Anti-Ro52 reactivity is an independent and additional serum marker in connective tissue disease. Issue 10 (1st October 2002)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Peene, I; Meheus, L; De Keyser, S; Humbel, R; Veys, E M; De Keyser, F
• Is Part Of: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. Volume 61:Issue 10(2002)
• Page Start: 929
• Page End: 933
• Publication Date: 2002-10-01
• Subjects: anti-Ro52 -- anti-SSA/Ro -- connective tissue disease; ANA, antinuclear antibodies -- DID, double immunodiffusion -- ELISA, enzyme linked immunosorbent assay -- HPLC, high performance liquid chromatography -- mAb, monoclonal antibody -- PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis -- PBS, phosphate buffered saline -- SDS, sodium dodecyl sulphate; Rheumatism -- Periodicals; 616.723005
• DOI: 10.1136/ard.61.10.929
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-4967

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: To determine whether anti-Ro52 is an independent serum marker in connective tissue disease. Methods: Over a two year period, 1727 consecutive antinuclear antibody (ANA) positive serum samples were analysed in parallel by double immunodiffusion with thymus/spleen nuclear extract and by line immunoassay with recombinant Ro52, recombinant La/SSB, and natural Ro60. Sera that were only reactive towards Ro52 were further analysed by a variety of additional anti-SSA/Ro detection methods and by specific anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 assays. Natural purified SSA/Ro was analysed by immunoblot and protein sequencing. Results: Analysis of natural purified SSA/Ro (Immunovision, Springdale, AR) showed only Ro60 and no immunoreactive Ro52. Consequently, assays based on this substrate only identify sera with anti-Ro60 reactivity. Twenty serum samples showed anti-Ro52 without anti-Ro60 and anti-SSB/La on line immunoassay. By additional testing, 2/20 sera were found positive for anti-Ro60 reactivity. The remaining 18 sera were not identified by any of the classical anti-SSA/Ro assays and were considered to be reactive only with Ro52 and not with Ro60. This anti-Ro52 reactivity was confirmed by natural and recombinant Ro52 in 16/18 cases. 12/18 sera corresponded to connective tissue diseases. Conclusion: Anti-Ro52 positive sera without any evidence of anti-Ro60 and anti-La/SSB reactivity can be considered as an independent group that is systematically missed by classical anti-SSA/Ro detection methods owing to a bias towards anti-Ro60 reactivity. The anti-Ro52 sera are precipitin negative, not retrieved by SSA/Ro enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) based on natural SSA/Ro, and show no specific ANA fluorescence staining pattern. These findings together with the clinical data indicate that anti-Ro52 should be considered as an additional and independent serum marker.