Literature DB >> 28203615

Epstein-Barr-negative MS: a true phenomenon?

Ruth Dobson1, Jens Kuhle1, Jaap Middeldorp1, Gavin Giovannoni1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2017        PMID: 28203615      PMCID: PMC5292929          DOI: 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm        ISSN: 2332-7812


× No keyword cloud information.
Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection is associated with MS; up to 3.3% people with MS are EBV nuclear antigen-1 (EBNA1)-seronegative compared with 6.0% controls.[1] EBV serology is complex, and multiple antigens are required to assess seropositive status.[2,3] We examined a cohort of seemingly EBV-negative patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). The size of the population enrolled in the International CIS study allowed us to examine the largest population of seemingly EBV-negative patients with CIS gathered to date.

Methods.

The International CIS study is a collaborative study across 33 centers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria and methods for sample and data collection have previously been described.[4] Immunoglobulin G (IgG) reactivity against EBNA1 was initially evaluated using commercially available ELISA (ETI-EBNA-G, Diasorin, Italy) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Samples with anti–EBNA1-IgG reactivity less than the manufacturer's cutoff value (CoV) (<20 AU/mL) for the ETI-EBNA-G ELISA (screen-negative) were tested using well-validated in-house ELISAs based on multiepitope peptides of EBNA1 and virus capsid antigen (VCA) using previously described methods.[5,6] The CoV for the in-house ELISA was the mean OD450 value of 4 truly EBNA1- and VCA-negative sera plus twice the SD (mean + 2 SD). OD450 values were normalized against the CoV, and values >1.0 were considered positive. Samples demonstrating negative or borderline (0.8–1.2) results against both EBV antigens were investigated using an EBV-specific immunoblot.[5]

Results.

Patient details are provided in the table. The CIS cohort has previously been described in detail.[4] Forty-one (3.9%) of 1,047 patients were screen-negative. Age, sex, time to serum sampling and clinically definite MS (CDMS) and follow-up duration were not different to the whole cohort. Screen-negative patients were less likely to be CSF oligoclonal band (OCB)-positive (48.8% vs 74.3%; p = 0.0009, Fisher exact test) and less likely to be smokers (p = 0.01). Anti–cytomegalovirus (CMV)-IgG[4]–negative patients were not less likely to be OCB-negative (52% vs 48%).
Table

Details of the 41 patients with CIS who had undetectable anti–EBNA1-IgG levels on initial screening

Details of the 41 patients with CIS who had undetectable anti–EBNA1-IgG levels on initial screening Of the screen-negative samples, 5/41 had reactivity <1.0 for anti–EBNA1-IgG and 2/41 <1.0 for anti–VCA-IgG and 2/41 had reactivity <1.0 against both EBV antigens. When values obtained from the 2 EBNA1 assays were compared, they demonstrated a correlation coefficient (rSpearman) of 0.57 after 3 outliers with reactivity <CoV of the ETI-EBNA-G ELISA, but high reactivity on the in-house ELISA were excluded (figure, A). A Bland-Altman plot demonstrated no evidence of systemic bias and reasonable agreement between the 2 assays (figure, B). Of the 2 samples with low reactivity to both EBV antigens, 1 showed no reactivity on immunoblot. This patient was OCB-positive and developed CDMS during follow-up.
Figure

Scatter graph and Bland-Altman plot demonstrating correlation and agreement between the 2 EBNA1 assays

(A) Scatter graph demonstrating correlation between the 2 Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen-1 (EBNA1) assays. (B) Bland-Altman plot demonstrating reasonable agreement between the 2 assays. Given the different arbitrary scales used to report assay results, the in-house ELISA values have been multiplied by the ratio of the mean values of each ELISA to allow them to be reported on the same scale.

Scatter graph and Bland-Altman plot demonstrating correlation and agreement between the 2 EBNA1 assays

(A) Scatter graph demonstrating correlation between the 2 Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen-1 (EBNA1) assays. (B) Bland-Altman plot demonstrating reasonable agreement between the 2 assays. Given the different arbitrary scales used to report assay results, the in-house ELISA values have been multiplied by the ratio of the mean values of each ELISA to allow them to be reported on the same scale.

Discussion.

