scholarly journals Evaluation of SIGLEC1 in the diagnosis of suspected systemic lupus erythematosus

Author(s):  
Lydia Zorn-Pauly ◽  
Anne Sae Lim von Stuckrad ◽  
Jens Klotsche ◽  
Thomas Rose ◽  
Tilmann Kallinich ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of SIGLEC1, a surrogate marker of type I IFN, with established biomarkers in an inception cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).MethodsSIGLEC1 was analysed by flow cytometry in 232 patients referred to our institution with suspected SLE between October 2015 and September 2020.ResultsSLE was confirmed in 76 of 232 patients (32.8%) according to the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria and their SIGLEC1 values were significantly higher compared to patients without SLE (p<0.0001). A sensitivity of 98.7 %, a specificity of 82.1 %, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.2 % and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 72.8 % were calculated for SIGLEC1. Adjusted to the highest reported prevalence of SLE, the NPV and PPV were > 99.9 % and 0.1 %, respectively. Using ROC analysis and Delong testing, the area under the curve (AUC) for SIGLEC1 (AUC=0.95) was significantly higher than for ANA (AUC=0.88, p=0.031), C3 (AUC=0.83, p=0.001) and C4 (AUC=0.83, p=0.002) but not for anti-dsDNA antibodies (AUC=0.90, p=0.163).ConclusionIFN-I pathway activation is detectable in almost all newly diagnosed SLE patients. Thus, a negative test result for SIGLEC1 is powerful to exclude SLE in suspected cases.

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 623.2-624
Author(s):  
L. Zorn-Pauly ◽  
A. S. L. Von Stuckrad ◽  
J. Klotsche ◽  
T. Rose ◽  
T. Kallinich ◽  
...  

Background:While there have been advances in the therapy of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in recent years, there have been no major new findings in SLE biomarkers [1, 2]. Type I interferon (IFN) plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of SLE [3]. In 2008, we first described CD169 / SIGLEC-1 (sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectin-1), an interferon-induced adhesion molecule on monocytes in SLE patients [4]. For over five years SIGLEC-1 has been routinely assessed in our clinic.Objectives:To evaluate and compare the diagnostic utility of the type I IFN induced SIGLEC-1 with established biomarkers in the initial diagnosis of the disease.Methods:We analyzed retrospectively 232 patients who were on suspicion of SLE at Charité University Hospital Berlin between October 2015 and September 2020. Patients underwent full clinical characterization, and biomarkers were determined in the routine laboratory. Based on the final diagnosis, we divided patients into two groups: A) initial diagnosis of SLE and B) Non-SLE mimicking condition.Results:In 76 patients (32.3 %) SLE was confirmed by fulfilling the EULAR / ACR 2019 classification criteria [5]. SIGLEC-1 was dramatically increased in patients with an initial diagnosis of SLE compared to patients without SLE (p<0.0001). For a threshold of 2500 molecule per monocyte, a sensitivity of 98.7 %, a specificity of 82.1 %, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.2 %, and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 72.8 % were calculated for SIGLEC-1. Adjusted to the prevalence of SLE in Germany (36.7 per 100,000 inhabitants [6]) NPV and PPV turned out to > 99.9 % and 0.2 %. We further aimed to compare not only the performance of the tests at a given cutoff but also across all possible measured values. Therefore, we conducted ROC curves analyses (see figure 1). The area under the curve (AUC) of SIGLEC-1 test was significantly higher than that of ANA test (AUC=0.88, p=0.031), C3 (AUC = 0.83, p=0.001), C4 (AUC=0.83, p=0.002), but not than that of the Anti-dsDNA ELISA (AUC=0.90, p=0.163).Conclusion:Our study shows that IFN activity is a hallmark at the onset of the disease and that the interferon biomarker SIGLEC-1 is valuable to rule out SLE in suspected cases.References:[1]Ostendorf L, Burns M, Durek P, Heinz GA, Heinrich F, Garantziotis P, Enghard P, Richter U, Biesen R, Schneider U et al: Targeting CD38 with Daratumumab in Refractory Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2020, 383(12):1149-1155.[2]Furie R, Rovin BH, Houssiau F, Malvar A, Teng YKO, Contreras G, Amoura Z, Yu X, Mok CC, Santiago MB et al: Two-Year, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Belimumab in Lupus Nephritis. N Engl J Med 2020, 383(12):1117-1128.[3]Ronnblom L, Leonard D: Interferon pathway in SLE: one key to unlocking the mystery of the disease. Lupus Sci Med 2019, 6(1):e000270.[4]Biesen R, Demir C, Barkhudarova F, Grun JR, Steinbrich-Zollner M, Backhaus M, Haupl T, Rudwaleit M, Riemekasten G, Radbruch A et al: Sialic acid-binding Ig-like lectin 1 expression in inflammatory and resident monocytes is a potential biomarker for monitoring disease activity and success of therapy in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 58(4):1136-1145.[5]Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D, Brinks R, Mosca M, Ramsey-Goldman R, Smolen JS, Wofsy D, Boumpas DT, Kamen DL et al: 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2019, 78(9):1151-1159.[6]Brinks R, Fischer-Betz R, Sander O, Richter JG, Chehab G, Schneider M: Age-specific prevalence of diagnosed systemic lupus erythematosus in Germany 2002 and projection to 2030. Lupus 2014, 23(13):1407-1411.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 369-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary K. Crow ◽  
Mikhail Olferiev ◽  
Kyriakos A. Kirou

