4.7 Article

Characterization of thyroglobulin epitopes in patients with autoimmune and non-autoimmune thyroid diseases using recombinant human monoclonal thyroglobulin autoantibodies

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Volume 93, Issue 2, Pages 591-596

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2007-1199

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context: Thyroglobulin (Tg) epitopes of serum Tg autoantibodies (TgAb) have been characterized using inhibition of Tg binding by human monoclonal TgAb in autoimmune thyroid diseases (AITD) [Hashimoto's thyroiditis (HT) and Graves' disease (GD)] but not in non-AITD [nontoxic multinodular goiter (NTMG) and papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC)]. Objective: Our objective was to compare Tg epitopes of serum TgAb from patients with AITD, non-AITD, and PTC associated with histological thyroiditis (PTC-T) using inhibition of Tg binding by four recombinant human TgAb-Fab (epitopic regions A-D). Design: Inhibition of Tg binding of 24 HT, 25 GD, 19 NTMG, 15 PTC, and 25 PTC-TTgAb-positive sera by each TgAb-Fab was evaluated in ELISA. Inhibition by the pool of the four TgAb-Fab was evaluated using labeled Tg. Results: Levels of inhibition were different for TgAb-Fab regions A (P = 0.001), B (0.007), and D (0.011). Inhibition by region A TgAb-Fab was significantly higher in HT, GD, and PTC-T than in NTMG and PTC patients. Inhibition levels by region B TgAb-Fab were significantly higher in HT compared with NTMG and PTC patients and in GD compared with NTMG patients. Inhibition by D region TgAb-Fab was significantly lower in NTMG than in the other groups. Inhibition by the pool ranged from 44% (NTMG) to 72% (GD). Conclusions: The pattern of Tg recognition is similar when FIT patients are compared to GD and NTMG to PTC patients and differs when AITD are compared with non-AITD patients. In IPTC-T patients, it is similar to that of AITD patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available