Only 1 of 1,047 patients (<0.01%) was truly EBV-negative. Previous literature demonstrates a strong association between MS and EBV infection; in keeping with this, 41 patients (3.9%) showed no EBNA1-reactivity on initial screen. More detailed testing revealed a much higher rate of EBV seropositivity in CIS and MS patients than previously described. There is significant antigenic diversity of anti–EBV-IgG responses in EBV carriers and patients with EBV-related disease.[2,3] Serologic testing against multiple antigens is recommended to accurately define EBV status when examining the link between EBV infection and other diseases. In studies examining MS risk and EBV infection, the rate of EBV positivity in the population is highly dependent on the method used to determine EBV serostatus.[7] ELISA against 2 different EBV antigens provides a screening method; immunoblot on apparently seronegative samples increases sensitivity. The ETI-EBNA-G ELISA was validated for Food and Drug Administration's approval against a cell-based EBNA1-anticomplement immunofluorescence. The CoV for this ELISA is likely set relatively high, giving borderline values a negative interpretation. The in-house ELISA that we used utilizes the same peptide antigen, but was validated against purified EBNA1, increasing sensitivity and explaining the correlation between EBNA1 titers in the 2 ELISAs. Some EBNA1-IgG–negative sera are positive against other EBV antigens. The fact that patients who were EBNA1-screen–negative were less likely to have OCBs provides an avenue for future research; there is likely a biological link between lower EBV immunoreactivity and OCB production. However, in our earlier study, while OCB predicted a second event, lower EBV reactivity did not[4]—the relationship therefore is more complex than a simple linear or threshold effect. EBNA1-seropositivity occurs later than VCA seroconversion; low titers of anti–EBNA1-IgG may reflect recent EBV infection which has not yet triggered downstream biological events. It may be that patients who are EBNA1-screen–negative have a lower overall level of immune response, resulting in negative OCBs. However, the same relationship is not seen in the CMV-seronegative population, hinting at an EBV-specific link. With only 1 of 1,047 patients in our large international cohort testing negative for EBV across multiple antigens and 2 platforms, it seems that while it is possible to be truly EBV seronegative and develop MS, this is extremely rare. It seems likely that this indicates a role for EBV in MS development, and further research is needed to examine this further.
  7 in total

1.  No evidence for intrathecal IgG synthesis to Epstein Barr virus nuclear antigen-1 in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Naghmeh Jafari; Gijsbert P van Nierop; Georges M G M Verjans; Albert D M E Osterhaus; Jaap M Middeldorp; Rogier Q Hintzen
Journal:  J Clin Virol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 3.168

Review 2.  Serological diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection: Problems and solutions.

Authors:  Massimo De Paschale; Pierangelo Clerici
Journal:  World J Virol       Date:  2012-02-12

3.  Conversion from clinically isolated syndrome to multiple sclerosis: A large multicentre study.

Authors:  J Kuhle; G Disanto; R Dobson; R Adiutori; L Bianchi; J Topping; J P Bestwick; U-C Meier; M Marta; G Dalla Costa; T Runia; E Evdoshenko; N Lazareva; E Thouvenot; P Iaffaldano; V Direnzo; M Khademi; F Piehl; M Comabella; M Sombekke; J Killestein; H Hegen; S Rauch; S D'Alfonso; J C Alvarez-Cermeño; P Kleinová; D Horáková; R Roesler; F Lauda; S Llufriu; T Avsar; U Uygunoglu; A Altintas; S Saip; T Menge; C Rajda; R Bergamaschi; N Moll; M Khalil; R Marignier; I Dujmovic; H Larsson; C Malmestrom; E Scarpini; C Fenoglio; S Wergeland; A Laroni; V Annibali; S Romano; A D Martínez; A Carra; M Salvetti; A Uccelli; Ø Torkildsen; K M Myhr; D Galimberti; K Rejdak; J Lycke; J L Frederiksen; J Drulovic; C Confavreux; D Brassat; C Enzinger; S Fuchs; I Bosca; J Pelletier; C Picard; E Colombo; D Franciotta; T Derfuss; Rlp Lindberg; Ö Yaldizli; L Vécsei; B C Kieseier; H P Hartung; P Villoslada; A Siva; A Saiz; H Tumani; E Havrdová; L M Villar; M Leone; N Barizzone; F Deisenhammer; C Teunissen; X Montalban; M Tintoré; T Olsson; M Trojano; S Lehmann; G Castelnovo; S Lapin; R Hintzen; L Kappos; R Furlan; V Martinelli; G Comi; S V Ramagopalan; G Giovannoni
Journal:  Mult Scler       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 6.312

Review 4.  Epstein-Barr Virus-Specific Humoral Immune Responses in Health and Disease.

Authors:  Jaap M Middeldorp
Journal:  Curr Top Microbiol Immunol       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.291

5.  Anti-Epstein-Barr virus antibodies as serological markers of multiple sclerosis: a prospective study among United States military personnel.