Type I interferons, which make up the first cytokine family to be described and are the essential mediators of antivirus host defense, have emerged as central elements in the immunopathology of systemic autoimmune diseases, with systemic lupus erythematosus as the prototype. Lessons from investigation of interferon regulation following virus infection can be applied to lupus, with the conclusion that sustained production of type I interferon shifts nearly all components of the immune system toward pathologic functions that result in tissue damage and disease. We review recent data, mainly from studies of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, that provide new insights into the mechanisms of induction and the immunologic consequences of chronic activation of the type I interferon pathway. Current concepts implicate endogenous nucleic acids, driving both cytosolic sensors and endosomal Toll-like receptors, in interferon pathway activation and suggest targets for development of novel therapeutics that may restore the immune system to health.


2015 ◽  
Vol 74 (7) ◽  
pp. 1474-1478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Alexander ◽  
Ramona Sarfert ◽  
Jens Klotsche ◽  
Anja A Kühl ◽  
Andrea Rubbert-Roth ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo investigate whether bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor approved for treatment of multiple myeloma, induces clinically relevant plasma cell (PC) depletion in patients with active, refractory systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).MethodsTwelve patients received a median of two (range 1–4) 21-day cycles of intravenous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) with the coadministration of dexamethasone (20 mg) for active SLE. Disease activity was assessed using the SLEDAI-2K score. Serum concentrations of anti–double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) and vaccine-induced protective antibodies were monitored. Flow cytometry was performed to analyse peripheral blood B-cells, PCs and Siglec-1 expression on monocytes as surrogate marker for type-I interferon (IFN) activity.ResultsUpon proteasome inhibition, disease activity significantly declined and remained stable for 6 months on maintenance therapies. Nineteen treatment-emergent adverse events occurred and, although mostly mild to moderate, resulted in treatment discontinuation in seven patients. Serum antibody levels significantly declined, with greater reductions in anti-dsDNA (∼60%) than vaccine-induced protective antibody titres (∼30%). Bortezomib significantly reduced the numbers of peripheral blood and bone marrow PCs (∼50%), but their numbers increased between cycles. Siglec-1 expression on monocytes significantly declined.ConclusionsThese findings identify proteasome inhibitors as a putative therapeutic option for patients with refractory SLE by targeting PCs and type-I IFN activity, but our results must be confirmed in controlled trials.


2021 ◽  
pp. 16-20
Author(s):  
C. Erramuspe ◽  
M. Racca ◽  
M. Siemsen ◽  
M. Pelosso ◽  
M. Quaglia ◽  
...  

Introduction: type I interferon (IFN) is a cytokine that plays a fundamental role in the pathogenesis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE). Different levels of this cytokine could explain the heterogeneity of this pathology and be useful to evaluate its activity. Objectives: to determine the serum type I IFN levels in patients with SLE and evaluate its usefulness as a biomarker of activity. Material and Method: 16 patients with SLE (ACR 1997) and 16 controls. Methods: Disease activity (SLEDAI-2K), organ damage (SLICC), type I IFN (HEK-Blue- IFNα/β), anti-dsDNA antibodies (Indirect Immunofluorescence), anti-ENA antibodies (ELISA), C3-C4 (Immunoturbidimetry). Statistics: InfoStat/Instat/MedCalc. P values <0.05 were statistically significant. Results: an increase in IFN concentration was observed in the SLE group respect to the control (p <0.05). Patients with IFN values above the cut-off point were associated with the presence of anti-dsDNA antibodies (OR: 13.33; p<0.05). Hypocomplementemic patients and those with a SLEDAI-2K score greater than 8 had higher IFN levels compared to patients with normal complement and a lower index score, respectively (p<0.05). Conclusions: these results suggest the importance that the determination of IFN type I could have for the monitoring of SLE activity.


