
5. Varga J, Abraham D. Systemic sclerosis: a prototypic multisystemfibrotic disorder. J Clin Invest. 2007;117(3):557-67. doi: 10.1172/ JCI31139
6. Hunzelmann N, Brinckmann J. What are the milestones in the pathogenesis of systemic sclerosis? Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jan;69 Suppl 1: 52-6. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.117119
7. Cipriani P, Marrelli A, Liakouli V, et al. Cellular players in angiogenesis during the course of systemic sclerosis. Autoimmun Rev. 2011;10:641-6. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2011.04.016
8. Bhattacharyya S, Wei J, Varga J.Understanding fibrosis in systemic sclerosis: shifting paradigms, emerging opportunities. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2011;8(1):42-54.
9. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2011.149
10. Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, et al. 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69:1580-8. doi: 10.1136/ard. 2010.138461
11. Van den Hoogen F, Khanna D, Fransen J, et al. 2013 classification criteria for systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum. 2013 Nov;65(11): 2737-47. doi: 10.1002/art.38098
12. Petri M, Orbai AM, Alarcon GS, et al. Derivation and validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Aug;64(8): 2677-86. doi: 10.1002/art.34473
13. Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4:295-306. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01753.x
14. Leavitt RY, Fauci AS, Bloch DA, еt al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Wegener’s granulomatosis. Arthritis Rheum. 1990 Aug;33(8):1101-7.
15. Masi AT, Hunder GG, Lie JT, et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Churg-Strauss syndrom (allergic granulomatosis and angiitis). Arthritis Rheum. 1990 Aug;33(8): 1094-100. doi: 10.1002/art.1780330806
16. Rothfield NF, Rodnan GP. Serum antinuclear antibodies in progressive systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Arthritis Rheum. 1968; 11(5):607-17. doi: 10.1002/art.1780110502
17. Cepeda EJ, Reveille JD. Autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis and fibrosing syndromes: clinical indications and relevance. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2004;16:723-32. doi: 10.1097/01. bor.0000144760.37777.fa.
18. Steen VD. Autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2005;35:35-42. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2005.03.005.
19. Walker JG, Fritzler MJ. Update on autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2007;19(6):580-91. doi: 10.1097/BOR.0b013e3282e7d8f9.
20. Chizzolini C, Brembilla NC, Montanari E, et al. Fibrosis and immune dysregulation in systemic sclerosis. Autoimmun Rev. 2011;
21. :276-81. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2010.09.016.
22. Bosello S, De Luca G, Tolusso B, et al. B cells in systemic sclerosis:a possible target for therapy. Autoimmun Rev. 2011;10(10): 624-30. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2011.04.013.
23. Sato S. Abnormalities of adhesion molecules and chemokines in scleroderma. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 1999;11:503-7. doi: 10.1097/ 00002281-199911000-00010.
24. Hu PQ, Fertig N, Medsger TA Jr, Wright TM. Correlation of serum anti-DNA topoisomerase I antibody levels with disease severity and activity in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48:1363-73.
25. doi: 10.1002/art.10977.
26. Hamaguchi Y, Hasegawa M, Fujimoto M, et al. The clinical relevance of serum antinuclear antibodies in Japanese patients with systemic sclerosis. Br J Dermatol. 2008;158(3): 487-95. doi: 10.1111/j.13652133.2007.08392.x.
27. Koenig M, Joyal F, Fritzler MJ, et al. Autoantibodies and microvascular damage are independent predictive factors for the progression of Raynaud’s phenomenon to systemic sclerosis: a twenty year prospective study of 586 patients, with validation of proposed criteria for early systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:3902-12.
28. doi: 10.1002/art.24038.
29. Walker UA, Tyndall A, Czirjak L, et al. Clinical risk assessment of organ manifestations in systemic sclerosis: a report from the ЕULAR Scleroderma Trials and Research group database. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007;66: 754-63. doi: 10.1136/ard.2006.062901.
30. Shoenfeld Y, Gershwin ME, Meroni PL. Autoantibodies. 2nd ed. Oxford:
31. Elsevier B.V.; 2007.
32. Насонов ЕЛ, Александрова ЕН. Современные технологии и перспективы лабораторной диагностики ревматических заболеваний. Терапевтический архив. 2010;(5):5-9 [Nasonov EL, Aleksandrova EN. Modern technologies and perspectives of laboratory diagnostics of rheumatic diseases. Terapevticheskii Arkhiv = Therapeutic Archive. 2010;(5):5-9 (In Russ.)].
