Abstract
Objective.
Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a systemic autoimmune disease with unknown etiology. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is an environmental factor associated with SLE. EBV maintains latency in B cells with frequent reactivation measured by antibodies against viral capsid antigen (VCA) and early antigen (EA). In this study, we determined whether EBV reactivation and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in EBV-associated host genes are associated with SLE transition.
Methods.
SLE patient relatives (n=436) who did not have SLE at baseline were re-contacted after 6.3 (±3.9) years and evaluated for interim transitioning to SLE (≥4 cumulative ACR criteria); 56 (13%) transitioned to SLE prior to the follow-up visit. At both visits, detailed demographic, environmental, clinical information, and blood samples were obtained. Antibodies against viral antigens were measured by ELISA. SNPs in IL10, CR2, TNFAIP3, and CD40 genes were typed by ImmunoChip™. Generalized estimating equations were used to test associations between viral antibody levels and transitioning to SLE.
Results.
Mean baseline VCA IgG (4.879±1.797 vs 3.866±1.795, p=0.0003) and EA IgG (1.192±1.113 vs 0.7774±0.8484, p=0.0236) levels were higher in transitioned compared to autoantibody negative non-transition relatives. Increased VCA IgG and EA IgG were associated with transitioning to SLE (OR 1.28 95%CI 1.07–1.53 p=0.007, OR 1.43 95%CI 1.06–1.93 p=0.02, respectively). Significant interactions were observed between CD40 variant rs48100485 and VCA IgG levels, and IL10 variant rs3024493 and VCA IgA levels in transitioning to SLE.
Conclusion.
Heightened serologic reactivation of EBV increases the probability of transitioning to SLE in unaffected SLE relatives.
Keywords: Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Autoimmunity, Epstein-Barr virus
Introduction
Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a systemic autoimmune disease that involves multiple organ systems and causes significant morbidity. The etiology of SLE is not completely understood. Genetic risk factors have been associated with SLE.[1 ,2] However, monozygotic twin concordance rates of 24–69% [3 ,4] suggest a role for environmental factors in SLE pathogenesis.
Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is a gamma-herpes virus that ubiquitously infects the majority of the world’s population. EBV maintains latency in B cells and occasionally reactivates the lytic cycle. EBV infection elicits an IgG response to viral capsid antigen (VCA), followed by an IgG response to early antigen (EA). EA IgG levels are detectable as early as a few months and up to 2 years following infection. VCA IgG responses persist for life, although levels are lower during latency compared to lytic infection.[5] Reactivation of EBV is proposed to increase VCA IgG levels and also leads to detectable EA IgG levels.[5] Serology can therefore be used to identify individuals with current infection or recent viral reactivation.
Significant associations between SLE and serologic markers of EBV infection, VCA IgG and EA IgG, have been shown.[6–8] SLE patients have higher frequencies of EBV-infected cells, higher viral loads in blood mononuclear cells, and higher levels of EA IgG,[9–12] suggesting more frequent EBV reactivation. However, whether this recurring EBV reactivation is a consequence of immune dysregulation and/or immune suppression in SLE patients is not clear. To our knowledge, no prospective studies have been performed to understand the cause/effect relationship between viral reactivation and SLE classification. The ligation of human complement receptor 2 (CR2) with gp350/220 glycoprotein of EBV leads to endocytosis and subsequent EBV infection of B cells.[13 ,14] EBV encodes homologues of human proteins to aid in infection and/or maintain latency. An EBV homologue of Interleukin 10 (IL-10) promotes B cell survival and induces pro-inflammatory phenotype in monocytes.[15 ,16] Latent Membrane Protein 1 (LMP-1), a viral mimic of CD40, induces extrafollicular B cell differentiation.[17] EBV infection induced CD40L/CD40 signaling in host cells may support viral persistence.[18] Interestingly, candidate gene studies in SLE patients relative to healthy controls have revealed that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in host IL10 (rs3024505, rs3024495, rs3024493, and 3122605) and CD40 (rs1569723, rs1883832, and rs4810485), and a three SNP CR2 haplotype (rs3813946, rs1048971, and rs17615) are associated with lupus susceptibility.[19–23] Relationships between EBV infection/reactivation and genetic variants in host genes implicated in these viral-associated pathways in SLE are unknown.
In this study, we examined whether EBV serological reactivation precedes SLE classification and whether the associations between serologic measures of EBV reactivation and transitioning to SLE were modified by variants in host EBV related genes. Interactions between EBV reactivation measures and SNPs in TNFAIP3, which is associated with SLE, but not involved in EBV infection, in SLE transitioning were also determined.
Methods
Study design and patients
Study participants were previously enrolled in the Lupus Family Registry and Repository (LFRR) and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Gullah Health (SLEIGH) studies [24 ,25] and provided consent for re-contact. This study analyzed baseline samples of individuals (n=436) who had a relative with SLE and who did not meet ≥4 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for SLE at the time of their baseline visit. were enrolled in aA follow-up study assessed ACR criteria to determine interim transition to classified SLE in these previously unaffected relatives, hereafter referred to as non-transitioned (<4 ACR criteria at follow-up) or transitioned (≥4 ACR criteria at follow-up) relatives. Unrelated unaffected controls, hereafter referred to as controls (n=122), were recruited at local health fairs in Oklahoma and were age- and sex-matched to SLE relatives. All study participants provided informed consent prior to enrollment. All protocols were approved by the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation (OMRF) or Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) Institutional Review Boards to be compliant with the Helsinki Declaration.
Patient and public involvement
Research was done without patient involvement in the study design, data analysis/interpretation, or writing/editing of this manuscript.
Autoantibody and anti-viral response testing
Autoantibody testing was performed by the CAP-certified/CLIA-approved OMRF Clinical Immunology Laboratory as described previously.[26 ,27] Anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) and anti-double stranded DNA (dsDNA) antibodies were determined by indirect immunofluorescence using Hep2 cells or Crithidia luciliae, respectively (INOVA Diagnostics, San Diego, CA). Positivity was defined as ANA detection at a titre of ≥ 1:120 and anti-dsDNA detection at ≥ 1:30. Antibodies against extractable nuclear antigens (Ro, La, Sm, nRNP, and ribosomal P) were detected by immunodiffusion. Anti-cardiolipin (aCL) antibodies were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Positivity was defined as >20 IgG or IgM units.
Antibodies against EBV VCA (IgG), EBV EA (IgG) (Zeus Scientific (Alere-Wampole/Abbott), Branchburg, NJ), and EBV VCA (IgA) (Calbiotech, El Cajon, CA) were measured using commercial ELISAs according to manufacturer’s instructions in samples collected at the baseline visit for SLE relatives and controls. Antibodies against unrelated herpes viruses, Cytomegalovirus (CMV, IgG) and Herpes Simplex Virus-1 (HSV1, IgG), and Varicella zoster (VZV, IgG) (Zeus Scientific (Alere-Wampole/Abbott), Branchburg, NJ) were also measured. Standard calibrators were used in each assay to calculate index values/optical density (OD) ratios, which serve as a semi-quantitative measure of antibody levels. All assays met pre-determined quality control measures based on positive, negative, and blank controls. Positivity was defined as OD ratio ≥1.1.
Genotyping Study Participants
Five SNPs in IL10, three in CD40, one in CR2, and five in TNFAIP3, previously shown to be associated with autoimmune diseases, were genotyped using the ImmunoChip™ and were read on the Illumina iScan in the OMRF Clinical Genomics Center as described previously. [28] Each SNP was tested for consistency with Hardy-Weinberg proportions using a one-degree of freedom χ2 goodness-of-fit test with a p value of 0.05 considered as evidence of a departure from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. IL10 variants, rs3024505, rs3024495, rs3024493, rs3122605, were in strong linkage disequilibrium (r2≥0.80). Similarly, CD40 SNPs, rs1569723, rs1883832, rs4810485, were in strong linkage disequilibrium (r2>0.80). IL10 SNP rs3024493 and CD40 SNP rs4810485 were therefore used as surrogates for other SNPs in IL10 and CD40 genes, respectively.
Statistical analysis
Viral antibody levels at baseline between transitioned relatives (n=56), non-transitioned relatives (n=380), and control (n=122) groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test (GraphPad Prism version 7.02). The percent of individuals positive for anti-viral responses in the different groups were compared by Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables (GraphPad Prism version 7.02). Generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusting for correlation within families, were used to test associations between the viral antibody levels and the categorical outcome of transitioning to SLE. Odds ratios (OR) are reported for one unit change in antibody level (OD ratio). Associations with SNPs were examined in an additive model treating the number of minor alleles as a continuous variable with the OR representing an increase (or decrease) in risk for each minor allele. OR and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined for all models. GEE analyses were performed in SAS V9.4. All multivariable models were adjusted for age, sex, and race.
Results
Study cohort
Nearly 75% of study participants were of European American descent and more than 85% were female. No significant differences were observed in average age between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives. Transitioned relatives had a greater number of confirmed ACR criteria at study enrollment, and higher percentages were ANA positive at baseline compared to non-transitioned relatives (p<0.0001, Table 1).
Table 1.
Study participant demographicsa
| Variable | Transitioned relatives n=56 | Non transitioned relatives n=380 | Unaffected Controls n=122 | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age at baseline: mean (median) ± SD | 47.4 (48.5) ± 12.1 | 47.2 (48.0) ± 15.8b | 51.1 (51.0) ± 12.7 | 0.01 |
| Time between re-contact (years): mean (median) ± SD | 5.9 (5.1) ± 3.5 | 6.3 (5.4) ± 3.9b | NAc | 0.50 |
| Sex: Female (n,%)d | 49 (87.5%) | 316 (83.2%) | 106 (86.9%) | 0.49 |
| Race (n,%) | 0.004 | |||
| European American | 43 (76.8%) | 279 (73.4%) | 89 (73.0%) | |
| African American | 9 (16.1%) | 55 (14.5%) | 15 (12.3%) | |
| Native American | 4 (7.1%) | 18 (4.7%) | 9 (7.4%) | |
| Asian/Pacific Islander | 0 (0.0%) | 17 (4.5%) | 5 (4.1%) | |
| Hispanic | 0 (0.0%) | 11 (2.9%) | 4 (3.2%) | |
| ANA Positive Baseline (n,%)e | 43 (76.8%) | 183 (48.2%) | 15 (12.3%) | <0.0001 |
| Number of baseline ACR Criteria | NDf | <0.0001 | ||
| 0–1 | 7 (12.5%) | 291 (76.5%) | ||
| 2 | 23 (41.1%) | 74 (19.5%) | ||
| 3 | 26 (46.4%) | 15 (4.0%) |
p value for trend
Not significant between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives by Mann-Whitney U test
Not applicable
Not significant between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives by Fisher’s exact test
p<0.0001 between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives by Fisher’s exact test
Not determined
Relatives who transitioned to SLE had higher baseline levels of anti-VCA IgG compared to relatives who did not transition to SLE
To understand the contribution of EBV reactivation to SLE classification, we compared the anti-EBV antibody levels at baseline visit in transitioned and non-transitioned relatives. Transitioned relatives had higher baseline VCA IgG levels compared to non-transitioned relatives (4.88±1.8 vs 4.18±1.81, p=0.0086, Figure 1A) and controls (4.88±1.8 vs 4.25±1.5, p=0.02). A higher percentage of controls were positive for VCA IgG compared to non-transitioned relatives (Figure 1B). However, VCA IgG seropositivity at baseline was not different between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives (Figure 1B), suggesting that both groups of SLE relatives had similar prior exposure to EBV. The total IgG concentrations were not different between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives, suggesting that the increase in VCA IgG levels is not due to hyperglobulinemia in the transitioned group (Supplementary figure S1).
Figure 1. Relatives who subsequently transitioned to SLE had higher baseline levels of anti EBV IgG compared to healthy controls.
IgG antibody levels against EBV VCA (A), EBV EA (C) and IgA antibodies against EBV VCA (E) were measured by ELISA at the baseline visit in relatives who transitioned to SLE (Transition), relatives who did not transition to SLE (Non-Transition), and unaffected unrelated controls (Control). Data are represented as median ± 95% CI. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ****p<0.0001 by Mann Whitney. Seropositivity for VCA IgG (B), EA IgG (D), and VCA IgA (F) was determined as described in Methods. ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001 by Fisher’s exact Test.
At the baseline visit, the transitioned relatives had higher EA IgG levels compared to controls (1.19±1.11 vs 0.62±0.64, p<0.0001) (Figure 1C). Baseline EA IgG levels were not different between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives. A higher percentage of transitioned relatives were positive for EA IgG compared to controls (37.5% vs 13.11%, p<0.0005) but not compared to non-transitioned relatives (Figure 1D). IgA responses against VCA were not different between the groups (Figure 1E,F).
Relatives who transitioned had higher levels of VCA IgG and EA IgG compared to ANA negative non-transitioned relatives
A higher number of transitioned relatives were ANA positive at baseline compared to non-transitioned relatives and controls (Table 1). Both VCA IgG (r=0.15, p=0.002) and EA IgG levels (r=0.22, p<0.0001) correlated with increasing numbers of autoantibody specificities (Supplementary Table 1). To determine whether EBV serological reactivation contributes to ANA positivity, we divided the non-transitioned relatives into ANA positive (ANA+) and ANA negative (ANA-) groups at baseline. Transitioned relatives had significantly higher levels of VCA IgG compared to ANA- non-transitioned relatives (4.879±1.797 vs 3.866±1.795, p=0.0003 Figure 2A). Lower percentages of non-transitioned relatives were positive for VCA IgG at baseline compared to controls, irrespective of autoantibody positivity (Figure 2B).
Figure 2. Relatives who transitioned to classified SLE had higher levels of VCA IgG and EA IgG compared to autoantibody negative non-transitioned relatives at baseline.
Relatives who did not transition (Non-Transition) were divided based on their ANA positivity status (as described in Methods). Antibody levels (A,C,E,G) and seropositivity (B,D,F,H) for VCA IgG (A,B), EA IgG (C,D), CMV IgG (E,F), and HSV-1 (G, H) at the baseline visit were determined by ELISA. Data represented as median ± 95% CI. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001 by Mann Whitney (A,C,E,G) or Fisher’s exact Test (B,D,F,H).
Transitioned relatives had higher EA IgG at baseline compared to ANA- non-transitioned relatives (1.192±1.113 vs 0.7774±0.8484, p=0.0236, Figure 2C). Higher percentages of transitioned relatives were positive for EA IgG compared to ANA-, but not ANA+ non-transitioned relatives (Figure 2D). VCA IgG and EA IgG levels were higher in the ANA+ non-transitioned compared to ANA- non-transitioned relatives (Figure 2A,C); however, the levels of total IgG between these two groups were similar (Supplementary figure S1). These data suggest that increased EBV reactivation, as measured by EA IgG positivity and increased VCA IgG and EA IgG, may contribute to generation of autoantibodies, eventually contributing to autoimmunity.
Controls in this study had higher seropositivity and antibody levels against CMV and HSV-1 compared to transitioned and non-transitioned relatives (Figure 2E–H). However, the levels of CMV IgG and HSV-1 IgG were not different between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives, irrespective of ANA positivity. No differences in varicella virus (VZV) seropositivity or levels of VZV IgG were found between transitioned and non-transitioned relatives, nor with healthy controls (Supplemental Figure S2). These data show that the differences with VCA IgG and EA IgG seen between the transitioned and non-transitioned relatives are specific for humoral responses to EBV and not a generalized dysregulation of immune response to herpes viruses in SLE relatives.
Increased levels of VCA IgG and EA IgG associate with transitioning to SLE
Our data show increased levels of VCA IgG and EA IgG at baseline prior to transitioning to classified disease in relatives of SLE patients. To determine whether these increased levels associate with transitioning to SLE after adjusting for age, sex, and race, we used GEE, accounting for correlation among families. Increasing levels of VCA IgG were associated with transitioning to SLE (Table 2).
Table 2.
Increasing VCA IgG and EA IgG levels are associated with transitioning to SLEa
| Serological measures | Transitioned (n=56) vs non transitioned (n=380) relatives OR (95% CI), p-value | Transitioned relatives (n=56) vs unrelated unaffected controls (n=122) OR (95% CI), p-value |
|---|---|---|
| VCA IgG (OD ratio) | 1.28 (1.07–1.53), 0.007 | 1.30 (1.02–1.65), 0.03 |
| VCA IgA (OD ratio) | 0.99 (0.78–1.27), 0.94 | 1.01 (0.73–1.42), 0.91 |
| EA IgG (OD ratio) | 1.43 (1.06–1.93), 0.02 | 2.11 (1.38–3.23), 0.0005 |
| CMV IgG (OD ratio) | 1.03 (0.87–1.22), 0.72 | 0.89 (0.73–1.07), 0.21 |
| HSV-1 IgG (OD ratio) | 1.06 (0.92–1.22), 0.44 | 0.94 (0.82–1.09), 0.43 |
Odds Ratio (OR) presented for 1 unit increase in OD ratio
Increased levels of VCA IgG remained significantly associated with transitioning to SLE after additionally adjusting the models for ANA positivity (OR 1.22 95%CI 1.01–1.47, p=0.04). EA IgG levels were also associated with transitioning to SLE (Table 2), when compared to non-transitioned relatives. No significant interactions were found between the anti-EBV antibody levels and age, sex, or race.
Increasing levels of VCA IgG and EA IgG were associated with transitioning to SLE when compared to controls (Table 2), and the association remained after additional adjustment for ANA positivity (OR 1.46, 95%CI 1.09–1.97, p=0.01 and OR 2.00 95%CI 1.21–3.31, p=0.007, respectively). Furthermore, EA IgG positivity was associated with transitioning to SLE (OR 4.35 95%CI 2.03–9.31, p=0.0002) when compared to controls. Levels of CMV IgG and HSV-1 IgG were not associated with transitioning to SLE (Table 2).
Variants in IL10 and CD40 interact with anti-VCA antibodies in transitioning to SLE
Recent studies show a close association between environmental and host genetic factors in the development or exacerbation of the autoimmune response.[28 ,29] To test whether there is an association between immune response to EBV and variants in host genes implicated in EBV infection, we determined the interactions between variants in IL10, CD40, and CR2 with anti-EBV responses in transitioning to SLE. We also tested interactions between anti-EBV responses and variants in TNFAIP3, a gene associated with SLE, but not implicated in EBV infection.
IL10 variants were associated with transitioning to SLE (Table 3), however, no association was observed with the CD40 variants or CR2 variant in this small cohort.
Table 3.
SNPs in IL10 are associated with transitioning to SLE
| Gene | SNP | Minor Allele | MAF | Transitioned to SLE (n=52) vs. Non Transition relatives (n=354) OR (95% CI) p-value | Transitioned (n=52) to SLE vs. Unaffected Controls (n=115) OR (95% CI) p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IL10 | rs3024505 | T | 0.14 | 2.15 (1.31–3.53) 0.002 | 1.87 (1.03–3.39) 0.04 |
| IL10 | rs3024495 | A | 0.15 | 2.13 (1.31–3.45) 0.002 | 2.00 (1.09–3.65) 0.02 |
| IL10 | rs3024493 | T | 0.14 | 2.06 (1.25–3.37) 0.004 | 1.91 (1.05–3.50) 0.03 |
| IL10 | rs1800896 | C | 0.45 | 1.15 (0.77–1.72) 0.50 | 1.23 (0.74–2.06) 0.43 |
| IL10 | rs3122605 | G | 0.13 | 1.86 (1.08–3.21) 0.02 | 1.79 (0.98–3.27) 0.06 |
| CD40 | rs1569723 | G | 0.43 | 0.98 (0.72–1.33) 0.91 | 0.86 (0.59–1.23) 0.40 |
| CD40 | rs1883832 | A | 0.24 | 1.02 (0.62–1.68) 0.93 | 1.11 (0.63–1.94) 0.73 |
| CD40 | rs4810485 | A | 0.25 | 0.95 (0.57–1.59) 0.85 | 1.03 (0.59–1.80) 0.90 |
| CR2 | rs17615 | T | 0.31 | 0.97 (0.61–1.53) 0.88 | 0.72 (0.42–1.24) 0.24 |
| TNFAIP3 | rs5029930 | C | 0.14 | 1.41 (0.78–2.55) 0.25 | 1.49 (0.79–2.81) 0.22 |
| TNFAIP3 | rs5029939 | G | 0.05 | 1.19 (0.57–2.49) 0.65 | 1.96 (0.82–4.68) 0.13 |
The association between VCA IgG level and transitioning to SLE was modified by CD40 rs4810485 (interaction p=0.0009) (Figure 3A). Increased VCA IgG level was associated with increased SLE risk in relatives with 0 minor alleles (OR=1.62, 95%CI 1.22–2.14), adjusting for age, sex, and race (Figure 3A). Similarly, the association between VCA IgA and transitioning to SLE was modified by IL10 rs3024493 (interaction p=0.008) (Figure 3C). Although neither VCA IgA levels nor the SNP in CR2 were associated with transitioning to SLE independently, we observed a modest but significant interaction between VCA IgA response and the CR2 variant rs17615 in SLE transition risk (interaction p= 0.03) (Supplementary Table 2). Similar results were found when comparing transitioned relatives to controls (Figure 3B and 3D). We also tested association of SNPs in TNFAIP3 as a gene associated with SLE, but not related to EBV. SNPs rs5029939 (in LD with rs5029937, rs2230926) and rs5029930 (in LD with rs3757173) were not associated with transitioning to SLE (Table 3). Furthermore, there were no significant interactions between TNFAIP3 SNPs and viral antibodies in transitioning to SLE.
Figure 3. Significant interactions were observed between CD40 variants and VCA IgG and between IL10 variants and VCA IgA.
(A, B) VCA IgG levels show significant interactions with CD40 variant rs4810485 in the risk of transitioning to SLE. CD40 rs4810485: Transition n=51, relatives who did not transition n= 355, unaffected unrelated controls n=115. A, interaction p value: p=0.0009 when compared to relatives who did not transition. B, interaction p value p=0.01, when compared to controls. (C,D) Significant interactions were observed between VCA IgA and IL10 variant rs3024493 in the risk of transitioning to SLE. IL10 rs3024493: Transition n=52, relatives who did not transition n=354, unrelated unaffected controls n=116. C, interaction p value = 0.008, when compared to those who did not transition, D, interaction p value p=0.04, when compared to controls.
Discussion
In this study, we evaluated the contribution of EBV reactivation to transitioning to SLE in unaffected relatives of SLE patients. Our data show that SLE relatives had increased reactivation of EBV prior to transitioning to SLE, and increasing levels of EBV antibodies associated with SLE disease transitioning.
EBV infection has been linked to autoantibody production through molecular mimicry and epitope spreading. Aberrant antibody responses against Epstein-Barr Nuclear Antigen-1 (EBNA-1) can incite antibody responses against lupus autoantigens, Sm and Ro.[30 ,31] Anti-Ro responses were shown to be among the first autoantibodies detected preceding SLE classification in longitudinal samples.[32] In this study, we show that the transitioned relatives had increased VCA IgG and EA IgG responses compared to non-transitioned relatives who were ANA negative at baseline. There were significant differences between VCA IgG and EA IgG levels in the non-transitioned relatives based on their ANA positivity, and ANA+ relatives had significantly higher EBV antibody levels compared to ANA- relatives. In addition, differences in VCA IgA between transitioned and non-transitioned groups became significant when accounting for IL10 rs3024493. These data support that EBV reactivation may contribute to autoimmune responses through facilitating the loss of tolerance to lupus autoantigens. A prospective natural history study of high-risk individuals with serial evaluations and sample collection is needed to precisely define the timing of SLE transition relative to EBV reactivation and to perform a trajectory analysis over time.
We observed higher seroprevalence and higher levels of CMV IgG and HSV-1 IgG in unaffected controls compared to lupus relatives. CMV seroprevalance shows racial/ethnic differences[33] and is influenced by socioeconomic status.[34] The controls used in this study were recruited from community health centers where the exposure levels may be impacted by various factors including socioeconomic status. Levels of IgG directed against CMV and HSV-1 antigens did not show any significant differences between transitioned non-transitioned relatives. Furthermore, CMV IgG and HSV-1 IgG were not associated with transitioning to SLE. We also did not observe any differences in IgG responses towards varicella zoster (Supplementary Figure S2). The immune response to EBV is therefore unique in those who transitioned and is related to ANA positivity.
We observed increased levels of both VCA IgG and EA IgG in transitioned, as well as non-transitioned, SLE relatives when compared to controls. When transitioned relatives were compared to either non-transitioned relatives or controls, the association between VCA IgG levels and transitioning to SLE was modified by SLE-associated SNPs in CD40 rs4810485 and VCA IgA levels were associated with increased risk of transitioning in individuals with 0 minor alleles at IL10 rs3024493. These data suggest that the genetic predisposition to SLE, as is expected in relatives of SLE patients, influences the immune response to a latent EBV infection, and that the increased reactivation of EBV in the context of host genetic risk alleles may increase the risk of transitioning to SLE. However, the exact relationship between EBV antibodies and SLE risk alleles remains unclear. The presence of risk alleles may allow for a frequent reactivation of EBV through as yet unknown mechanisms.
Our data show that increased serological reactivation of EBV prior to SLE classification is associated with transitioning to SLE in genetically susceptible individuals. The negative predictive value for EA IgG positivity in SLE relatives was 89.33% and is possibly better than the currently available measures for assessing risk of transitioning in SLE relatives. We also show that there are significant interactions between SLE-associated variants in host genes implicated in viral-related pathways and measures of EBV serologic reactivation. To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study examining pre-clinical association between serologic measures of EBV reactivation and SLE disease transition.
Supplementary Material
Key Messages.
What is already known about this subject?
Significant associations between EBV serological markers and SLE have been shown
SLE patients have higher frequencies of EBV infected cells, higher viral loads, and higher EA IgG levels
What does this study add?
This is a prospective study to understand the contribution of EBV reactivation prior to SLE disease onset in at risk individuals
The study shows that previously unaffected relatives of SLE patients who subsequently develop classified SLE have higher serological reactivation of EBV compared to those who do not transition to SLE
The study also shows that variants in genes that are associated with SLE and implicated in EBV infection, associate with transitioning to SLE
How might this impact on clinical practice or future development?
Serological measures of EBV reactivation may provide additional biomarkers to identify individuals at higher risk of transitioning to clinical SLE
Acknowledgements.
The authors would like to thank the LFRR (OMRF) and SLEIGH (MUSC) groups, as well as Virginia Roberts and Tiny Powe for their assistance in recruiting study participants. The authors would also like to thank the Oklahoma Clinical Characterization and Biorepository Core and the OMRF Clinical Genomics Center for technical assistance, and Kandice L. Tessneer, Ph.D. for editorial assistance.
Financial support: This study was supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences U54GM104938 (JAJ), the National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases P30AR053482 (JAJ), P30AR072582 (GG), P60AR062755 (GG & DLK), K24AR068406 (DLK), P50AR055503 (DRK), the National Institute of Allergy, and Infectious Diseases U19AI082714 (JAJ), U01AI101934 (JAJ), AI024717 (JBH), AI130830 (JBH), the National Human Genome Research Institute HG008666 (JBH) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (JBH).
Author Disclosures. All authors report grant support from the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of this study. JBH has a pending patent on broadly related work. Other than as permitted in any relevant BMJ Author’s Self Archiving Policies, I confirm this Work has not been accepted for publication elsewhere, is not being considered for publication elsewhere and does not duplicate material already published. The Work is based on data previously presented in the form of an abstract at the American College of Rheumatology Annual Meeting 2017. I confirm all authors consent to publication of this Work and authorize the granting of this license.
Footnotes
Data Availability. All relevant data have been included in the text.
References
- 1.Chen L, Morris DL, Vyse TJ. Genetic advances in systemic lupus erythematosus: an update. Current opinion in rheumatology 2017;29(5):423–33 doi: 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000411[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Deng Y, Tsao BP. Updates in Lupus Genetics. Current rheumatology reports 2017;19(11):68 doi: 10.1007/s11926-017-0695-z[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Block SR, Winfield JB, Lockshin MD, et al. Studies of twins with systemic lupus erythematosus. A review of the literature and presentation of 12 additional sets. The American journal of medicine 1975;59(4):533–52 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Deapen D, Escalante A, Weinrib L, et al. A revised estimate of twin concordance in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis and rheumatism 1992;35(3):311–8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gulley ML. Molecular diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus-related diseases. The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD 2001;3(1):1–10 doi: 10.1016/S1525-1578(10)60642-3[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.James JA, Kaufman KM, Farris AD, et al. An increased prevalence of Epstein-Barr virus infection in young patients suggests a possible etiology for systemic lupus erythematosus. The Journal of clinical investigation 1997;100(12):3019–26 doi: 10.1172/JCI119856[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.James JA, Neas BR, Moser KL, et al. Systemic lupus erythematosus in adults is associated with previous Epstein-Barr virus exposure. Arthritis and rheumatism 2001;44(5):1122–6 doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(200105)44:5<1122::AID-ANR193>3.0.CO;2-D[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Hanlon P, Avenell A, Aucott L, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the sero-epidemiological association between Epstein-Barr virus and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis research & therapy 2014;16(1):R3 doi: 10.1186/ar4429[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Gross AJ, Hochberg D, Rand WM, et al. EBV and systemic lupus erythematosus: a new perspective. Journal of immunology 2005;174(11):6599–607 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kang I, Quan T, Nolasco H, et al. Defective control of latent Epstein-Barr virus infection in systemic lupus erythematosus. Journal of immunology 2004;172(2):1287–94 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Huggins ML, Todd I, Powell RJ. Reactivation of Epstein-Barr virus in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology international 2005;25(3):183–7 doi: 10.1007/s00296-003-0420-2[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Esen BA, Yilmaz G, Uzun S, et al. Serologic response to Epstein-Barr virus antigens in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a controlled study. Rheumatology international 2012;32(1):79–83 doi: 10.1007/s00296-010-1573-4[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Fingeroth JD, Weis JJ, Tedder TF, et al. Epstein-Barr virus receptor of human B lymphocytes is the C3d receptor CR2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1984;81(14):4510–4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Tanner J, Weis J, Fearon D, et al. Epstein-Barr virus gp350/220 binding to the B lymphocyte C3d receptor mediates adsorption, capping, and endocytosis. Cell 1987;50(2):203–13 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hsu DH, de Waal Malefyt R, Fiorentino DF, et al. Expression of interleukin-10 activity by Epstein-Barr virus protein BCRF1. Science 1990;250(4982):830–2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Jog NR, Chakravarty EF, Guthridge JM, et al. Epstein Barr Virus Interleukin 10 Suppresses Anti-inflammatory Phenotype in Human Monocytes. Frontiers in immunology 2018;9:2198 doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02198[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Uchida J, Yasui T, Takaoka-Shichijo Y, et al. Mimicry of CD40 signals by Epstein-Barr virus LMP1 in B lymphocyte responses. Science 1999;286(5438):300–3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Imadome K, Shirakata M, Shimizu N, et al. CD40 ligand is a critical effector of Epstein-Barr virus in host cell survival and transformation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2003;100(13):7836–40 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1231363100[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Sakurai D, Zhao J, Deng Y, et al. Preferential binding to Elk-1 by SLE-associated IL10 risk allele upregulates IL10 expression. PLoS genetics 2013;9(10):e1003870 doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003870[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Vazgiourakis VM, Zervou MI, Choulaki C, et al. A common SNP in the CD40 region is associated with systemic lupus erythematosus and correlates with altered CD40 expression: implications for the pathogenesis. Annals of the rheumatic diseases 2011;70(12):2184–90 doi: 10.1136/ard.2010.146530[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Chen JM, Guo J, Wei CD, et al. The association of CD40 polymorphisms with CD40 serum levels and risk of systemic lupus erythematosus. BMC genetics 2015;16:121 doi: 10.1186/s12863-015-0279-8[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Douglas KB, Windels DC, Zhao J, et al. Complement receptor 2 polymorphisms associated with systemic lupus erythematosus modulate alternative splicing. Genes and immunity 2009;10(5):457–69 doi: 10.1038/gene.2009.27[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Wu H, Boackle SA, Hanvivadhanakul P, et al. Association of a common complement receptor 2 haplotype with increased risk of systemic lupus erythematosus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2007;104(10):3961–6 doi: 10.1073/pnas.0609101104[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Rasmussen A, Sevier S, Kelly JA, et al. The lupus family registry and repository. Rheumatology 2011;50(1):47–59 doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keq302[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Kamen DL, Barron M, Parker TM, et al. Autoantibody prevalence and lupus characteristics in a unique African American population. Arthritis and rheumatism 2008;58(5):1237–47 doi: 10.1002/art.23416[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bruner BF, Guthridge JM, Lu R, et al. Comparison of autoantibody specificities between traditional and bead-based assays in a large, diverse collection of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and family members. Arthritis and rheumatism 2012;64(11):3677–86 doi: 10.1002/art.34651[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Munroe ME, Young KA, Kamen DL, et al. Discerning Risk of Disease Transition in Relatives of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients Utilizing Soluble Mediators and Clinical Features. Arthritis & rheumatology 2017;69(3):630–42 doi: 10.1002/art.40004[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Young KA, Munroe ME, Guthridge JM, et al. Combined role of vitamin D status and CYP24A1 in the transition to systemic lupus erythematosus. Annals of the rheumatic diseases 2017;76(1):153–58 doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209157[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Takvorian SU, Merola JF, Costenbader KH. Cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption and risk of systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2014;23(6):537–44 doi: 10.1177/0961203313501400[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Kaufman KM, Kirby MY, Harley JB, et al. Peptide mimics of a major lupus epitope of SmB/B’. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2003;987:215–29 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.McClain MT, Heinlen LD, Dennis GJ, et al. Early events in lupus humoral autoimmunity suggest initiation through molecular mimicry. Nature medicine 2005;11(1):85–9 doi: 10.1038/nm1167[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Arbuckle MR, McClain MT, Rubertone MV, et al. Development of autoantibodies before the clinical onset of systemic lupus erythematosus. The New England journal of medicine 2003;349(16):1526–33 doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa021933[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Staras SA, Dollard SC, Radford KW, et al. Seroprevalence of cytomegalovirus infection in the United States, 1988–1994. Clin Infect Dis 2006;43(9):1143–51 doi: 10.1086/508173[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Dowd JB, Aiello AE, Alley DE. Socioeconomic disparities in the seroprevalence of cytomegalovirus infection in the US population: NHANES III. Epidemiology and infection 2009;137(1):58–65 doi: 10.1017/S0950268808000551[published Online First: Epub Date]|. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.



