Diagnostic value of the anti-Sa antibody compared with the anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody in rheumatoid arthritis

Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies as biomarkers in rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

The serological biomarker anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) may have several functions but is especially important for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) along with clinical symptoms.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an overview of ACPAs, which are useful in RA diagnostics and may improve our understanding of disease etiology. PubMed was searched with combinations of words related to antibodies recognizing epitopes containing the post-translationally modified amino acid citrulline in combination with rheumatoid arthritis; cyclic citrullinated peptide, CCP, anti-CCP, anti-citrullinated protein antibodies, ACPA, citrullination, peptide/protein arginine deiminase, PAD, filaggrin, vimentin, keratin, collagen, perinuclear factor, EBNA1, EBNA2, and others. From this search, we made a qualitative extract of publications relevant to the discovery, characterization, and clinical use of these antibodies in relation to RA. We highlight significant findings and identify areas for improvement.

EXPERT OPINION

ACPAs have high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for RA and recognize citrullinated epitopes from several proteins. The best-performing single epitope originates from Epstein-Barr Virus nuclear antigen 2 and contains a central Cit-Gly motif, which is recognized by ACPAS when located in a flexible peptide structure. In addition, ACPAs may also have prognostic value, especially in relation to early treatment, although ACPAs' main function is to aid in the diagnosis of RA.

Objective and noninvasive biochemical markers in rheumatoid arthritis: where are we and where are we going?

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease that affects approximately 1% of the adult population. RA is multi-factorial, and as such our understanding of the molecular pathways involved in the disease is currently limited. An increasing number of studies have suggested that several molecular phenotypes (i.e. endotypes) of RA exist, and that different endotypes respond differently to various treatments. Biochemical markers may be an attractive means for achieving precision medicine, as they are objective and easily obtainable.

AREAS COVERED

We searched recent publications on biochemical markers in RA as either diagnostic or prognostic markers, or as markers of disease activity. Here, we provide a narrative overview of different classes of markers, such as autoantibodies, citrulline products, markers of tissue turnover and cytokines, that have been tested in clinical cohorts or trials including RA patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Although many biochemical markers have been identified and tested, few are currently being used in clinical practice. As more treatment options are becoming available, the need for precision medicine tools that can aid physicians and patients in choosing the right treatment is growing.

The importance of differences; On environment and its interactions with genes and immunity in the causation of rheumatoid arthritis

The current review uses rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as a prominent example for how studies on the interplay between environmental and genetic factors in defined subsets of a disease can be used to formulate aetiological hypotheses that subsequently can be tested for causality using molecular and functional studies. Major discussed findings are that exposures to airways from many different noxious agents including cigarette smoke, silica dust and more interact with major susceptibility genes, mainly HLA-DR genetic variants in triggering antigen-specific immune reactions specific for RA. We also discuss how several other environmental and lifestyle factors, including microbial, neural and metabolic factors, can influence risk for RA in ways that are different in different subsets of RA.The description of these processes in RA provides the best example so far in any immune-mediated disease of how triggering of immunity at one anatomical site in the context of known environmental and genetic factors subsequently can lead to symptoms that precede the classical inflammatory disease symptoms and later contribute also to the classical RA joint inflammation. The findings referred to in the review have led to a change of paradigms for very early therapy and prevention of RA and to efforts towards what we have named 'personalized prevention'. We believe that the progress described here for RA will be of relevance for research and practice also in other immune-mediated diseases.

Diagnostic accuracy of anti-Sa and anti-RA33 antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of anti-Sa and anti-RA33 antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for relevant studies, and 2 meta-analyses were performed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of anti-Sa and anti-RA33 antibodies in patients with RA.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 17 studies. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of anti-Sa antibody were 39.5 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 36.5-42.4) and 96.8 % (95 % CI 95.9-97.4), respectively, and those of anti-RA33 antibody were 31.8 % (95 % CI 28.7-35.0) and 90.1 % (95 % CI 87.8-92.1), respectively. PLR, NLR, and DOR of anti-Sa antibody were 14.11 (95 % CI 7.076-28.13), 0.607 (95 % CI 0.558-0.703), and 22.76 (95 % C, 11.10-46.69), respectively, and those of anti-RA33 antibody were 3.429 (95 % CI 2.039-5.765), 0.761 (95 % CI 0.681-0.851), and 4.597 (95 % CI 2.602-8.121), respectively. AUC and Q^* index for anti-Sa antibody were 0.558 and 0.543, respectively, while those for anti-RA33 antibody were 0.501 and 0.500, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis indicated that both anti-Sa and anti-RA33 antibodies were highly specific but not sensitive for diagnosing RA.

