4.8 Article

Cystic fibrosis autoantibody signatures associate with Staphylococcus aureus lung infection or cystic fibrosis-related diabetes

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1151422

关键词

CFRD; CF-related diabetes; cystic fibrosis; autoimmunity; autoantibody signature; Staphylococcus aureus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identified several new autoantibodies in the blood of CF patients and found associations with neutrophil components, diabetes, lung disease severity, and P. aeruginosa infection.
Introduction: While cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease is characterized by persistent inflammation and infections and chronic inflammatory diseases are often accompanied by autoimmunity, autoimmune reactivity in CF has not been studied in depth.Methods: In this work we undertook an unbiased approach to explore the systemic autoantibody repertoire in CF using autoantibody microarrays.Results: and discussion Our results show higher levels of several new autoantibodies in the blood of people with CF (PwCF) compared to control subjects. Some of these are IgA autoantibodies targeting neutrophil components or autoantigens linked to neutrophil-mediated tissue damage in CF. We also found that people with CF with higher systemic IgM autoantibody levels have lower prevalence of S. aureus infection. On the other hand, IgM autoantibody levels in S. aureus-infected PwCF correlate with lung disease severity. Diabetic PwCF have significantly higher levels of IgA autoantibodies in their circulation compared to nondiabetic PwCF and several of their IgM autoantibodies associate with worse lung disease. In contrast, in nondiabetic PwCF blood levels of IgA autoantibodies correlate with lung disease. We have also identified other autoantibodies in CF that associate with P. aeruginosa airway infection. In summary, we have identified several new autoantibodies and associations of autoantibody signatures with specific clinical features in CF.

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

4.8
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