4.5 Article

EBV and vitamin D status in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients with a unique cytokine signature

期刊

MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND IMMUNOLOGY
卷 205, 期 2, 页码 143-154

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00430-015-0437-7

关键词

Epstein-Barr virus; Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis; Vitamin D; Immune biomarker signature

资金

  1. Tehran University of Medical Sciences [92-01-27-21999]
  2. Tehran University of Medical Sciences, international Campus (TUMS-IC) [92-03-103-23671]
  3. Bonyad Melli Nokhbegan [15/28819]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multiple sclerosis, a debilitating autoimmune and inflammatory disease of the central nervous system, is associated with both infectious and non-infectious factors. We investigated the role of EBV infection, vitamin D level, and cytokine signature in MS patients. Molecular and serological assays were used to investigate immune biomarkers, vitamin D level, and EBV status in 83 patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and 62 healthy controls. In total, 98.8 % of MS patients showed a history of EBV exposure compared to 88.6 % in the healthy group (p = 0.005). EBV DNA load was significantly higher in MS patients than healthy subjects (p < 0.0001). Using a panel of biomarkers, we found a distinct transcriptional signature in MS patients compared to the healthy group with mRNA levels of CD73, IL-6, IL-23, IFN-gamma, TNF-alpha, IL-15, IL-28, and IL-17 significantly elevated in MS patients (p < 0.0001). In contrast, the mRNA levels for TGF-beta, IDO, S1PR1, IL-10, and CCL-3 were significantly lower in MS patients compared to healthy controls (p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found with the mRNA levels of IL-13, CCL-5, and FOXP3. Interestingly, in MS patients we found an inverse correlation between vitamin D concentration and EBV load, but not EBNA-1 IgG antibody levels. Our data highlight biomarker correlates in MS patients together with a complex interplay between EBV replication and vitamin D levels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据