Advertisement

Anti-Neuronal Antibodies Within the IVIg Preparations: Importance in Clinical Practice

  • Maria M. Dimitriadou
  • Haris Alexopoulos
  • Sofia Akrivou
  • Eleni Gola
  • Marinos C. DalakasEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Our study objective was testing for anti-neuronal autoantibodies within commercially available intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) preparations. Sixteen samples from 5 different commercially available IVIg preparations were tested with cell-based assays (CBA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect and characterize common neuronal autoantibodies, and with immunohistochemistry on teased fibers from mouse sciatic nerve and on mouse brain sections to screen for nodal and not yet identified neuronal antigens. In 15/16 IVIg preparations, anti-GAD antibodies were detected in titers ranging from 40 to 1507 IU/mL, as typically seen in type 1 diabetes, but not in the range (> 2000 IU/mL) seen in GAD-positive neurological patients. None of the preparations was however positive with anti-GAD CBA. Antibodies to AQP4 were also detected by ELISA in 15/16 IVIg preparations with titers comparable to those seen in AQP4-seropositive NMO patients; with CBA, however, all IVIg samples were AQP4-negative. IVIg preparations contained IgG-anti-MAG antibodies by ELISA at statistically significant higher titers compared to controls. Two of the 16 IVIg samples were positive for human 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) antibodies. All IVIg preparations were negative for antibodies to MOG, NMDAR, anti-nodal, and other neuronal-specific proteins. IVIg preparations contain antibodies against GAD and AQP4 in titers comparable to those seen in autoimmune patients when tested by ELISA, but not by CBA or tissue immunohistochemistry, suggesting that the autoantibodies within the IVIg are against linear rather than structural epitopes, as part of the natural antibody immune repertoire. The information is clinically important for diagnosis when testing patients’ sera after they have received therapy with IVIg to avoid false interpretation.

Keywords

Natural autoantibodies intravenous immunoglobulin cell-based assay ELISA immunohistochemistry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Assist. Prof. E. Kapsogeorgou for technical assistance.

References

  1. 1.
    Kaveri SV. Intravenous immunoglobulin: exploiting the potential of natural antibodies. Autoimmun Rev. 2012;11(11):792–794. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2012.02.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kazatchkine MD, Kaveri SV. Immunomodulation of autoimmune and inflammatory diseases with intravenous immune globulin. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(10):747–755. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra993360.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lacroix-Desmazes S, Kaveri SV, Mouthon L, Ayouba A, Malanchere E, Coutinho A et al. Self-reactive antibodies (natural autoantibodies) in healthy individuals. J Immunol Methods. 1998;216(1–2):117–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lunemann JD, Nimmerjahn F, Dalakas MC. Intravenous immunoglobulin in neurology--mode of action and clinical efficacy. Nature reviews Neurology. 2015;11(2):80–89. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2014.253.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dalakas MC. Mechanistic effects of IVIg in neuroinflammatory diseases: conclusions based on clinicopathologic correlations. Journal of clinical immunology. 2014;34 Suppl 1:S120-S126. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10875-014-0024-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dalakas MC. Blockade of blocking antibodies in Guillain-Barre syndromes: “unblocking” the mystery of action of intravenous immunoglobulin. Annals of neurology. 2002;51(6):667–669. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.10259.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dalakas MC. Intravenous immunoglobulin in autoimmune neuromuscular diseases. Jama. 2004;291(19):2367–2375. doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.19.2367.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dalakas MC. Intravenous immune globulin therapy for neurologic diseases. Annals of internal medicine. 1997;126(9):721–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dalakas MC. Mechanism of action of intravenous immunoglobulin and therapeutic considerations in the treatment of autoimmune neurologic diseases. Neurology. 1998;51(6 Suppl 5):S2–S8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.51.6_suppl_5.s2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vani J, Elluru S, Negi VS, Lacroix-Desmazes S, Kazatchkine MD, Bayry J et al. Role of natural antibodies in immune homeostasis: IVIg perspective. Autoimmun Rev. 2008;7(6):440–444. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2008.04.011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Beer F, Schreurs MW, Foncke EM. False positive autoantibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase in opsoclonus-myoclonus-ataxia syndrome after intravenous treatment with immunoglobulin. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2009;111(7):643–644. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2009.03.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Suwannalai P, Scherer HU, van der Woude D, Ioan-Facsinay A, Jol-van der Zijde CM, van Tol MJ et al. Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies have a low avidity compared with antibodies against recall antigens. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(2):373–379. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2010.135509.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stathopoulos P, Alexopoulos H, Dalakas MC. Autoimmune antigenic targets at the node of Ranvier in demyelinating disorders. Nature reviews Neurology. 2015;11(3):143–156. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2014.260.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith TD, Cunningham-Rundles C. Detection of anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies in immunoglobulin products. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2018;6(1):260–261. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2017.04.042.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abbott JK, Church JA. In vivo assessment of clinically relevant autoantibodies in intravenous immunoglobulin preparations. Pediatric Allergy, immunology and pulmonology. 2010;23(2):121–123. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/ped.2010.0009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kampylafka EI, Routsias JG, Alexopoulos H, Dalakas MC, Moutsopoulos HM, Tzioufas AG. Fine specificity of antibodies against AQP4: epitope mapping reveals intracellular epitopes. J Autoimmun. 2011;36(3–4):221–227. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2011.01.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alexopoulos H, Kampylafka EI, Chatzi I, Travasarou M, Karageorgiou KE, Dalakas MC et al. Reactivity to AQP4 epitopes in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Journal of neuroimmunology. 2013;260(1–2):117–120. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroim.2013.04.017.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alexopoulos H, Kampylafka EI, Fouka P, Tatouli I, Akrivou S, Politis PK et al. Anti-aquaporin-4 autoantibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus persist for years and induce astrocytic cytotoxicity but not CNS disease. Journal of neuroimmunology. 2015;289:8–11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroim.2015.10.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bradl M, Lassmann H. Experimental models of neuromyelitis optica. Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland). 2014;24(1):74–82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bpa.12098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dalakas MC. Advances in the diagnosis, immunopathogenesis and therapies of IgM-anti-MAG antibody-mediated neuropathies. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2018;11:1756285617746640. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1756285617746640.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nishimura S, Nishiya K, Hisakawa N, Chikazawa H, Ookubo S, Nakatani K et al. Positivity for antinuclear antibody in patients with advanced rheumatoid arthritis. Acta Med Okayama. 1996;50(5):261–265. doi: https://doi.org/10.18926/AMO/30501.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guo Y, Tian X, Wang X, Xiao Z. Adverse Effects of Immunoglobulin Therapy. Front Immunol. 2018;9:1299. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01299.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Koffman BM, Dalakas MC. Effect of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin on serum chemistry, hematology, and lymphocyte subpopulations: assessments based on controlled treatment trials in patients with neurological diseases. Muscle & nerve. 1997;20(9):1102–1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Neuroimmunology Unit, Department of Pathophysiology, Faculty of MedicineNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations