Bach Jean-François
Laboratoire d'Immunologie, Hôpital Necker, 161 rue de Sèvres, 75743 Paris Cedex 15, France.
J Autoimmun. 2005;25 Suppl:74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2005.09.024. Epub 2005 Nov 8.
The high percentage of disease-discordant pairs of monozygotic twins demonstrates the central role of environmental factors in the etiology of autoimmune diseases. Efforts were first focussed on the search for triggering factors. The study of animal models has clearly shown that infections may trigger autoimmune diseases, as in the case of Coxsackie B4 virus in type I diabetes and the encephalomyocarditis virus in autoimmune myositis, two models in which viruses are thought to act by increasing immunogenicity of autoantigens secondary to local inflammation. The induction of a Guillain-Barré syndrome in rabbits after immunization with a peptide derived from Campylobacter jejuni is explained by mimicry between C. jejuni antigens and peripheral nerve axonal antigens. Other models involve chemical modification of autoantigens, as in the case of iodine-induced autoimmune thyroiditis. These mechanisms have so far only limited clinical counterparts (rheumatic fever, Guillain-Barré syndrome and drug-induced lupus or myasthenia gravis) but one may assume that unknown viruses may be at the origin of a number of chronic autoimmune diseases, such as type I diabetes and multiple sclerosis) as illustrated by the convergent data incriminating IFN-alpha in the pathophysiology of type I diabetes and systemic lupus erythematosus. Perhaps the difficulties met in identifying the etiologic viruses are due to the long lag time between the initial causal infection and onset of clinical disease. More surprisingly, infections may also protect from autoimmune diseases. Western countries are being confronted with a disturbing increase in the incidence of most immune disorders, including autoimmune and allergic diseases, inflammatory bowel diseases, and some lymphocyte malignancies. Converging epidemiological evidence indicates that this increase is linked to improvement of the socio-economic level of these countries, posing the question of the causal relationship and more precisely the nature of the link. Epidemiological and clinical data support the hygiene hypothesis according to which the decrease of infections observed over the last three decades is the main cause of the incessant increase in immune disorders. The hypothesis does not exclude an etiological role for specific pathogens in a given immune disorder as might notably be the case in inflammatory bowel diseases. Even in this setting, infections could still have a non-specific protective role. Independently of the need for confirmation by epidemiological prospective studies, the hygiene hypothesis still poses numerous questions concerning the nature of protective infectious agents, the timing of their involvement with regard to the natural history of immune diseases and, most importantly, the mechanisms of protection. Four orders of mechanisms are being explored. Antigenic competition is the first hypothesis (immune responses against pathogens compete with autoimmune and allergic responses). This is probably an important mechanism but its modalities are still elusive in spite of considerable experimental data. Its discussion in the context of homeostatic regulation of lymphocyte pools has shed new light on this hypothesis with possible competition for self MHC peptide recognition and interleukin-7. Another hypothesis deals with immunoregulation. Infectious agents stimulate a large variety of regulatory cells (Th2, CD25+, Tr1, NKT, ...) whose effects extend to other specificities than those which triggered their differentiation (bystander suppression). Infectious agents may also intervene through components which are not recognized as antigens but bind to specific receptors on cells of the immune system. Major attention has recently been drawn to Toll receptors (expressed on macrophages and possibly on regulatory T cells) and TIM proteins present on Th cells, which may express the function of the virus receptor (as in the case of the Hepatitis A virus and Tim-1). Experimental data will be presented to support each of these hypotheses. In any event, the final proof of principle will be derived from therapeutic trials where the immune disorders in question will be prevented or better cured by products derived from protective infectious agents. Numerous experimental data are already available in several models. Preliminary results have also been reported in atopic dermatitis using bacterial extracts and probiotics.
同卵双胞胎中疾病不一致对的高比例表明环境因素在自身免疫性疾病病因学中起核心作用。最初的努力集中在寻找触发因素。动物模型研究清楚地表明,感染可能触发自身免疫性疾病,如I型糖尿病中的柯萨奇B4病毒和自身免疫性肌炎中的脑心肌炎病毒,在这两种模型中,病毒被认为是通过增加局部炎症继发的自身抗原的免疫原性而起作用。用空肠弯曲菌衍生的肽免疫兔子后诱导格林-巴利综合征,这是由空肠弯曲菌抗原与周围神经轴突抗原之间的分子模拟来解释的。其他模型涉及自身抗原的化学修饰,如碘诱导的自身免疫性甲状腺炎。到目前为止,这些机制在临床上仅有有限的对应情况(风湿热、格林-巴利综合征和药物性狼疮或重症肌无力),但可以推测,未知病毒可能是许多慢性自身免疫性疾病的病因,如I型糖尿病和多发性硬化症,I型糖尿病和系统性红斑狼疮病理生理学中涉及干扰素-α的趋同数据就说明了这一点。也许识别病因病毒遇到困难是由于初始因果感染与临床疾病发作之间的长时间间隔。更令人惊讶的是,感染也可能预防自身免疫性疾病。西方国家正面临着包括自身免疫性和过敏性疾病、炎症性肠病以及一些淋巴细胞恶性肿瘤在内的大多数免疫紊乱发病率令人不安的上升。趋同的流行病学证据表明,这种上升与这些国家社会经济水平的提高有关,这就提出了因果关系问题,更确切地说是这种联系的性质问题。流行病学和临床数据支持卫生假说,根据该假说,过去三十年中观察到的感染减少是免疫紊乱持续增加的主要原因。该假说并不排除特定病原体在特定免疫紊乱中的病因作用,如在炎症性肠病中可能就是这种情况。即使在这种情况下,感染仍可能具有非特异性保护作用。独立于流行病学前瞻性研究的证实需求之外,卫生假说仍然提出了许多关于保护性感染因子的性质、它们在免疫疾病自然史中的参与时间以及最重要的保护机制的问题。正在探索四种机制。抗原竞争是第一个假说(针对病原体的免疫反应与自身免疫和过敏反应竞争)。这可能是一个重要机制,但其方式尽管有大量实验数据仍难以捉摸。在淋巴细胞库稳态调节的背景下对其进行讨论为这个假说带来了新的启示,可能存在对自身MHC肽识别和白细胞介素-7的竞争。另一个假说涉及免疫调节。感染因子刺激多种调节细胞(Th2、CD25 +、Tr1、NKT等),其作用扩展到触发其分化的特异性之外的其他特异性(旁观者抑制)。感染因子也可能通过不被识别为抗原但与免疫系统细胞上特定受体结合的成分起作用。最近主要关注的是Toll受体(在巨噬细胞上表达,可能也在调节性T细胞上表达)和Th细胞上存在的TIM蛋白,它们可能表达病毒受体的功能(如甲型肝炎病毒和Tim - 1的情况)。将展示实验数据来支持这些假说中的每一个。无论如何,原理的最终证明将来自治疗试验,在这些试验中,相关的免疫紊乱将通过源自保护性感染因子的产品得到预防或更好的治疗。在几个模型中已经有大量实验数据。在特应性皮炎中使用细菌提取物和益生菌也已经报道了初步结果。