BACKGROUND: B-lymphocyte depletion with rituximab has been shown to benefit patients with various autoimmune diseases. We have previously demonstrated that this benefit is also apparent in patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. OBJECTIVES: The effect of rituximab on in vivo antibody responses, particularly during the period of B-lymphocyte depletion, is incompletely determined. This study was designed to assess this knowledge void. METHODS: In patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes treated with rituximab (n = 46) or placebo (n = 29), antibody responses to neoantigen phiX174 during B-lymphocyte depletion and with hepatitis A (as a second neoantigen) and tetanus/diphtheria (as recall antigens) after B-lymphocyte recovery were studied. Anti- tetanus, diphtheria, mumps, measles, and rubella titers were measured before and after treatment by means of ELISA. Antibody titers and percentage IgM versus percentage IgG to phiX174 were measured by means of phage neutralization. B-lymphocyte subsets were determined by means of flow cytometry. RESULTS: No change occurred in preexisting antibody titers. Tetanus/diphtheria and hepatitis A immunization responses were protective in the rituximab-treated subjects, although significantly blunted compared with those seen in the controls subjects, when immunized at the time of B-lymphocyte recovery. Anti-phiX174 responses were severely reduced during the period of B-lymphocyte depletion, but with B-lymphocyte recovery, anti-phiX174 responses were within the normal range. CONCLUSIONS: During the time of B-lymphocyte depletion, rituximab recipients had a decreased antibody response to neoantigens and significantly lower titers after recall immunization with diphtheria and tetanus toxoid. With recovery, immune responses return toward normal. Immunization during the time of B-lymphocyte depletion, although ineffective, does not preclude a subsequent response to the antigen.
BACKGROUND: B-lymphocyte depletion with rituximab has been shown to benefit patients with various autoimmune diseases. We have previously demonstrated that this benefit is also apparent in patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. OBJECTIVES: The effect of rituximab on in vivo antibody responses, particularly during the period of B-lymphocyte depletion, is incompletely determined. This study was designed to assess this knowledge void. METHODS: In patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes treated with rituximab (n = 46) or placebo (n = 29), antibody responses to neoantigen phiX174 during B-lymphocyte depletion and with hepatitis A (as a second neoantigen) and tetanus/diphtheria (as recall antigens) after B-lymphocyte recovery were studied. Anti- tetanus, diphtheria, mumps, measles, and rubella titers were measured before and after treatment by means of ELISA. Antibody titers and percentage IgM versus percentage IgG to phiX174 were measured by means of phage neutralization. B-lymphocyte subsets were determined by means of flow cytometry. RESULTS: No change occurred in preexisting antibody titers. Tetanus/diphtheria and hepatitis A immunization responses were protective in the rituximab-treated subjects, although significantly blunted compared with those seen in the controls subjects, when immunized at the time of B-lymphocyte recovery. Anti-phiX174 responses were severely reduced during the period of B-lymphocyte depletion, but with B-lymphocyte recovery, anti-phiX174 responses were within the normal range. CONCLUSIONS: During the time of B-lymphocyte depletion, rituximab recipients had a decreased antibody response to neoantigens and significantly lower titers after recall immunization with diphtheria and tetanus toxoid. With recovery, immune responses return toward normal. Immunization during the time of B-lymphocyte depletion, although ineffective, does not preclude a subsequent response to the antigen.
Authors: Christopher M Bearden; Avinash Agarwal; Benita K Book; Carlos A Vieira; Richard A Sidner; Hans D Ochs; Marquerite Young; Mark D Pescovitz Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Nicole Eibl; Martin Spatz; Gottfried F Fischer; Wolfgang R Mayr; Aysen Samstag; Hermann M Wolf; Guntram Schernthaner; Martha M Eibl Journal: Clin Immunol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Carla J Greenbaum; Thomas Mandrup-Poulsen; Paula Friedenberg McGee; Tadej Battelino; Burkhard Haastert; Johnny Ludvigsson; Paolo Pozzilli; John M Lachin; Hubert Kolb Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Ishac Nazi; John G Kelton; Mark Larché; Denis P Snider; Nancy M Heddle; Mark A Crowther; Richard J Cook; Alan T Tinmouth; Joy Mangel; Donald M Arnold Journal: Blood Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Vijay G Bhoj; Dimitrios Arhontoulis; Gerald Wertheim; James Capobianchi; Colleen A Callahan; Christoph T Ellebrecht; Amrom E Obstfeld; Simon F Lacey; Jan J Melenhorst; Farzana Nazimuddin; Wei-Ting Hwang; Shannon L Maude; Mariusz A Wasik; Adam Bagg; Stephen Schuster; Michael D Feldman; David L Porter; Stephen A Grupp; Carl H June; Michael C Milone Journal: Blood Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Thamiris Palacios; Luther Bartelt; William Scheld; M Beatriz Lopes; Sarah M Kelting; Steven Holland; W Ian Lipkin; Phenix-Lan Quan; Larry Borish; Monica Lawrence Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: Laura M Jacobsen; Brittney N Newby; Daniel J Perry; Amanda L Posgai; Michael J Haller; Todd M Brusko Journal: Curr Diab Rep Date: 2018-08-30 Impact factor: 4.810
Authors: Polly J Bingley; Diane K Wherrett; Ann Shultz; Lisa E Rafkin; Mark A Atkinson; Carla J Greenbaum Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Robert A Eisenberg; Abbas F Jawad; Jean Boyer; Kelly Maurer; Kenyetta McDonald; Eline T Luning Prak; Kathleen E Sullivan Journal: J Clin Immunol Date: 2012-10-14 Impact factor: 8.317