33. Ананьева ЛП, Александрова ЕН. Ауто-антитела при системной склеродермии: спектр, клинические ассоциации и прогностическое значение. Научно-практическая ревматология. 2016;54(1):86-99 [Ananyeva LP, Aleksandrova EN. Autoantibodies in scleroderma systematica: Spectrum, clinical associations, and prognostic value. Nauchno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologiya = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2016;54(1):86-99 (In Russ.)].
34. doi: 10.14412/1995-4484-2016-86-99.
35. Villalta D, Imbastaro T, Di Giovanni S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and predictive value of extended autoantibody profile in systemic sclerosis. Autoimmun Rev. 2012 Dec;12(2):114-20. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev. 2012.07.005.
36. Fanning GC, Welsh KI, Bunn C, et al. HLA associations in three mutually exclusive autoantibody subgroups in UK systemic sclerosis patients. Br J Rheumatol. 1998;37:201-7. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/37.2.201.
37. Okano Y. Antinuclear antibody in systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 1996;22:709-35. doi: 10.1016/ S0889-857X(05)70297-0.
38. Stamenkovic B, Stankovic A, Dimic A, et al. The clinical significance of antibody determination to cyclic citrullinated peptides in systemic sclerosis. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2012 May-Jun;140(5-6):350-4. doi: 10.2298/SARH 1206350S.
39. Horimoto AMC, de Macedo Possamai V, da Costa IP (2016) Sjö gren’s Syndrome and Sicca Symptoms in Patients with Systemic Sclerosis. J Arthritis. 2016;5:190. doi: 10.4172/2167-7921.1000190.
40. Старовойтова МН, Десинова ОВ, Конева ОА и др. Профиль аутоантител при системной склеродермии. Научно-практическая ревматология. 2016;54(4):418-23 [Starovoitova MN, Desinova OV, Koneva OA, et al. Profile of autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Nauchno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologiya = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2016;54(4):418-23 (In Russ.)].
41. doi: 10.14412/1995-4484-2016-418-423.
42. Jung M, Baron M, Hudson M, et al. Myopathy is a poor prognostic feature in systemic sclerosis: results from the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group (CSRG) cohort. Scand J Rheumatol. 2014;43(3): 217-20. doi: 10.3109/03009742.2013.868512.
43. Hoffmann AM, Gunnarsson R, Garen T, et al. Performance of the 2013AmericanCollege of Rheumatology/ European League Against Rheumatism Classification Criteria for Systemic Sclerosis (SSc) in Large, Well-defined Cohorts of SSc and Mixed Connective Tissue Disease. J Rheumatol. 2015;42;60-3. doi: 10.3899/ jrheum.140047.
44. Mehra S, Walker J, Patterson K, Fritzler MJ. Autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Autoimmun Rev. 2013;12:350-4. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2012.05.011.
45. Graf SW, Hakendorf P, Lester S, et al. South Australian Scleroderma Register: autoantibodies aspredictive biomarkers of phenotype and outcome. Int J Rheum Dis. 2012;15:102-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-185X. 2011.01688.x.
46. Krzyszczak ME, Li Y, Rosset SJ, et al Gender and ethnicity differences in the prevalence of scleroderma-related autoanti-bodies. Clin Rheumatol. 2011 Oct;30(10): 1333-9. doi: 10.1007/s10067-011-1751-0.
47. Reveille JD, Fischbach M, McNearney T, et al. Systemic sclerosis in 3 US ethnic groups: a comparison of clinical sociodemographic, serologic, and immunogenetic determinants. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2001;30: 332-46. doi: 10.1053/sarh.2001.20268
48. Jacobsen S, Halberg P, Ullman S, et al. Clinical features and serum antinuclear antibodies in 230 Danish patients with systemic sclerosis. Br J Rheumatol. 1998;37:39-45. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/37.1.39.
49. Ihn H, Sato S, Fujimoto M, et al. Measurement of anticardiolipin antibodies by ELISA using 2-glycoprotein I (2-GPI) in systemic sclerosis. Clin Exp Immunol. 1996; 105:475-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.1996. d01-774.x.
50. Kuwana M, Kaburaki J, Okano Y, et al. Clinical and prognostic associations based on serum antinuclear antibodies in Japanese patients with systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum. 1994;37:75-83. doi: 10.1002/art. 1780370111.
51. Lerner MR, Steitz JA. Antibodies to small nuclear RNAs complexed with proteins are produced by patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1979; 76:5495-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.76.11.5495.
52. Lutz CS, James J. Antibodies to Spliceosomal Components Dubois' Lupus Erythematosus. Lippincott: Williams & Wilkins; 2007.
