H + K + -ATPase Antibodies in Autoimmune Gastritis: Observations on the Development of Pernicious Anemia
The prevalence and development of antibodies to H+,K+-ATPase were investigated with a sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 86 patients with autoimmune atrophic gastritis (type A). Sixty-nine of the patients had pernicious anemia, and 17 had simple atrophic gastritis. Elevated titers were found in 93% of pernicious anemia probands. Women had higher levels than men: 3.24 versus 1.58 U/l (p = 0.002) (upper reference limit, 0.55 U/l). The antibody levels did not change over 1-4 years, but a gradual decrease in titers over decades was observed. All patients with pernicious anemia had low levels of pepsinogen A, a product of the gastric chief and mucous neck cells (median, 8.5 micrograms/l; reference range, 10-90 percentile, 64.4-195.5 micrograms/l), and elevated serum gastrin values (greater than 55 pmol/l) were found in 87%. Serum pepsinogen A, but not serum gastrin, correlated with H+,K(+)-ATPase antibody titers (r = 0.35, p = 0.01). In the 17 cases with simple atrophic gastritis, H+,K(+)-ATPase antibodies correlated inversely with fundic mucosal gland destruction. The data indicate that H+,K(+)-ATPase antibody titers reflect the immune responsiveness of a given patient as well as the antigenic amount, dependent on the degree of mucosal destruction and the duration of the disease.
Available from: Pia Burman
Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences 02/1991; 96(3):149-75. DOI:10.3109/03009739109179268 · 1.98 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Autoimmune gastritis, leading to pernicious anaemia, is an organ-specific autoimmune disease characterized by chronic atrophic gastritis and circulating gastric parietal cell autoantibodies. The parietal cell autoantigens have recently been identified as the α and β subunit of the gastric proton pump (H+,K+ ATPase). Here Paul Gleeson and Ban-Hock Toh discuss how the identification of thesegastric parietal cell autoantigens and the development of a mouse model of autoimmune gastritis have paved the way for an understanding of the pathogenesis of the gastric lesion.
Immunology Today 08/1991; 12(7-12):233-238. DOI:10.1016/0167-5699(91)90036-S · 9.49 Impact Factor
Available from: Ralph Carmel
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Anti-parietal cell antibody has been reported in nearly all patients with pernicious anaemia in past studies, in contrast with anti-intrinsic factor (IF) antibody which occurs in only 50-70% of such patients. However, observations in the more diverse patient population at our hospital suggest that these prevalences, originally described in predominantly elderly, white patients of European origin, no longer apply. Anti-IF antibody was found in 70% of the 324 patients, with blacks (84%) and Latin Americans (69%) having a significantly higher prevalence than whites (55%). In contrast, only 55% of the 266 patients tested had anti-parietal cell antibody. It was noteworthy that this low rate was similar in all racial groups. However, patients lacking anti-parietal cell antibody were significantly younger than those who had the antibody (54.8 +/- 17.8 vs 59.6 +/- 16.2 years, P = 0.022). Overall, a striking 30% of all patients had anti-IF antibody but not anti-parietal cell antibody, while only 13% had the latter antibody without having anti-IF antibody. This pattern was particularly striking among black patients. An interesting incidental observation was that gastrin levels were not associated with antibody status, but were significantly higher not only among women than among men but also among white and black patients than among Latin-American patients. The findings show that anti-parietal cell antibody is not found nearly as often in pernicious anaemia as has been reported in the past, and thus has no value as a diagnostic tool in pernicious anaemia. They also suggest clues to different expressions of pernicious anaemia or of its immunologic response, particularly among younger patients with the disease.
Clinical & Experimental Immunology 08/1992; 89(1):74-7. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2249.1992.tb06880.x · 3.04 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.