4.7 Article

High maternal expression of SIGLEC1 on monocytes as a surrogate marker of a type I interferon signature is a risk factor for the development of autoimmune congenital heart block

Journal

ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
Volume 76, Issue 8, Pages 1476-+

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210927

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [SFB 650]
  2. Leibniz Graduate School for Rheumatology (DRFZ)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives Autoimmune congenital heart block (CHB) is associated with placental transcytosis of maternal autoantibodies directed against Ro/SS-A and La/SS-B. However, only about 2% of children born to mothers with the respective antibodies are affected, indicating that further risk factors exist, which are not yet fully understood. In this study, we investigated whether a maternal type I interferon (IFN) signature represents a risk factor for the development of CHB. Methods Blood samples, clinical data and serological parameters from 9 women with CHB pregnancies, 14 pregnant women with antibodies against Ro/SS-A but without a CHB complication and another 30 healthy pregnant women as controls were studied. SIGLEC1 expression was measured by flow cytometry and was correlated to plasma IFN-alpha levels measured by ELISA, and IFN-gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10) levels measured by Bio-Plex technique. Results Mothers of affected children had a significantly higher expression of SIGLEC1 (p=0.0034) and IFN-alpha (p=0.014), but not of IP-10 (p=0.14, all MWU) compared to mothers of unaffected children. SIGLEC1 and IFN-alpha expression were reduced by hydroxychloroquine and oral glucocorticoids. Conclusions High expression of SIGLEC1 in pregnant women with autoantibodies against Ro/SS-A indicates an enhanced risk for CHB development, and these women may benefit especially from IFN-alpha directed therapy, for example with hydroxychloroquine.

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