Authors:  K L Munger; L I Levin; E J O'Reilly; K I Falk; A Ascherio
Journal:  Mult Scler       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 6.312

Review 6.  The risk of developing multiple sclerosis in individuals seronegative for Epstein-Barr virus: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julia Pakpoor; Giulio Disanto; Jennifer E Gerber; Ruth Dobson; Ute C Meier; Gavin Giovannoni; Sreeram V Ramagopalan
Journal:  Mult Scler       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 6.312

7.  Epstein-Barr virus infection and risk of lymphoma: immunoblot analysis of antibody responses against EBV-related proteins in a large series of lymphoma subjects and matched controls.

Authors:  Silvia de Sanjosé; Ramon Bosch; Tabitha Schouten; Sandra Verkuijlen; Alexandra Nieters; Lenka Foretova; Marc Maynadié; Pier Luigi Cocco; Anthony Staines; Nikolaus Becker; Paul Brennan; Yolanda Benavente; Paolo Boffetta; Chris Jlm Meijer; Jaap M Middeldorp
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2007-10-15       Impact factor: 7.396

  7 in total
  13 in total

Review 1.  The CD8 T Cell-Epstein-Barr Virus-B Cell Trialogue: A Central Issue in Multiple Sclerosis Pathogenesis.

Authors:  Caterina Veroni; Francesca Aloisi
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 7.561

2.  Environmental factors influencing multiple sclerosis in Latin America.

Authors:  Jorge Correale; Mauricio F Farez; María Inés Gaitán
Journal:  Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin       Date:  2017-06-13

Review 3.  Infections, Vaccines and Autoimmunity: A Multiple Sclerosis Perspective.

Authors:  Dejan Jakimovski; Bianca Weinstock-Guttman; Murali Ramanathan; Michael G Dwyer; Robert Zivadinov
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-28

4.  Cumulative Roles for Epstein-Barr Virus, Human Endogenous Retroviruses, and Human Herpes Virus-6 in Driving an Inflammatory Cascade Underlying MS Pathogenesis.

Authors:  Ute-Christiane Meier; Richard Christopher Cipian; Abbas Karimi; Ranjan Ramasamy; Jaap Michiel Middeldorp
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 7.561

5.  Onset Symptom Clusters in Multiple Sclerosis: Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Risk Factors.

Authors:  Vladeta Ajdacic-Gross; Nina Steinemann; Gábor Horváth; Stephanie Rodgers; Marco Kaufmann; Yanhua Xu; Christian P Kamm; Jürg Kesselring; Zina-Mary Manjaly; Chiara Zecca; Pasquale Calabrese; Milo A Puhan; Viktor von Wyl
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 4.003

6.  Epstein-Barr virus is present in the brain of most cases of multiple sclerosis and may engage more than just B cells.

Authors:  Asma Hassani; John R Corboy; Suhail Al-Salam; Gulfaraz Khan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Complete Epstein-Barr virus seropositivity in a large cohort of patients with early multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Sargis Abrahamyan; Bettina Eberspächer; Muna-Miriam Hoshi; Lilian Aly; Felix Luessi; Sergiu Groppa; Luisa Klotz; Sven G Meuth; Christoph Schroeder; Thomas Grüter; Björn Tackenberg; Friedemann Paul; Florian Then-Bergh; Tania Kümpfel; Frank Weber; Martin Stangel; Antonios Bayas; Brigitte Wildemann; Christoph Heesen; Uwe Zettl; Clemens Warnke; Gisela Antony; Nicole Hessler; Heinz Wiendl; Stefan Bittner; Bernhard Hemmer; Ralf Gold; Anke Salmen; Klemens Ruprecht
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 8.  Epstein-Barr Virus in Multiple Sclerosis: Theory and Emerging Immunotherapies.

Authors:  Amit Bar-Or; Michael P Pender; Rajiv Khanna; Lawrence Steinman; Hans-Peter Hartung; Tap Maniar; Ed Croze; Blake T Aftab; Gavin Giovannoni; Manher A Joshi
Journal:  Trends Mol Med       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 11.951

9.  Epidemiology of Epstein-Barr virus infection and infectious mononucleosis in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Ashvin Kuri; Benjamin Meir Jacobs; Nikki Vickaryous; Julia Pakpoor; Jaap Middeldorp; Gavin Giovannoni; Ruth Dobson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2020-06-12       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between Epstein-Barr virus, multiple sclerosis and other risk factors.

Authors:  Benjamin M Jacobs; Gavin Giovannoni; Jack Cuzick; Ruth Dobson
Journal:  Mult Scler       Date:  2020-03-23       Impact factor: 6.312

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.