Abstract
It is known that anti-Ro/SSA positivity leads to higher risk of miscarriage and fetal cardiac malformations. Particularly, anti-p200 antibodies against a finer specificity of the Ro/SSA antigen, have been associated with congenital heart block. The aim of the study was to assess the frequency of anti-p200 among female patients with different connective tissue diseases and, among these, the relevance of anti-p200 values in patients with cutaneous diseases compared to systemic diseases. Anti-p200 were investigated in 110 anti-Ro/SSA positive female sera, sent to our laboratory between 2008 and 2014 with suspect of connective disease, by using ELISA testing. Positivity was found in 40.9 % samples, 34 of them showed a strong positivity (values ≥ 1.0, cut off = 0.7). Patients with systemic diseases were anti-p200 positive in the 45.9 % of cases while patients with cutaneous diseases were positive in the 24.0 % of cases. Positivity for anti-p200 antibodies was revealed in 24.0 % of patients with discoid lupus erythematosus; 100 % of patients with dermatomyositis; 40.0 % of patients with mixed connective tissue disease; 25.0 % of patients with rheumatoid arthritis; 100 % of patients with Sjögren’s syndrome; 33.3 % of patients with subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus; 42.9 % of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus; 80.0 % of patients with systemic sclerosis. No significant difference in anti-p200 prevalence was found between systemic and cutaneous involvement, nevertheless, considering only positive sera, the antibody titer was higher in systemic diseases rather than in cutaneous diseases (2.6 ± 1.7 and 1.7 ± 1.9; p = 0.041). The authors think screenings for anti-Ro/SSA and anti-p200 antibodies should be included in the laboratory checklist for pregnancy.
References
Boutjdir M (2000) Molecular and ionic basis of congenital complete heart block. Trends Cardiovasc Med 10:114–122
Brucato A (2008) Prevention of congenital heart block in children of SSA-positive mothers. Rheumatology 47:35–37
Brucato A, Doria A, Frassi M, Castellino G, Franceschini F, Faden D, Pisoni MP, Solerte L, Muscarà M, Lojacono A, Motta M, Cavazzana I, Ghirardello A, Vescovi F, Tombini V, Cimaz R, Gambari PF, Meroni PL, Canesi B, Tincani A (2002) Pregnancy outcome in 100 women with autoimmune diseases and anti-Ro/SSA antibodies: a prospective controlled study. Lupus 11:716–721
Carazzai AM, Sucena RC, Milano SI, Munhoz EG, Santos RA, Scheinberg MA (1988) Detection of SSA/Ro antibody in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, discoid lupus erythematosus and cutaneous photosensitivity. A comparative study. Rev Paul Med 106:71–74
Clancy RM, Buyon JP, Ikeda K, Nozawa K, Argyle DA, Friedman DM, Chan EK (2005) Maternal antibody responses to the 52-kd SSA/RO p200 peptide and the development of fetal conduction defects. Arthritis Rheum 52:3079–3086
Costedoat-Chalumeau N, Amoura Z, Villain E, Cohen L, Piette JC (2005) Anti-SSA/Ro antibodies and the heart: more than complete congenital heart block? A review of electrocardiographic and myocardial abnormalities and of treatment options. Arthritis Res Ther 7:69–73
Lazzerini PE, Capecchi PL, Laghi-Pasini F (2010) Anti-Ro/SSA antibodies and cardiac arrhythmias in the adult: facts and hypotheses. Scand J Immunol 72:213–222
Strandberg L, Winqvist O, Sonesson SE, Mohseni S, Salomonsson S, Bremme K, Buyon JP, Julkunen H, Wahren-Herlenius M (2008) Antibodies to amino acid 200–239 (p200) of Ro52 as serological markers for the risk of developing congenital heart block. Clin Exp Immunol 154:30–37
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interests nor funding sources.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cozzani, E., Agnoletti, A.F., Pappalardo, F. et al. The high incidence of anti-Ro/SSA and anti-p200 antibodies in female patients with connective tissue diseases confirms the importance of screening for congenital heart block-associated autoantibodies during pregnancy. Arch Dermatol Res 308, 139–143 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-016-1622-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-016-1622-2