53. Hoffman RW, Maldonado ME. Immune pathogenesis of Mixed Connective Tissue Disease: a short analytical review. Clin Immunol. 2008 Jul;128(1):8-17.
54. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2008.03.461.
55. Takada K, Suzuki K, Matsumoto M, et al. Clinical characteristics of patients with both anti-U1RNP and anti-centromere antibodies. Scand J Rheumatol. 2008 Sep-Oct; 37(5): 360-4. doi: 10.1080/03009740802116190.
56. Vlachoyiannopoulos PG, Petrovas C, Tzioufas AG, et al. No evidence of epitope spreading after immunization with the major Sm epitope P-P-G-M-R-P-P anchored to sequential oligopeptide carriers (SOCs). J Autoimmun. 2000 Feb;14(1):53-61. doi: 10.1006/jaut.1999.0344.
57. Ho KT, Reveille JD. The clinical relevance of autoantibodies in scleroderma. Arthritis Res Ther. 2003;5(2):80-93. doi: 10.1186/ar628.
58. Nihtyanova SI, Denton CP. Autoantibodies as predictive tools in systemic sclerosis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2010;6:112-6. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2009.238.
59. Mierau R, Moinzadeh P, Riemekasten G, et al. Frequency of disease-associated and other nuclear autoantibodies in patients of the German network for systemic scleroder-ma: correlation with characteristic clinical features. Arthritis Res Ther. 2011;13(5):R172. doi: 10.1186/ar3495.
60. Kattah NH, Kattah MG, Utz PJ. The U1-snRNP complex: structural properties relating to autoimmune pathogenesis in rheumatic diseases. Immunol Rev. 2010 Jan; 233(1):126-45. doi: 10.1111/j.0105-2896. 2009.00863.x.
61. Ambrose N, Morgan TA, Galloway J, et al. Differences in disease phenotype and severity in SLE across age groups on behalf of the UK JSLE Study Group. Lupus. 2016;25: 1542-50. doi: 10.1177/0961203316644333.
62. Faria AC, Barcellos KS, Andrade LE. Longitudinal fluctuation of antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 2005;32: 1267-72.
63. Hoffman IEA, Peene I, Meheus L, et al. Specific antinuclear antibodies are associated with clinical features in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:1155-8. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.013417.
64. St Clair EW, Query CC, Bentley R, et al. Expression of autoantibodies to recombinant (U1) RNP-associated 70K antigen in systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin Immunol Immunopathol. 1990;54:266-80.
65. doi: 10.1016/0090-1229(90)90088-8.
66. Koenig M, Fritzler MJ, Targoff IN, et al. Heterogeneity of autoantibodies in 100 patients with autoimmune myositis: insights into clinical features and outcomes. Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9:78. doi: 10.1186/ar2276.
67. Gunnarsson R, Molberg O, Gilboe IM, et al. The prevalence and incidence of mixed connective tissue disease: a national multi-centre survey of Norwegian patients. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70:1047-51. doi: 10.1136/ ard.2010.143792
68. Smeenk RJT, Feltkamp TEW. Antinuclear antibodies. In: Delves PJ, Roitt IM, editors. Encyclopedia of Immunology. 2nd ed. San Diego: Academic Press; 1998. P. 125-33.
69. Ihn H, Yamane K, Yazawa N, et al. Distribution and antigen specificity of anti-U1RNP antibodies in patients with systemic sclerosis. Clin Exp Immunol. 1999;117:383-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.1999.00961.x.
70. Coppo P, Clauvel JP, Bengoufa D, et al. Inflammatory myositis associated with anti-U1-small nuclear ribonucleoprotein antibodies: a subset of myositis associated with a favourable outcome. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2002;41:1040-6. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/41.9.1040.
71. Lundberg I, Nennesmo I, Hedfors E. A clinical, serological, and histopathological study of myositis patients with and without anti-RNP antibodies. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 1992;22:127-38. doi: 10.1016/0049-0172 (92)90006-Y.
72. Generini S, Steiner G, Miniati I, et al. Anti-hnRNP and other autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis with joint involvement. Rheumatology. 2009;48:920-5. doi: 10.1093/ rheumatology/kep138.
73. Sobanski V, Giovannelli J, Lynch BM, et al. Characteristics and Survival of Anti-U1RNPAntibody-Positive Patients With Connective Tissue Disease-Associated Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. Arthritis Rheum. 2016 Feb;68(2):484-93. doi: 10.1002/ art.39432.