Author(s):  
Concepción González ◽  
Belen Garcia-Berrocal ◽  
Oscar Herráez ◽  
José Alejandro Navajo ◽  
José ManuelGonzález-Buitrago

AbstractAnti-nucleosome (anti-chromatin) antibodies play a key role in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The objective of the present study was to determine the clinical significance of anti-nucleosome (anti-chromatin) antibodies, anti-dsDNA antibodies and anti-histone antibodies in patients with SLE in relation to patients with positive nuclear antibodies and healthy controls. We measured anti-nucleosome (anti-chromatin) antibodies, anti-dsDNA antibodies and anti-histone antibodies in 70 patients with SLE, 35 antinuclear antibody (ANA)-positive subjects without autoimmune disease and 35 blood donors. All antibodies were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We obtained the receiver operating caracteristic (ROC) curve and the area under the curve (AUC) for each autoantibody. Likewise, we obtained the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative likelihood ratios for each autoantibody. The highest AUC was obtained for anti-nucleosome (0.898) and the lowest AUC for a kit for anti-dsDNA (0.725). Stratification of the control group (ANA-positive subjects without autoimmune disease and blood donors) produced significant changes in the AUCs; all AUCs decreased when ANA-positive patients without autoimmune disease were considered as controls and all AUCs increased when blood donors were considered as controls. These effects were less marked in anti-dsDNA antibodies. We observed discrepancies between kits (anti-nucleosome and anti-chromatin and two for anti-dsDNA). The highest sensitivity for SLE was obtained for anti-nucleosome antibodies (86%) and the highest specificity was obtained for anti-dsDNA antibodies (90%). In conclusion, anti-nucleosome and anti-chromatin kits show different degrees of clinical accuracy due to the cut-off selected by the manufacturer. Once the kits with the best performance and the optimal cut-offs have been selected, anti-nucleosome antibodies and anti-dsDNA antibodies provide similar information in established SLE.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
A. Aue ◽  
F. Szelinski ◽  
S. Weißenberg ◽  
A. Wiedemann ◽  
T. Rose ◽  
...  

Background:Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is characterized by two pathogenic key signatures, type I interferon (IFN) (1.) and B-cell abnormalities (2.). How these signatures are interrelated is not known. Type I-II IFN trigger activation of Janus kinase (JAK) – signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT).Objectives:JAK-STAT inhibition is an attractive therapeutic possibility for SLE (3.). We assess STAT1 and STAT3 expression and phosphorylation at baseline and after IFN type I and II stimulation in B-cell subpopulations of SLE patients compared to other autoimmune diseases and healthy controls (HD) and related it to disease activity.Methods:Expression of STAT1, pSTAT1, STAT3 and pSTAT3 in B and T-cells of 21 HD, 10 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 7 primary Sjögren’s (pSS) and 22 SLE patients was analyzed by flow cytometry. STAT1 and STAT3 expression and phosphorylation in PBMCs of SLE patients and HD after IFNα and IFNγ incubation were further investigated.Results:SLE patients showed substantially higher STAT1 but not pSTAT1 in B and T-cell subsets. Increased STAT1 expression in B cell subsets correlated significantly with SLEDAI and Siglec-1 on monocytes, a type I IFN marker (4.). STAT1 activation in plasmablasts was IFNα dependent while monocytes exhibited dependence on IFNγ.Figure 1.Significantly increased expression of STAT1 by SLE B cells(A) Representative histograms of baseline expression of STAT1, pSTAT1, STAT3 and pSTAT3 in CD19+ B cells of SLE patients (orange), HD (black) and isotype controls (grey). (B) Baseline expression of STAT1 and pSTAT1 or (C) STAT3 and pSTAT3 in CD20+CD27-, CD20+CD27+ and CD20lowCD27high B-lineage cells from SLE (orange) patients compared to those from HD (black). Mann Whitney test; ****p≤0.0001.Figure 2.Correlation of STAT1 expression by SLE B cells correlates with type I IFN signature (Siglec-1, CD169) and clinical activity (SLEDAI).Correlation of STAT1 expression in CD20+CD27- näive (p<0.0001, r=0.8766), CD20+CD27+ memory (p<0.0001, r=0.8556) and CD20lowCD27high (p<0.0001, r=0.9396) B cells from SLE patients with (A) Siglec-1 (CD169) expression on CD14+ cells as parameter of type I IFN signature and (B) lupus disease activity (SLEDAI score). Spearman rank coefficient (r) was calculated to identify correlations between these parameters. *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01. (C) STAT1 expression in B cell subsets of a previously undiagnosed, active SLE patient who was subsequently treated with two dosages of prednisolone and reanalyzed.Conclusion:Enhanced expression of STAT1 by B-cells candidates as key node of two immunopathogenic signatures (type I IFN and B-cells) related to important immunopathogenic pathways and lupus activity. We show that STAT1 is activated upon IFNα exposure in SLE plasmablasts. Thus, Jak inhibitors, targeting JAK-STAT pathways, hold promise to block STAT1 expression and control plasmablast induction in SLE.References:[1]Baechler EC, Batliwalla FM, Karypis G, Gaffney PM, Ortmann WA, Espe KJ, et al. Interferon-inducible gene expression signature in peripheral blood cells of patients with severe lupus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(5):2610-5.[2]Lino AC, Dorner T, Bar-Or A, Fillatreau S. Cytokine-producing B cells: a translational view on their roles in human and mouse autoimmune diseases. Immunol Rev. 2016;269(1):130-44.[3]Dorner T, Lipsky PE. Beyond pan-B-cell-directed therapy - new avenues and insights into the pathogenesis of SLE. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2016;12(11):645-57.[4]Biesen R, Demir C, Barkhudarova F, Grun JR, Steinbrich-Zollner M, Backhaus M, et al. Sialic acid-binding Ig-like lectin 1 expression in inflammatory and resident monocytes is a potential biomarker for monitoring disease activity and success of therapy in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(4):1136-45.Disclosure of Interests:Arman Aue: None declared, Franziska Szelinski: None declared, Sarah Weißenberg: None declared, Annika Wiedemann: None declared, Thomas Rose: None declared, Andreia Lino: None declared, Thomas Dörner Grant/research support from: Janssen, Novartis, Roche, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Roche, Janssen, EMD, Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, Roche, Samsung, Janssen


