4.0 Article

Elevated Fab glycosylation of anti-hinge antibodies

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 52, 期 1, 页码 25-32

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03009742.2021.1986959

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that anti-hinge antibodies (AHAs) and elevated levels of Fab glycosylation are present not only in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but also in healthy controls (HCs). These results suggest that extensive Fab glycosylation may develop in response to an inflammatory proteolytic microenvironment, but is not restricted to RA.
Objective Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by systemic inflammation and the presence of anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs), which contain remarkably high levels of Fab glycosylation. Anti-hinge antibodies (AHAs) recognize immunoglobulin G (IgG) hinge neoepitopes exposed following cleavage by inflammation-associated proteases, and are also frequently observed in RA, and at higher levels compared to healthy controls (HCs). Here, we investigated AHA specificity and levels of Fab glycosylation as potential immunological markers for RA. Method AHA serum levels, specificity, and Fab glycosylation were determined for the IgG(1/4)-hinge cleaved by matrix metalloproteinase-3, cathepsin G, pepsin, or IdeS, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and lectin affinity chromatography, in patients with early active RA (n = 69) and HCs (n = 97). Results AHA reactivity was detected for all hinge neoepitopes in both RA patients and HCs. Reactivity against CatG-IgG(1)-F(ab ')(2)s and pepsin-IgG(4)-F(ab ')(2)s was more prevalent in RA. Moreover, all AHA responses showed increased Fab glycosylation levels in both RA patients and HCs. Conclusions AHA responses are characterized by elevated levels of Fab glycosylation and highly specific neoepitope recognition, not just in RA patients but also in HCs. These results suggest that extensive Fab glycosylation may develop in response to an inflammatory proteolytic microenvironment, but is not restricted to RA.

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

4.0
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