Autoantibodies against four-and-a-half-LIM domain 1 (FHL1) in inflammatory myopathies: results from an Australian single-centre cohort.

Angeles S Galindo-Feria, Begum Horuluoglu, Jessica Day, Catia Fernandes-Cerqueira, Edvard Wigren, Susanne Gräslund, Susanna Proudman, Ingrid E Lundberg, Vidya Limaye
{"title":"Autoantibodies against four-and-a-half-LIM domain 1 (FHL1) in inflammatory myopathies: results from an Australian single-centre cohort.","authors":"Angeles S Galindo-Feria,&nbsp;Begum Horuluoglu,&nbsp;Jessica Day,&nbsp;Catia Fernandes-Cerqueira,&nbsp;Edvard Wigren,&nbsp;Susanne Gräslund,&nbsp;Susanna Proudman,&nbsp;Ingrid E Lundberg,&nbsp;Vidya Limaye","doi":"10.1093/rheumatology/keac003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the prevalence and associations of autoantibodies targeting a muscle-specific autoantigen, four-and-a-half-LIM-domain 1 (FHL1), in South Australian patients with histologically-confirmed idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and in patients with SSc.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sera from patients with IIM (n = 267) from the South Australian Myositis Database (SAMD), SSc (n = 174) from the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study (ASCS) and healthy controls (HC, n = 100) were analysed for anti-FHL1 autoantibodies by Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Autoantibodies to FHL1 were more frequent in patients with IIM (37/267, 13.8%) compared with SSc (12/174, 7%) (P < 0.02) and HC (2/100, 2%) (P < 0.001). The most common IIM subtypes among FHL1+ IIM patients were (32%) and IBM (2/37, 32%). No statistically significant differences in muscular or extra-muscular manifestations of IIM were found when comparing patients who were anti-FHL1+ with their anti-FHL1- counterparts. In 29/37 (78%) anti-FHL1+ patients, no myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSA) were present. In FHL1+ muscle biopsies, there was less frequent infiltration by CD45+ cells (P = 0.04). There was a trend for HLA alleles DRB1*07 and DRB1*15 to be more frequent in anti-FHL1+ compared with anti-FHL1- patients (9/25 vs 19/113, P = 0.09 and 8/25 vs 15/114, P = 0.09, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We report a substantial prevalence (13.8%) of anti-FHL1 autoantibodies in a large cohort of patients with histologically confirmed IIM; 75% of these cases did not have a detectable myositis-specific autoantibody. Anti-FHL1 autoantibodies were also detected in a subgroup of patients with SSc (7%), indicating that anti-FHL1 autoantibodies may not be myositis-specific. The trend towards an HLA-DR association might indicate a specific immune response to the FHL1 protein.</p>","PeriodicalId":379078,"journal":{"name":"Rheumatology (Oxford, England)","volume":" ","pages":"4145-4154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5e/2e/keac003.PMC9536793.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rheumatology (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keac003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the prevalence and associations of autoantibodies targeting a muscle-specific autoantigen, four-and-a-half-LIM-domain 1 (FHL1), in South Australian patients with histologically-confirmed idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and in patients with SSc.

Material and methods: Sera from patients with IIM (n = 267) from the South Australian Myositis Database (SAMD), SSc (n = 174) from the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study (ASCS) and healthy controls (HC, n = 100) were analysed for anti-FHL1 autoantibodies by Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA).

Results: Autoantibodies to FHL1 were more frequent in patients with IIM (37/267, 13.8%) compared with SSc (12/174, 7%) (P < 0.02) and HC (2/100, 2%) (P < 0.001). The most common IIM subtypes among FHL1+ IIM patients were (32%) and IBM (2/37, 32%). No statistically significant differences in muscular or extra-muscular manifestations of IIM were found when comparing patients who were anti-FHL1+ with their anti-FHL1- counterparts. In 29/37 (78%) anti-FHL1+ patients, no myositis-specific autoantibodies (MSA) were present. In FHL1+ muscle biopsies, there was less frequent infiltration by CD45+ cells (P = 0.04). There was a trend for HLA alleles DRB1*07 and DRB1*15 to be more frequent in anti-FHL1+ compared with anti-FHL1- patients (9/25 vs 19/113, P = 0.09 and 8/25 vs 15/114, P = 0.09, respectively).

Conclusions: We report a substantial prevalence (13.8%) of anti-FHL1 autoantibodies in a large cohort of patients with histologically confirmed IIM; 75% of these cases did not have a detectable myositis-specific autoantibody. Anti-FHL1 autoantibodies were also detected in a subgroup of patients with SSc (7%), indicating that anti-FHL1 autoantibodies may not be myositis-specific. The trend towards an HLA-DR association might indicate a specific immune response to the FHL1 protein.

Abstract Image

针对炎症性肌病的4.5 lim结构域1 (FHL1)的自身抗体:来自澳大利亚单中心队列的结果。
目的:确定南澳大利亚州组织学证实的特发性炎症性肌病(IIM)患者和SSc患者中针对肌肉特异性自身抗原的自身抗体的患病率及其相关性。材料和方法:采用酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)对来自南澳大利亚肌炎数据库(SAMD)的IIM患者(n = 267)、来自澳大利亚硬皮病队列研究(ASCS)的SSc (n = 174)和健康对照(HC, n = 100)的血清进行抗fhl1自身抗体分析。结果:与SSc(12/174, 7%)相比,FHL1自身抗体在IIM患者中更常见(37/267,13.8%)(P结论:我们报告了大量组织学证实的IIM患者中抗FHL1自身抗体的患病率(13.8%);75%的病例没有检测到肌炎特异性自身抗体。在SSc患者亚组中也检测到抗fhl1自身抗体(7%),表明抗fhl1自身抗体可能不是肌炎特异性的。HLA-DR关联的趋势可能表明对FHL1蛋白的特异性免疫反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书