Cargando…

The value of anti-CarP and anti-PAD4 as markers of rheumatoid arthritis in ACPA/RF negative rheumatoid arthritis patients

BACKGROUND: Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) and rheumatoid factor (RF) are key factors in the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism rheumatoid arthritis (RA) classification criteria markers. However, about 30% of patients diagnosed with RA are seronegative...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kolarz, Bogdan, Ciesla, Marek, Rosenthal, Ann K., Dryglewska, Magdalena, Majdan, Maria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7882754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33628335
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1759720X21989868
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) and rheumatoid factor (RF) are key factors in the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism rheumatoid arthritis (RA) classification criteria markers. However, about 30% of patients diagnosed with RA are seronegative, rationalizing the need for new serologic markers for RA. Antibodies against carbamylated proteins (anti-CarP) and against peptidyl-arginine deiminase type 4 (anti-PAD4) have been postulated to be useful RA markers. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the value of anti-CarP and anti-PAD4 in a well-characterized population of RA patients and healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: A total of 122 RA patients and 30 HCs were enrolled in the study. Serum levels of ACPA, anti-PAD4, anti-CarP and RF were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent immunoassays (ELISAs). Synthetic carbamylated peptides were used in the ELISA assay to determine the protein targets of the anti-CarP antibodies. RESULTS: Rates of ACPA, RF, anti-PAD4 and anti-CarP positivity were 85.2%, 67.2%, 55.7% and 46.7% in RA, and 0%, 0%, 6.7% and 6.7% in HC respectively. In the RA population, 25.4% of patients had all four types of antibodies positive, while 6.6% had no antibodies. There was a significant correlation between anti-PAD4 and ACPAs (r(s) = 0.39), RF and ACPAs, (r(s) = 0.3) and RF and anti-CarP, (r(s) = 0.3). There was no correlation between ACPAs and anti-CarP. Anti-CarP positivity was noted in 49 (47.1%) and 45 (54.9%) of ACPAs and RF positive patients respectively. In addition, five anti-CarP+ patients did not have ACPA nor RF. CONCLUSION: Anti-CarP but not anti-PAD4 may be a useful biomarker in identifying ACPA/RF negative RA patients. This antibody may identify an additional RA population who may benefit from early implementation of aggressive therapy.