Post-Translational Modifications of Proteins: Novel Insights in the Autoimmune Response in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Post-translational modifications (PTM) are chemical changes mostly catalyzed by enzymes that recognize specific target sequences in specific proteins. These modifications play a key role in regulating the folding of proteins, their targeting to specific subcellular compartments, their interaction with ligands or other proteins, and eventually their immunogenic properties. Citrullination is the best characterized PTM in the field of rheumatology, with antibodies anticyclic citrullinated peptides being the gold standard for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In recent years, growing evidence supports not only that a wide range of proteins are subject to citrullination and can trigger an autoimmune response in RA, but also that several other PTMs such as carbamylation and acetylation occur in patients with this disease. This induces a wide spectrum of autoantibodies, as biomarkers, with different sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis, which may be linked to peculiar clinical manifestations and/or response to treatment. The purpose of this review article is to critically summarize the available literature on antibodies against post-translationally modified proteins, in particular antibodies against citrullinated proteins (ACPA) and antibodies against modified proteins (AMPA), and outline their diagnostic and prognostic role to be implemented in clinical practice for RA patients.

Meta-analysis: compared with anti-CCP and rheumatoid factor, could anti-MCV be the next biomarker in the rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria?

Background

Previous reviews of the diagnosis for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have not compared anti-mutated citrullinated vimentin (MCV) with anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) and rheumatoid factor (RF) in respect of sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) against disease controls for differential diagnosis. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the value of anti-MCV in the diagnosis for RA, the combined sensitivity of anti-MCV and anti-CCP, and certain clinical characteristics related to the performance of anti-MCV.

Methods

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for articles published up to 25 August 2018. A total of 33 studies including 6044 RA patients and 5094 healthy or disease controls achieved inclusive criteria. QUADAS-2 was applied to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The bivariate random effects model was employed in primary data synthesis to evaluate the diagnostic performance.

Results

The sensitivity of anti-MCV, anti-CCP and RF in RA diagnosis against a disease control group was 0.71, 0.71, 0.77, with the specificity of 0.89, 0.95, 0.73, and the AUC of the SROC of 0.89, 0.95, 0.82, respectively. The predesign of the primary study and diagnostic criteria were statistically significant as sources of heterogeneity. Anti-MCV and anti-CCP tests demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.77 when performed in parallel, with a sensitivity of 0.60 when performed in series; whereas, the combination of anti-MCV and RF presented a sensitivity of 0.64 when used in series.

Conclusions

Anti-MCV demonstrates comparable diagnostic value to anti-CCP and RF, thus it can be an effective diagnostic marker for RA and may be written into the next authoritative criteria.

Clinical and pathophysiologic relevance of autoantibodies in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune/inflammatory disease affecting 0.5 to 1% of adults worldwide and frequently leads to joint destruction and disability. Early diagnosis and early and effective therapy may prevent joint damage and lead to better long-term results. Therefore, reliable biomarkers and outcome measures are needed. Refinement of the understanding of molecular pathways involved in disease pathogenesis have been achieved by combining knowledge on RA-associated genes, environmental factors and the presence of serological elements. The presence of autoantibodies is a distinctive feature of RA. Rheumatoid Factor and Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibodies are the two most remarkable autoantibodies in RA and provide different clinical and pathophysiological information. They precede the onset of disease symptoms and predict a more severe disease course, indicating a pathogenetic role in RA. Therefore, they promote a more accurate prognosis and contribute for a better disease management. Several RA-associated autoantibody systems have been identified: Anti-Carbamylated Antibodies, Anti-BRAF, Anti-Acetylated, Anti-PAD4 antibodies and others. Hopefully, the characterization of a comprehensive array of novel autoantibody systems in RA will provide unique pathogenic insights of relevance for the development of diagnostic and prognostic approaches compatible with an effective personalized medicine.

Autoantibody and metalloproteinase activity in early arthritis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency of anti-mutated citrullinated vimentin antibodies (a-Sa), anti-citrullinated α-enolase peptide 1 antibodies (a-CEP-1), anti-filaggrin antibodies (AFAs), heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein compies/anti-RA33-antibodies (a-hnRNP/RA33), anti-carbamylated protein antibodies (a-CarP), and metalloproteinase (MMPs) activity in patients with early inflammatory arthritis (EIA).

METHODS

Seventy-four patients with EIA: 51 diagnosed with RA (rheumatoid arthritis) and 23 with UA (undifferentiated arthritis), and 20 healthy volunteers were enrolled to the study. Inflammatory markers, rheumatoid factor (RF), and antibodies mentioned above were assessed in all patients.

RESULTS

In the EIA group, we observed significantly higher concentration of a-CEP-1 (65.8 ± 111.6 RU/mL) than in controls (2.0 ± 0.0 RU/mL). In RF(+) RA patients, we observed higher concentration of a-Sa and a-CEP-1 than in other groups. A-Sa were positive in 69% of RF(+) RA, 37% of RF(-) RA, 26% of UA patients and in 10% of controls. A-CEP-1 were positive in 77% of RF(+) RA patients, in 56% of RF(-) RA patients, in 8.7% of UA patients, but they were negative in controls. In patients with RF(+) RA, positive a-CarP were present statistically significantly more often than in RF (-) RA patients. No statistically significant difference in frequency of a-hnRNP/RA33 and AFA between RF(+) RA, RF(-) RA, and UA was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that a-CEP-1 may help in differentiation between RF(-) RA and UA. a-CEP-1 and a-Sa may be useful while diagnosing EIA. a-CarP may be used in differentiation of RA RF(-) and UA. However, a follow-up study is needed to evaluate the prognostic value of analyzed antibodies.