4.5 Article

Untangling COVID-19 and autoimmunity: Identification of plausible targets suggests multi organ involvement

期刊

MOLECULAR IMMUNOLOGY
卷 137, 期 -, 页码 105-113

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.molimm.2021.06.021

关键词

SARS-COV-2; COVID-19; Molecular mimicry; Autoimmunity; Multi-organ damage

资金

  1. IIT Madras [BIO/14-15/645/NFSG]
  2. Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB) , India [ECR/2015/000602]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identifies 28 human proteins with regions homologous to SARS-CoV-2 peptides as potential autoantigens, explaining the occurrence of autoimmune conditions following COVID-19 infection. These autoantigens are found to be distributed widely in tissues, suggesting their involvement in multi-organ manifestations through molecular mimicry. The report may guide future antigen-specific studies for management of extrapulmonary symptoms of COVID-19.
Underlying mechanisms of multi-organ manifestations and exacerbated inflammation in COVID-19 are yet to be delineated. The hypothesis of SARS-CoV-2 triggering autoimmunity is gaining attention and, in the present study, we have identified 28 human proteins harbouring regions homologous to SARS-CoV-2 peptides that could possibly be acting as autoantigens in COVID-19 patients displaying autoimmune conditions. Interestingly, these conserved regions are amongst the experimentally validated B cell epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 proteins. The reported human proteins have demonstrated presence of autoantibodies against them in typical autoimmune conditions which may explain the frequent occurrence of autoimmune conditions following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Moreover, the proposed autoantigens' widespread tissue distribution is suggestive of their involvement in multi-organ manifestations via molecular mimicry. We opine that our report may aid in directing subsequent necessary antigen-specific studies, results of which would be of long-term relevance in management of extrapulmonary symptoms of COVID-19.

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