K C Simon1, X Yang, K L Munger, A Ascherio. 1. Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. ksimon@hsph.harvard.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prior infection with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is an established risk factor for multiple sclerosis (MS). Some findings from observational studies, including possible epidemics and differences in prevalence, may be explained if different strains of EBV conferred different MS risk. METHODS: DNA was extracted from peripheral lymphocytes obtained from 66 MS cases and 66 age- and cohort-matched controls. Nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed to amplify the N- and C-terminus regions of EBNA1 and the hyper-variable region of the LMP1 gene. For EBNA1, we compared the presence of the prototype B95.8 vs variant sequence and the presence of multiple strains in MS cases and controls. For LMP1, we considered differences in the proportions of mutations between cases and controls. RESULTS: Comparing the proportion of mutant sequence between MS cases and controls in the EBNA1 N-terminal (0/28 vs 1/27) and C-terminal regions (3/40 vs 8/36) revealed no significant differences (P > 0.05). No individual variants in LMP1 were associated with risk of MS (all P > 0.05). Neither EBNA1 nor LMP1 variation was associated with anti-EBNA1 IgG antibody titers. CONCLUSIONS: These findings do not support a strong role for variation in EBNA1 N-terminus, EBNA1 C-terminus or LMP1 contributing to MS risk.
BACKGROUND: Prior infection with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is an established risk factor for multiple sclerosis (MS). Some findings from observational studies, including possible epidemics and differences in prevalence, may be explained if different strains of EBV conferred different MS risk. METHODS: DNA was extracted from peripheral lymphocytes obtained from 66 MS cases and 66 age- and cohort-matched controls. Nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed to amplify the N- and C-terminus regions of EBNA1 and the hyper-variable region of the LMP1 gene. For EBNA1, we compared the presence of the prototype B95.8 vs variant sequence and the presence of multiple strains in MS cases and controls. For LMP1, we considered differences in the proportions of mutations between cases and controls. RESULTS: Comparing the proportion of mutant sequence between MS cases and controls in the EBNA1 N-terminal (0/28 vs 1/27) and C-terminal regions (3/40 vs 8/36) revealed no significant differences (P > 0.05). No individual variants in LMP1 were associated with risk of MS (all P > 0.05). Neither EBNA1 nor LMP1 variation was associated with anti-EBNA1 IgG antibody titers. CONCLUSIONS: These findings do not support a strong role for variation in EBNA1 N-terminus, EBNA1 C-terminus or LMP1 contributing to MS risk.
Authors: A Ascherio; K L Munger; E T Lennette; D Spiegelman; M A Hernán; M J Olek; S E Hankinson; D J Hunter Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Maria Vaysberg; Olivia Hatton; Stacie L Lambert; Andrew L Snow; Bonnie Wong; Sheri M Krams; Olivia M Martinez Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2008-11-05 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Diego Franciotta; Marco Salvetti; Francesco Lolli; Barbara Serafini; Francesca Aloisi Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Carmen Yea; Raymond Tellier; Patrick Chong; Garrett Westmacott; Ruth Ann Marrie; Amit Bar-Or; Brenda Banwell Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-09-06 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Rosella Mechelli; Caterina Manzari; Claudia Policano; Anita Annese; Ernesto Picardi; Renato Umeton; Arianna Fornasiero; Anna Maria D'Erchia; Maria Chiara Buscarinu; Cristina Agliardi; Viviana Annibali; Barbara Serafini; Barbara Rosicarelli; Silvia Romano; Daniela F Angelini; Vito A G Ricigliano; Fabio Buttari; Luca Battistini; Diego Centonze; Franca R Guerini; Sandra D'Alfonso; Graziano Pesole; Marco Salvetti; Giovanni Ristori Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Monika Tschochner; Shay Leary; Don Cooper; Kaija Strautins; Abha Chopra; Hayley Clark; Linda Choo; David Dunn; Ian James; William M Carroll; Allan G Kermode; David Nolan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240