74. Genth E, Zarnowski H, Mierau R, et al. HLA-DR4 and Gm(1,3;5,21) Are Associated With U1-nRNP Antibody Positive Connective Tissue Disease. Ann Rheum Dis. 1987 Mar;46(3):189-96. doi: 10.1136/ ard.46.3.189.
75. Hoffman RW, Greidinger EL. Mixed connective tissue disease. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2000 Sep;12(5):386-90. doi: 10.1097/00002281-200009000-00006.
76. Jury EC, D’Cruz D, Morrow WJ. Autoantibodies and overlap syndromes in autoimmune rheumatic disease. J Clin Pathol. 2001 May;54(5):340-7. doi: 10.1136/jcp. 54.5.340.
77. Szodoray P, Hajas A, Kardos L, et al. Distinct phenotypes in mixed connective tissue disease: subgroups and survival. Lupus. 2012 Nov;21(13):1412-22. doi: 10.1177/0961203312456751.
78. Cappelli S, Bellando Randone S, Martinovic D, et al. «To Be or Not To Be», Ten Years After: Evidence for Mixed Connective Tissue Disease as a Distinct Entity. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2011;41(4): 589-98. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2011.07.010.
79. Sharp GC, Irvin WS, May CM. Association of antibodies to ribonucleoprotein and Sm antigens with mixed connectivetissue disease, systemic lupus erythematosus and other rheumatic diseases. N Engl J Med. 1976;295:1149-54. doi: 10.1056/ NEJM197611182952101.
80. Minkin W, Rabhan N. Mixed connective tissue disease. Arch Dermatol. 1976 Nov; 112(11):1535-8. doi: 10.1001/archderm. 1976.01630350011003.
81. Sharp GC. Diagnostic criteria for classification of MCTD. In: Kasukawa R,
82. Sharp GC, editors. Mixed connective tissue disease and anti-nuclear antibodies. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (Biomedical Division); 1987. P. 23-30.
83. Alarcon-Segovia D, Villarreal M. Classification and diagnostic criteria for mixed connective tissue disease. In: Kasukawa R, Sharp GC, editors. Mixed connective tissue disease and anti-nuclear antibodies. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (Biomedical Division); 1987. P. 33-40.
84. Kahn MF, Appelboom T. In: Kahn MF, Peltier AP, Meyer O, et al. Les Maladies Systemiques. Paris: Flammarion; 1991. P. 545-56.
85. Kasukawa R, Tojo T, Miyawaki S, et al. Preliminary diagnostic criteria for classification of mixed connective tissue disease. In: Kasukawa R, Sharp GC, editors. Mixed connective tissue disease and anti-nuclear antibodies. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B. V. (Biomedical Division); 1987. P. 41-7.
86. Gunnarsson R, Hetlevik SO, Lilleby V, et al. Mixed connective tissue disease. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2016;30:95-111. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2016.03.002
87. Flam ST, Gunnarsson R, Garen T, et al. The HLA profiles of mixed connective tissue disease differ distinctly from the profiles of clinically related connective tissue diseases. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015;54:528-35.
88. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keu310.
89. Paradowska-Gorycka A, Stypinska B, Olesinska M, et al. Association of HLADRB1 alleles with susceptibility to mixed connective tissue disease in Polish patients. HLA Immun Res Genet. 2016;87:13-8. doi: 10.1111/tan.12698.
90. Nimelstein SH, Brody S, McShane D, Holman HR. Mixed connective tissue disease: a subsequent evaluation of the original 25 patients. Medicine (Baltimore). 1980; 59:239-48. doi: 10.1097/00005792-198007 000-00001.
91. Van den Hoogen FH, Spronk PE, Boerbooms AM, et al. Long-term follow-up of 46 patients with anti-(U1)snRNP antibodies. Br J Rheumatol. 1994;33:1117-20.
92. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/33.12.1117.
93. Burdt MA, Hoffman RW, Deutscher SL, et al. Long-term outcome in mixed connective tissue disease: longitudinal clinical and serologic findings. Arthritis Rheum. 1999;42:899-909. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131 (199905)42:53.0.CO;2-L.
94. Lundberg I, Hedfors E. Clinical course of patients with anti-RNP antibodies. A prospective study of 32 patients. J Rheumatol. 1991;18:1511-9.
Review
For citations:
Shayakhmetova RU, Ananyeva LP. Positivity for antiribonucleoprotein antibodies in rheumatic diseases: focus on scleroderma systematica. Sovremennaya Revmatologiya=Modern Rheumatology Journal. 2017;11(4):48-55. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14412/1996-7012-2017-4-48-55
Views:
1155
Email this article 