Article

Autoantibody induction and adipokine levels in patients with psoriasis treated with infliximab.

Section of Dermatology and Venereology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Immunologic Research (Impact Factor: 3.53). 04/2013; DOI: 10.1007/s12026-013-8410-2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study was aimed to analyse the prevalence of antinuclear antibodies in patients with psoriasis after treatment with infliximab and correlates the development of antibodies with both response to treatment and adipokines levels. Serum levels of ANA, anti-dsDNA, anti-histone, anti-nucleosome and anti-ENA antibodies at baseline after 2 and 12 months of treatment with infliximab were measured in 27 patients with psoriasis, as well as in 27 matched controls. Serum C-reactive protein (CRP), chemerin, visfatin and resistin were also assessed. The prevalence of ANA increased from 22 to 37 % and 63 % (p < 0.01) during treatment with infliximab, with a gradual progressive increase both in ANA titre and in percentage of ANA pattern. The prevalence of other antibodies also increased from 7 to 30 % and 48 % (p < 0.01) for anti-ds-DNA and from 7 to 26 % and 37 % for anti-nucleosome antibodies (p < 0.05), whereas the prevalence of anti-histone and anti-ENA antibodies was unchanged throughout the study period. Basal chemerin, resistin and CRP levels were higher in patients than in controls, and their levels progressively normalized during treatment (p < 0.01). Conversely, visfatin levels gradually increased (p < 0.01). ANA+ patients tended to show a faster decrease in PASI score, CRP and chemerin levels after 2 months, but the PASI score did not differ between ANA+ and ANA- patients at 12 months. A higher increase of visfatin was also found in ANA+ patients at 2 and 12 months. The antinuclear antibody response induced by infliximab was restricted to ANA, anti-dsDNA and anti-nucleosome antibodies. Patients who developed ANA positivity showed a faster clinical, inflammatory and immunological response to infliximab therapy.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
69 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A great deal of research has addressed the elevation of C-reactive protein (CRP) among psoriatic patients and the role of this marker in assessment of disease severity and progression. However, there are some discrepancies in this area. We sought to figure out the relationship between CRP values and disease severity as well as the changes in marker levels after treatment through an extensive literature review. Comparison between CRP levels in psoriatic patients and those in healthy or non-psoriatic individuals was also another focus of this review. A thorough search in Pubmed and Embase was conducted for articles investigating different aspects of CRP measurement in patients with psoriasis. Overall, 32 articles were found to meet our inclusion criteria. Of 28 studies comparing the CRP values in psoriatic patients with those of controls, 24 found a statistically significant difference. In addition, 12 out of 16 papers examining the association between disease severity and CRP values noted significant results. With regard to CRP changes over the course of a treatment, all 15 studies addressing this issue revealed a significant decrease in marker levels. In conclusion, high CRP levels only for moderate and severe forms of disease might be inferred from the literature and there is no sufficient evidence suggesting a similar association for mild disease as well. Moreover, CRP may serve interchangeably with Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) as a measure of disease severity in the case of untreated psoriatic patients who do not have disease related arthritis. For other patients, however, a careful clinical examination and PASI calculation still remain the mainstay of severity assessment.
    Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 09/2013; 28(6). · 2.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Background: In the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis, increasingly complex clinical scenarios necessitate practical tools for appropriate biologic therapy selection in individual patients. An Italian Delphi consensus panel provided guidance on biologic use in selected clinical scenarios. Methods: Ten experts defined statements under consideration, which were distributed as an online survey to a dermatologist panel. Plenary discussions of contentious statements were held to achieve consensus. Results: The survey was sent to 30 clinicians. After plenary discussions, consensus was reached on all 20 statements on the following topics: special populations; infections; comorbidities; immunogenicity; extra-cutaneous involvement; pregnancy; and adherence. Three statements required further discussion in order to gain consensus: use of subcutaneous biologics in mild liver impairment (final 94% agreement), use of any biologic in discoid lupus erythematosus (final 100% disagreement), and use of etanercept in patients with history of hypersensitivity reactions to drugs and/or food (final 75% disagreement). Conclusions: This Delphi expert consensus on the use of biologics in psoriasis provides practical recommendations for dermatologists to use when choosing an appropriate biologic in challenging but common clinical scenarios. More data are required to clarify clinical differences of biologic drugs used to treat psoriasis.
    Journal of Dermatological Treatment 04/2014; · 1.76 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chemerin is an immunomodulating factor secreted predominantly by adipose tissue and skin. Processed by a variety of proteases linked to inflammation, it activates the G-protein coupled receptor chemokine-like receptor 1 (CMKLR1) and induces chemotaxis in natural killer cells, macrophages, and immature dendritic cells. Recent developments revealed the role of the nonsignaling chemerin receptor C-C chemokine receptor-like 2 (CCRL2) in inflammation. Besides further research establishing its link to inflammatory skin conditions such as psoriasis, functions in healthy skin have also been reported. Here, the current understanding of chemerin processing, signaling and physiological function has been summarized, focusing on the regulation of its activity, its different receptors and its controversially discussed role in diseases. © 2014 IUBMB Life, 2014.
    International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Life 01/2014; · 2.79 Impact Factor