| Literature DB >> 28446142 |
M Staudt1, J M Diederich1, C Meisel2, A Meisel1, J Klehmet3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is presented by a large heterogeneity of clinical phenotypes. Around 50% of patients suffer from typical CIDP and show better therapy response than atypical variants. The goal of our study was to search for cellular immunological differences in typical versus atypical CIDP in comparison to controls.Entities:
Keywords: Atypical; Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy; MBP protein; P0 protein; T memory subsets; Typical
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28446142 PMCID: PMC5406908 DOI: 10.1186/s12883-017-0860-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurol ISSN: 1471-2377 Impact factor: 2.474
ELISPOT-antigens
| antigen | Sequence |
|---|---|
| PMP-22 32–51 | NGHATDLWQNCSTSSSGNVH |
| PMP-22 51–64 | HHCFSSSPNEWLQS |
| PMP-22120–133 | RHPEWHLNSDYSYG |
| P2 14–25 | ENFDDYMKALGV |
| P2 61–70 | EISFKLGQEF |
| P0 180-199 | ASKRGRQTPVLYAMLDHSRS |
| MBP 82-100 | DENPVVHFFKNIVTPRTPP |
| CEF | peptide pool |
Fig. 1Frequency of P0 and MBP specific T cells in CIDP patients. Frequencies of peripheral myelin antigen-specific T cell responses in CIDP patients (n = 20) vs. HC (n = 14) measured by IFN-y ELISPOT. Background corrected SFU per 106 PBMC were significantly elevated for P0 180-199 as well as MBP 82-100 in CIDP patients vs. HC. Maximum value defined due to methodical limitations (CEF = 2500). (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001). Scatter dot plot with line at mean
Fig. 2Frequencies of peripheral myelin antigen-specific T cell responses in typical versus atypical CIDP patients. Typical (n = 8) vs atypical CIDP patients (n = 12) vs. HC (n = 14) were measured by IFN-y ELISPOT. Background corrected SFU per 106 PBMC. Significantly, elevated SFU were observed in atypical CIDP patients vs. HC for PMP-22 32-51, PMP-22 51-64, PMP-22 120-133, P2 14-25, P0 180-199, MBP 82-100. (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001). Scatter dot plot with line at mean. For P0 180-199, a cut-off value of 5 SFU/106 PBMC in T cell-Elispot having a sensitivity of 91,7% (11/12) and a specificity of 62,5% (5/8) with AUC 0.69. For MBP 82-100 using a cut-off value of 10 SFU per 106 PBMC in a T cell-Elispot assay had a sensitivity of 75,0% (9/12) and a specificity of 62,5% (5/8) with AUC 0.68
Fig. 3Quantitative analysis of lymphocyte subpopulations in typical versus atypical CIDP. Lymphocyte subpopulations of typical (n = 9) vs. atypical CIDP patients (n = 17) vs. HC (n = 28) were measured by flow cytometry. In atypical CIDP patients significantly higher frequencies of T cells and CD4+ T cells were seen compared to vs. typical CIDP patients and HC (a). Significantly higher frequencies for CD4+ TEM and TCM in atypical vs. typical CIDP patients and HC (b). Significantly higher frequencies for CD8+ TCM in atypical CIDP patients vs. HC (c). (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001). Scatter dot plot with line at mean
Clinical information (n = 26; IVIG intravenous immunoglobulins, CIDP chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, INCAT Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment, GS glucocorticosteroids)
| typical | atypical |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | male | 3/9 (33%) | 14/17 (82%) | 0.013 |
| female | 6/9 (66%) | 3/17 (18%) | ||
| Age (years) | mean | 61.0 | 57.2 | 0.512 |
| range | 32-78 | 33-74 | ||
| Previous treatment | None | 3/9 (33%) | 9/17 (53%) | 0.429a |
| IVIG | 4/9 (44%) | 6/17 (35%) | 0.652a | |
| Steroid | 2/9 (22%) | 2/17 (12%) | 0.547a | |
| Time since diagnosis | mean | 4.1 | 4.2 | 0.860 |
| (years) | range | 1-8 | 1-7 | |
| INCAT | mean | 3.2 | 2.3 | 0.045 |
| Range | <1-8 | <1-7 | ||
| Disease activity | range | 1-5 | 1-3 | |
| active-unstable | 6/9 (66%) | 14/17 (82%) | 1.000b | |
| active-stable | 1/9 (11%) | 0/17 (0%) | 0.333b | |
| in remission | 2/9 (22%) | 3/17 (18%) | 1.000b | |
| Therapy response | responder | 9/9 (100%) | 8/17 (47%) | 0.022 |
| non-responder | 0/9 (0%) | 9/17 (53%) |
Fishers exact test for sex, previous treatment, disease activity and therapy response
acompared versus treatment naïve patients
bcompared versus remission state; unpaired t-test for age and INCAT score; Mann-Whitney test for time since diagnosis