Search

BackgroundPatients with primary humoral immunodeficiency are more prone to invasive as well as recurrent pneumococcal infections. Therefore, anti-pneumococcal vaccination including the 13-valent conjugate vaccine is recommended. Nevertheless, to date, no data is available on immunogenicity of this vaccine in this population.ObjectiveTo assess the immunogenicity and the persistence of protection up to one year after a 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in patients with primary humoral immunodeficiency.MethodsTwenty-nine patients with common variable immunodeficiency or IgG subclass deficiency were vaccinated. Immune response and immune protection at baseline as well as at one, six and twelve months after vaccination were evaluated by measuring specific IgG serum concentrations (ELISA), and opsonophagocytic activities directed against selected pneumococcal (MOPA).ResultsBy ELISA, half of the patients had protective IgG concentrations before vaccination, 35.7% showed an immune response one month after vaccination, 71.4%, 66.7% and 56.0% of the patients were protected at one, six and twelve months respectively. Conversely, by MOPA, 3.4% of the patients were protected at baseline, 10.7% showed an immune response and 28.6%, 48.2% and 33.3% were protected at one, six and twelve months respectively. IgG subclass deficiency, Ig replacement therapy and higher IgG2 concentrations at diagnosis were associated with long-term protection.ConclusionPneumococcal conjugate vaccine improves immune protection and antibodies’ functionality in a subset of patients with primary immunodeficiency. Prime-boost vaccine strategy needs to be better and individually adapted.

IntroductionAnti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies are pathogenic antibodies first detected in renal-limited anti-GBM disease and in Goodpasture disease, the latter characterized by rapidly progressive crescentic glomerulonephritis combined with intra-alveolar hemorrhage. Studies have suggested that anti-GBM antibody positivity may be of interest in lupus nephritis (LN). Moreover, severe anti-GBM vasculitis cases in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been described in the literature, but few studies have assessed the incidence of anti-GBM antibodies in SLE patients.ObjectiveThe main study objective was to determine if positive anti-GBM antibodies were present in the serum of SLE patients with or without proliferative renal damage and compared to a healthy control group.MethodologyThis retrospective study was performed on SLE patients’ sera from a Franco-German European biobank, developed between 2011 and 2014, from 17 hospital centers in the Haut-Rhin region. Patients were selected according to their renal involvement, and matched by age and gender. The serum from healthy voluntary blood donors was also tested. Anti-GBM were screened by fluorescence enzyme immunoassay (FEIA), and then by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) in case of low reactivity detection (titer >6 U/ml).ResultsThe cohort was composed of 100 SLE patients with proliferative LN (27% with class III, 67% with class IV, and 6% with class V), compared to 100 SLE patients without LN and 100 controls. Patients were mostly Caucasian and met the ACR 1997 criteria and/or the SLICC 2012 criteria. Among the 300 tested sera, no significant levels of anti-GBM antibodies were detected (>10 U/ml) by the automated technique, three sera were found “ambivalent” (>7 U/ml): one in the SLE with LN group and two in the SLE without LN group. Subsequent IIF assays did not detect anti-GBM antibodies.ConclusionAnti-GBM antibodies were not detected in the serum of Caucasian patients with SLE, even in case of renal involvement, a situation favoring the antigenic exposure of glomerular basement membranes. Our results reaffirm the central role of anti-GBM antibodies as a specific diagnostic biomarker for Goodpasture vasculitis and therefore confirm that anti-GBM antibody must not be carried out in patients with SLE (with or without LN) in the absence of disease-suggestive symptoms.

Background: DNA extracellular traps (ETs), released by neutrophils (NETs), or eosinophils (EETs), play a pathogenic role in several autoimmune disorders. However, to date, NETs have never been investigated in bullous pemphigoid (BP) with respect to clinical and immunological activities, both at baseline and at time of relapse which have been characterized with specific IL-17 and IL-23 patterns.Objective: We sought to assess whether ETs were associated with BP as well as the relative contribution of IL-17 axis cytokines to NET induction.Methods: Skin biopsy specimens were obtained from 11 patients with BP. Immuno-detection of neutrophils and eosinophils combined to DNA staining allowed us to investigate the in-situ presence of NETs and EETs using confocal scanning microscopy. NETs release was evaluated ex vivo by stimulating polymorphonuclear cells from BP patients with BP biological fluids in presence of IL-17A and IL-23 or of glucocorticoids.Results: At baseline, ETs were observed in BP lesions at the site of dermal-epidermal cleavage. Despite an important infiltrate of eosinophils, ETs were essentially associated with neutrophils in situ and were not related to BP clinical activity at diagnosis. In situ observation of NETs was associated in 6 among 8 patients with serum capacity of NET induction. Notably both blister fluid and sera from BP patients at diagnosis and at time of relapse could induce NET formation ex vivo. In contrast, a longitudinal investigation showed a decrease of NET formation with time of treatment in patients undergoing remission. Mimicking relapse, complementation of sera from BP patients with ongoing remission with either IL-17A or IL-23 increased NET formation. Conversely, IL-17A inhibited NET formation induced by serum from BP patients with relapse supplemented or not with IL-23. Finally, glucocorticoids also inhibited NET formation ex vivo in BP.Conclusion: NET formation is an associated phenomenon with BP. Furthermore, we showed that IL-23 favored NET formation, whereas the effects of IL-17A are environment dependent. Indeed, IL-17A displayed a protective effect on NET formation when associated with IL-23, showing for the first-time differential effects of these two cytokines in BP.

Anti-SS-A antibodies are often sought for in autoimmune diseases diagnosis. Two different target proteins have actually been identified: Ro52 and Ro60. Clinical and immunological associations seem different depending on anti-Ro52 or anti-Ro60 antibodies presence. However, due to a heterogeneous presentation in the literature, some immunology laboratories in France have stopped providing anti-Ro52 antibody findings. We report here a new hospital study designed to determine the diagnostic utility of the separate detection of anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies. We conducted a retrospective, observational study, including every adult patient with positive antinuclear antibodies (ANA) tested in our immunology laboratory, and associated with anti-Ro52 and/or anti-Ro60 antibodies, between 2011 and 2014. Out of 13032 sera tested for ANA, 399 adults had antibodies to Ro52 and/or Ro60; 81.7% were female, with a mean age of 54.5 ± 17.0 years. Anti-Ro52 antibodies were found in 75.7% of the patients and anti-Ro60 antibodies in 56.9%. Among them, 43.1% were classified in the Ro52 + Ro60- group, 32.6% in the Ro52 + Ro60 + group and 24.3% in the Ro52-Ro60+ group. In the Ro52-Ro60+ group, systemic lupus was the most frequent diagnosis (48.5%), with a possible association with antiphospholipid antibodies (anti-cardiolipin antibodies: OR 2.5 (CI95 [1.0–5.0], p = 0.05) and lupus anticoagulant {OR 3.6 (CI95 [1.10–10.0] p = 0.02)}. In the Ro52+Ro60+, primary Sjögren Syndrome was the most likely (OR 4.2 95% CI [2.1–8.3] p < 10−4), especially in patients Ro52+Ro60+La+. Patients with isolated anti-Ro52 had a wider variety of diseases associated, but among auto-immune diseases they were more prone to inflammatory myositis (OR 10.5 [1.4–81.7], p = 0.02) and inflammatory rheumatism (OR 4.6 [1.6–13.8], p = 0.006) in contrast to systemic lupus (OR 0.2 [0.1–0.3], p < 10−4) or primary Sjögren's syndrome (OR 0.1 [0.06–0.2], p < 10−4). We therefore suggest that, when anti-ENA antibodies are prescribed, it should include separate anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies determination. To go even further, we would like to suggest a change in ENA nomenclature to avoid confusion, abandoning the anti-SS-A label in favor of the anti-Ro52/TRIM21 or anti-Ro60 antibody for a clearer designation.

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is an autoimmune bullous skin disease characterized by anti-BP180 and anti-BP230 autoantibodies (AAbs). Mucous membrane involvement is an uncommon clinical feature of BP which may evoke epidermolysis bullosa acquisita, another skin autoimmune disease characterized by anti-type VII collagen AAbs. We therefore evaluated the presence of anti-type VII collagen AAbs in the serum of BP patients with and without mucosal lesions at time of diagnosis and under therapy. Anti-BP180, anti-BP230, and anti-type VII collagen AAbs were measured by ELISA in the serum of unselected patients fulfilling clinical and histo/immunopathological BP criteria at baseline (n = 71) and at time of relapse (n = 24). At baseline, anti-type VII collagen AAbs were detected in 2 out of 24 patients with BP presenting with mucosal involvement, but not in patients without mucosal lesions (n = 47). At the time of relapse, 10 out of 24 BP patients either displayed a significant induction or increase of concentrations of anti-type VII collagen AAbs (P

Connective tissue diseases (CTDs) such as systemic lupus erythematosus, systemic sclerosis, myositis, Sjögren’s syndrome, and rheumatoid arthritis are systemic diseases which are often associated with a challenge in diagnosis. Autoantibodies (AAbs) can be detected in these diseases and help clinicians in their diagnosis. Actually, pathophysiology of these diseases is associated with the presence of antinuclear antibodies. In the last decades, many new antibodies were discovered, but their implication in pathogenesis of CTDs remains unclear. Furthermore, the classification of these AAbs is nowadays misused, as their targets can be localized outside of the nuclear compartment. Interestingly, in most cases, each antibody is associated with a specific phenotype in CTDs and therefore help in better defining either the disease subtypes or diseases activity and outcome. Because of recent progresses in their detection and in the comprehension of their pathogenesis implication in CTD-associated antibodies, clinicians should pay attention to the presence of these different AAbs to improve patient’s management. In this review, we propose to focus on the different phenotypes and features associated with each autoantibody used in clinical practice in those CTDs.