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 602.1-603
Author(s):  
E. S. Torun ◽  
E. Bektaş ◽  
F. Kemik ◽  
M. Bektaş ◽  
C. Cetin ◽  
...  

Background:Recently developed EULAR/ACR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have important differences compared to the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) SLE classification criteria and the revised 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria: The obligatory entry criterion of antinuclear antibody (ANA) positivity is introduced and a “weighted” approach is used1. Sensitivity and specificity of these three criteria have been debated and may vary in different populations and clinical settings.Objectives:We aim to compare the performances of three criteria sets/rules in a large cohort of patients and relevant diseased controls from a reference center with dedicated clinics for SLE and other autoimmune/inflammatory connective tissue diseases from Turkey.Methods:We reviewed the medical records of SLE patients and diseased controls for clinical and laboratory features relevant to all sets of criteria. Criteria sets/rules were analysed based on sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity and negative predictive value, using clinical diagnosis with at least 6 months of follow-up as the gold standard. A subgroup analysis was performed in ANA positive patients for both SLE patients and diseased controls. SLE patients that did not fulfil 2012 SLICC criteria and 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria and diseased controls that fulfilled these criteria were evaluated.Results:A total of 392 SLE patients and 294 non-SLE diseased controls (48 undifferentiated connective tissue disease, 51 Sjögren’s syndrome, 43 idiopathic inflammatory myopathy, 50 systemic sclerosis, 52 primary antiphospholipid syndrome, 15 rheumatoid arthritis, 15 psoriatic arthritis and 20 ANCA associated vasculitis) were included into the study. Hundred and fourteen patients (16.6%) were ANA negative.Sensitivity was more than 90% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria and positive predictive value was more than 90% for all three criteria (Table 1). Specificity was the highest for 1997 ACR criteria. Negative predictive value was 76.9% for ACR criteria, 88.4% for SLICC criteria and 91.7% for EULAR/ACR criteria.In only ANA positive patients, sensitivity was 79.6% for 1997 ACR criteria, 92.2% for 2012 SLICC criteria and 96.1% for 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. Specificity was 92.6% for ACR criteria, 87.8% for SLICC criteria 85.2% for EULAR/ACR criteria.Eleven clinically diagnosed SLE patients had insufficient number of items for both 2012 SLICC and 2019 EULAR/ACR criteria. Both criteria were fulfilled by 16 diseased controls: 9 with Sjögren’s syndrome, 5 with antiphospholipid syndrome, one with dermatomyositis and one with systemic sclerosis.Table 1.Sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity and negative predictive value of 1997 ACR, 2012 SLICC and 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteriaSLE (+)SLE (-)Sensitivity (%)Positive Predictive Value (%)Specificity (%)Negative Predictive Value (%)1997 ACR(+) 308(-) 841527978.695.494.976.92012 SLICC(+) 357(-) 352626891.193.291.288.42019 EULAR/ACR(+) 368(-) 242826693.892.990.591.7Conclusion:In this cohort, although all three criteria have sufficient specificity, sensitivity and negative predictive value of 1997 ACR criteria are the lowest. Overall, 2019 EULAR/ACR and 2012 SLICC criteria have a comparable performance, but if only ANA positive cases and controls are analysed, the specificity of both criteria decrease to less than 90%. Some SLE patients with a clinical diagnosis lacked sufficient number of criteria. Mostly, patients with Sjögren’s syndrome or antiphospholipid syndrome are prone to misclassification by both recent criteria.References:[1]Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D, et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78:1151-1159.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document