Racial variability in immune responses only partially explains differential systemic sclerosis disease severity.

Objective: To understand if autoantibodies account for racial variation in disease severity, we compared autoantibody distribution and associated phenotype between self-identified black and white systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients.
Methods: 803 black and 2178 white SSc patients had systematic testing for autoantibodies using Euroimmun (centromere (ACA), RNA-polymerase III (POLR3), Scl70, PM/Scl, NOR90, Th/To, Ku, U3RNP and Ro52) and commercial ELISA (U1RNP). In this observational study, logistic regression was performed to assess the association between self-identified race and outcomes, adjusting for autoantibodies. To estimate whether the effect of race was mediated by autoantibody status, race coefficients from multivariate models including and excluding autoantibodies were compared.
Results: Anti-Scl70, anti-U1RNP, anti-U3RNP, anti-Th/To, anti-Ku and anti-NOR90 were more common in the black cohort than in the white cohort, which was enriched for ACA, anti-POLR3 and anti-PM/Scl. Black individuals had a higher prevalence of severe Raynaud's, skin, lung, gastrointestinal and renal disease whereas white individuals had a higher prevalence of severe heart and muscle disease. Adjusting for autoantibodies decreased the effect of race on outcome for telangiectasias, forced vital capacity <70%, pulmonary hypertension and severe lung, heart, muscle and gastrointestinal disease by 11%-44% and increased the association between race and renal crisis and severe kidney disease by 37%-52%.
Conclusions: This study is the largest systematic analysis of autoantibody responses in a geographically diverse population of black SSc patients. Black and white individuals with SSc have distinct autoantibody profiles. Autoantibodies explain only a fraction of the effect of race on clinical outcomes, suggesting other factors contribute to disparate outcomes between these groups.
Competing Interests: Competing interests: RD received consulting fees from CSL Behring and Astra-Zeneca. LAS received grant funding from Horizon Pharmaceuticals, aTyr Pharmaceuticals and Kinevant Pharmaceuticals and honoraria from Janssen Pharmaceuticals. She served on the data safety monitoring board for Argenx Pharmaceuticals. LC received grant funding from Boehringer Ingelheim and consulting fees from Kyverna, Eicos Sciences, Genentech, IgM Biosciences, Lilly. She participated in an advisory capacity for Mitsubishi Tanabe and Janssen. FB received honoraria from Janssen. RMS received grant funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck and Amgen; he is the CEO of FibroBiologics. JV received consulting fees from TeneoBio, and Conquest; he serves on the data safety monitoring board for Conquest. MDM received grant funding from Prometheus Biosciences, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Boehringer Ingelheiem, Eicos, Corbus and Horizon Pharmaceuticals. She received consulting fees from Cabaletta Pharmaceuticals; she served on the advisory board for Mitsubishi Tanabe and Eicos Sciences. AS has grant support from Kadmon, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Medpace and Eicos Sciences.
(© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ on behalf of EULAR.)