4.1 Article

Evidence that anti-muscarinic antibodies in Sjogren's syndrome recognise both M3R and M1R

Journal

BIOLOGICALS
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages 213-222

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2007.11.001

Keywords

anti-muscarinic receptor antibodies; Sjogren's syndrome; binding assays; cross reactivity; intravenous immunoglobulin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Inhibitory anti-muscarinic receptor type 3 (M3R) antibodies may contribute to the pathogenesis of Sjogren's syndrome (SS), and putative anti-M3R blocking antibodies in intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) have been suggested as a rationale for treatment with IVIg. We investigated the presence of subtype-specific anti-MR autoantibodies in healthy donor and SS sera using MR-transfected whole-cell binding assays as well as M1R and M3R peptide ELISAs. Control antibodies against the second extracellular loop of the M3R, a suggested target epitope, were induced in rabbits and found to be cross-reactive on the peptides M3R and M1R. The rabbit antibodies had neither an agonistic nor an antagonistic effect on M3R-dependent ERK1/2 signalling. Only one primary SS (out of 5 primary SS, 2 secondary SS and 5 control sera) reacted strongly with M3R transfected cells. The same SS serum also reacted strongly with M1R and M2R transfectants, as well as M1R and two different M3R peptides. Strong binding to M1R and low-level activities against M3R peptides were observed both in SS and control sera. IVIg showed a strong reactivity against all three peptides, especially M1R. Our results indicate that certain SS individuals may have antibodies against M1R, M2R and M3R. Our results also suggest that neither the linear M3R peptide nor M3R transfectants represent suitable tools for discrimination of pathogenic from natural autoantibodies in SS. (C) 2007 The International Association for Biologicals. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available