Сalprotectin in the blood plasma as a new biomarker for assessing the activity of rheumatoid arthritis
https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-0363-2022-3-59-66
Abstract
Aim. To study the potential use and information value of calprotectin in the blood plasma as a new biomarker for determining the activity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Materials and methods. The study included 113 people. The treatment group consisted of 79 patients diagnosed with RA; the average age was 58 (± 11.66) years, the median duration of the disease was 10 [6; 15] years. The control group encompassed 34 healthy volunteers; the average age was 40 (± 11.14) years. RA activity was determined according to the Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28 and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). The concentration of calprotectin in the blood plasma was determined by the solid-phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The obtained results were compared with laboratory and clinical parameters, as well as with composite indices (DAS28, CDAI) of RA activity. For mathematical data processing, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, linear discriminant analysis, and ROC analysis were used.
Results. In the group of patients with RA, the level of calprotectin in the blood was higher than in the control group. A statistically significant relationship was revealed between the level of calprotectin in the blood and all standard parameters of RA activity. The ROC analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in assessing articular syndrome, as well as moderate and high RA activity according to the composite indices DAS28 and CDAI were higher for calprotectin than for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP). The linear discriminant analysis showed that a combination of ESR and calprotectin levels was the most informative; following it, the probability of correct classification of RA activity, according to the DAS28 index, was 71%. For the CDAI index, only one marker, calprotectin, resulted in a statistically significant classification with a probability of 70.5 %.
Conclusion. Сalprotectin in the blood plasma is a promising laboratory biomarker for assessing synovitis activity in RA demonstrating higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity than traditional acute-phase reactants.
About the Authors
A. A. KorolkovaRussian Federation
2, Akkuratova Str., St. Petersburg, 197341
Competing Interests:
The authors declare the absence of obvious or potential conflict of interest related to the publication of this article
V. V. Khizha
Russian Federation
44, Toreza Str., St. Petersburg, 197341
Competing Interests:
The authors declare the absence of obvious or potential conflict of interest related to the publication of this article
D. I. Kozlova
Russian Federation
44, Toreza Str., St. Petersburg, 197341
Competing Interests:
The authors declare the absence of obvious or potential conflict of interest related to the publication of this article
A. L. Maslyanskiy
Russian Federation
2, Akkuratova Str., St. Petersburg, 197341
Competing Interests:
The authors declare the absence of obvious or potential conflict of interest related to the publication of this article
T. V. Vavilova
Russian Federation
2, Akkuratova Str., St. Petersburg, 197341
Competing Interests:
The authors declare the absence of obvious or potential conflict of interest related to the publication of this article
References
1. Smolen J.S., Aletaha D., Bijlsma J.W., Breedveld F.C., Boumpas D., Burmester G. et al. T2T Expert committee. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2010;69(4):631–637. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2009.123919.
2. Fransen J., Stucki G., van Riel P.L.C.M. Rheumatoid arthritis measures: Disease Activity Score (DAS), Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28), Rapid Assessment of Disease Activity in Rheumatology (RADAR) and Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI). Arthritis & Rheumatism. 2003;49:214–224. DOI: 10.1002/art.11407.
3. Prevoo M.L., van ‘t Hof M.A., Kuper H.H., van Leeuwen M.A., van de Putte L.B., van Riel P.L. Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38(1):44–48. DOI: 10.1002/art.1780380107. PMID: 7818570.
4. De Jong P.H., Hazes J.M., van Zeben D., van der Lubbe P.A., de Jager M.H., de Sonnaville P.B. at al. Treatment decisions and related costs differ significantly depending on the choice of a disease activity index in RA, according to 1987 and 2010 classification criteria. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51(7):1269– 1277. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kes008.
5. Marks J.L., Holroyd C.R., Dimitrov B.D., Armstrong R.D., Calogeras A., Cooper C. et al. Does combined clinical and ultrasound assessment allow selection of individuals with rheumatoid arthritis for sustained reduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy? Arthritis Care Res. (Hoboken). 2015;67(6):746– 753. DOI: 10.1002/acr.22552.
6. Miranda-García P., Chaparro M., Gisbert J.P. Correlation between serological biomarkers and endoscopic activity in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2016;39(8):508–515. DOI: 10.1016/j.gastrohep.2016.01.015.
7. Korndörfer I.P., Brueckner F., Skerra A. The crystal structure of the human (S100A8/S100A9)2 heterotetramer, calprotectin, illustrates how conformational changes of interacting alpha-helices can determine specific association of two EF-hand proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 2007;370(5):887–898. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.04.065.
8. Romand X., Bernardy C., Nguyen M.V.C., Courtier A., Trocme C., Clapasson M. et al. Systemic calprotectin and chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Joint Bone Spine. 2019;86(6):691–698. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2019.01.003.
9. Lee D.G., Woo J.W., Kwok S.K., Cho M.L., Park S.H. MRP8 promotes Th17 differentiation via upregulation of IL-6 production by fibroblast-like synoviocytes in rheumatoid arthritis. Exp. Mol. Med. 2013;45(4):20. DOI: 10.1038/ emm.2013.39.
10. Abildtrup M., Kingsley G.H., Scott D.L. Calprotectin as a biomarker for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. J. Rheumatol. 2015;42(5):760–770. DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.140628.
11. Bae S.C., Lee Y.H. Calprotectin levels in rheumatoid arthritis and their correlation with disease activity: a meta-analysis. Postgrad. Med. 2017;129(5):531–537. DOI: 10.1080/00325481.2017.131972.
12. Hurnakova J., Zavada J., Hanova P., Hulejova H., Klein M., Mann H. et al. Serum calprotectin (S100A8/9): an independent predictor of ultrasound synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res. Ther. 2015;17(1):252. DOI: 10.1186/ s13075-015-0764-5.
13. Jarlborg M., Courvoisier D.S., Lamacchia C., Martinez Prat L., Mahler M. Bentow C. et al. Physicians of the Swiss Clinical Quality Management (SCQM) registry. Serum calprotectin: a promising biomarker in rheumatoid arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis. Arthritis Res. Ther. 2020;22(1):105. DOI: 10.1186/s13075-020-02190-3.
14. Hammer H.B., Ødegård S., Syversen S.W., Lande wé R., van der Heijde D., Uhlig T. et al. Calprotectin (a major S100 leucocyte protein) predicts 10-year radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2010;69(1):150–154. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2008.103739.
15. Bach M., Moon J., Moore R., Pan T., Nelson J.L., Lood C. A neutrophil activation biomarker panel in prognosis and monitoring of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020;72(1):47–56. DOI: 10.1002/art.41062.
16. Altman R., Asch E., Bloch D., Bole G., Borenstein D., Brandt K. et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29(8):1039–1049. DOI: 10.1002/art.1780290816.
Review
For citations:
Korolkova A.A., Khizha V.V., Kozlova D.I., Maslyanskiy A.L., Vavilova T.V. Сalprotectin in the blood plasma as a new biomarker for assessing the activity of rheumatoid arthritis. Bulletin of Siberian Medicine. 2022;21(3):59-66. https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-0363-2022-3-59-66