4.4 Review

A systematic, quantitative review of blood autoantibodies in schizophrenia

Journal

SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH
Volume 150, Issue 1, Pages 245-251

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2013.07.029

Keywords

Schizophrenia; First-episode psychosis; Immunology; Autoantibody; Autoimmune; Epidemiology; Meta-analysis

Categories

Funding

  1. NIH
  2. Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
  3. Carlos and Marguerite Mason Trust
  4. NIMH
  5. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
  6. GRU

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Schizophrenia is associated with immune system dysfunction, including an increased prevalence of autoimmune disorders and autoantibodies. We performed a systematic, quantitative review of self-reacting blood antibodies in patients with schizophrenia. Method: We identified articles by searching PubMed, PsychInfo, and ISI, and the reference lists of identified studies. Results: Eighty-one of 111 studies identified met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant increased prevalence of positive titers for 20 different autoantibodies in patients with schizophrenia compared to controls. The prevalence of positive anti-cardiolipin IgG and NMDA receptor titers was also significantly increased in subjects with first-episode psychosis versus controls (p < 0.01). Absolute titers for anti-cardiolipin IgG and IgM, and nerve growth factor were significantly increased in patients with schizophrenia compared to controls (p < 0.02 for each). Conclusion: Schizophrenia is associated with an increased prevalence of multiple autoantibodies, although there is marked study heterogeneity, and correlations between autoantibodies and clinical features are inconsistent. This area merits more research evaluation, especially controlling for potential confounding factors such as clinical status, age, genetic background, psychotropic medications, BMI, and smoking. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available