Journal of Immunology Research (Jan 2023)

Clinical Significance of Different Profiles of anti-Ro Antibodies in Connective Tissue Diseases

  • Hai-Tao Yang,
  • Xiao-Ping Hong,
  • Jie-Wen Guo,
  • Xiao-Ling Zhong,
  • Rui Liao,
  • Cui-Lian Liu,
  • Li-Xiong Liu,
  • Kai Li,
  • Yu-Lan Chen,
  • Dong-Zhou Liu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/9195157
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 2023

Abstract

Read online

Objective. Anti-Ro60 and anti-Ro52 antibodies are associated with different connective tissue diseases (CTDs). However, the clinical significance of anti-Ro antibodies is not always consistent among different global regions. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with anti-Ro antibodies. Methods. A total of 1596 inpatients with anti-Ro antibodies were included in the study. Demographic, clinical, and serological data were compared between individuals with different profiles of anti-Ro antibodies: patients with anti-Ro52 antibodies alone, patients with anti-Ro60 antibodies alone, and patients with combined anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies. Results. Of the 1596 patients, 1362 (85.3%) were female, the mean age was 45.5 years, and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (46.0%) and Sjogren’s syndrome (SS) (19.0%) were the most common CTD diagnoses. Among the patients with anti-Ro52 antibodies alone, idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (18.8%) and SLE (17.6%) were the most common CTD diagnoses. The coexistent autoantibodies of this group were significantly lower compared with those of the other two groups, while the presence of anti-Jo1 antibodies were significantly higher compared with those of the other two groups (3.7% vs. 0.6% vs. 1.9%, p=0.029). In addition, the patients with isolated anti-Ro52 antibodies were more likely to suffer from interstitial lung disease (35.5% vs. 11.3% vs. 13.7%, p<10−4) and pulmonary arterial hypertension (10.1% vs. 5.3% vs. 3.6%, p=0.001) compared with the other two groups of patients. Compared with patients with isolated anti-Ro52 or anti-Ro60 antibodies, the patients with combined anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies were more likely to suffer from xerophthalmia and xerostomia. Furthermore, hypocomplementemia, hyperglobulinemia, and proteinuria were particularly prevalent in patients with anti-Ro60 antibodies. Conclusion. Different profiles of anti-Ro antibodies were significantly associated with clinical phenotypic features in CTDs, indicating the potential diagnostic and prognostic value of these antibodies in clinical practice.