Department of Rheumatology, Centro Hospitalar Baixo Vouga, Aveiro; Egas Moniz Health Alliance Academic Clinical Center, Aveiro; and EpiDoc Unit, Nova Medical School, NOVA University Lisbon, Portugal.
Department of Mathematics, Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal.
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2024 Jul;42(7):1474-1479. doi: 10.55563/clinexprheumatol/puxml7. Epub 2024 Mar 26.
Anti-SSA autoantibodies can be differentiated according to their antigenic target proteins as anti-Ro60 (60 kDa) or anti-Ro52 (52 kDa). Anti-SSA(Ro60) antibodies are clearly associated with connective tissue diseases (CTD), but the clinical significance of anti-SSA(Ro52) antibodies remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to analyse the disease phenotype of patients with anti-Ro52 and/or anti-Ro60 antibodies.
A multicentre, cross-sectional study was carried out of positive anti-Ro52 and/or Ro60 antibodies patients followed at 10 Rheumatology centres from January 2018 until December 2021. Patients were categorised into 3 groups: group 1 (Ro52+/Ro60-); group 2 (Ro52-/Ro60+); group 3 (Ro52+/Ro60+). Antinuclear antibodies were evaluated by indirect immunofluorescence assay and further screened for anti-extractable nuclear antigen (ENA) antibodies. Demographicsand clinical data were compared between the 3 groups, by patients' medical chart review. Univariate analysis was performed and subsequently logistic regression was used to identify intergroup differences and calculate the odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI).
We included 776 patients [female: 83.1%; median age: 59 (46-71) years]. Groups 1, 2, and 3 comprised 31.1%, 32.6%, and 36.3% of the patients, respectively. Anti-Ro52 antibody alone was more frequently associated with non-rheumatic diseases, older age, and men (p<0.05). Among patients with CTD, the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus is 3 and 2 times more prevalent in groups 2 and 3, respectively, than in group 1 [OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.60, 4.97), p<0.001; OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.28, 3.86), p<0.01]. In group 2, the diagnosis of undifferentiated CTD is more frequent than in the other groups. Group 1 was more frequently associated with inflammatory myositis than group 2 [OR 0.09 (95% CI 0.01, 0.33), p<0.001] or group 3 [OR 0.08 (95% CI 0.01, 0.29), p<0.001]. Group 1 was also more frequently associated with arthritis (p<0.01), interstitial lung disease (p<0.01), and myositis (p<0.01).
Anti-Ro52+ antibody alone is frequently found in patients with non-rheumatic diseases. In addition, anti-Ro52+ antibody is also prevalent in patients with CTD and associated with clinical phenotypes that are different from anti-Ro60+ antibody.
抗 SSA 自身抗体可根据其抗原靶蛋白进行区分,分为抗 Ro60(60 kDa)或抗 Ro52(52 kDa)。抗 SSA(Ro60)抗体与结缔组织疾病(CTD)明显相关,但抗 SSA(Ro52)抗体的临床意义仍不清楚。本研究旨在分析抗 Ro52 和/或抗 Ro60 抗体患者的疾病表型。
对 2018 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间在 10 个风湿病中心接受治疗的抗 Ro52 和/或 Ro60 抗体阳性患者进行了一项多中心、横断面研究。患者被分为 3 组:组 1(Ro52+/Ro60-);组 2(Ro52-/Ro60+);组 3(Ro52+/Ro60+)。通过间接免疫荧光法评估抗核抗体,并进一步筛选提取核抗原(ENA)抗体。通过患者病历回顾比较 3 组之间的人口统计学和临床数据。进行单变量分析,随后进行逻辑回归以确定组间差异并计算 95%置信区间(95%CI)的优势比。
我们纳入了 776 名患者[女性:83.1%;中位年龄:59(46-71)岁]。组 1、2 和 3 分别占患者的 31.1%、32.6%和 36.3%。单独的抗 Ro52 抗体更常与非风湿性疾病、年龄较大和男性相关(p<0.05)。在 CTD 患者中,与组 1 相比,组 2 和组 3 中系统性红斑狼疮的诊断分别更为常见[OR 2.8(95%CI 1.60,4.97),p<0.001;OR 2.2(95%CI 1.28,3.86),p<0.01]。在组 2 中,未分化 CTD 的诊断比其他组更为常见。与组 2 相比,组 1 更常与炎性肌病相关[OR 0.09(95%CI 0.01,0.33),p<0.001]或组 3[OR 0.08(95%CI 0.01,0.29),p<0.001]。与组 2 相比,组 1 还更常与关节炎(p<0.01)、间质性肺病(p<0.01)和肌炎(p<0.01)相关。
单独的抗 Ro52+抗体在非风湿性疾病患者中经常发现。此外,抗 Ro52+抗体在 CTD 患者中也很常见,并与抗 Ro60+抗体不同的临床表型相关。