High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin exerts its beneficial effect in patients with dermatomyositis by blocking endomysial deposition of activated complement fragments

M Basta, M C Dalakas, M Basta, M C Dalakas

Abstract

In patients with dermatomyositis (DM) the earliest lesion is microvasculopathy mediated by deposition of C5b-C9 membranolytic attack complex (MAC) on intramuscular capillaries. This leads sequentially to muscle ischemia, necrosis of muscle fibers, and muscle weakness. High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), which can modulate complement-dependent tissue damage in animal models, has been shown to be effective in the treatment of patients with DM. We used an in vitro C3 uptake assay to examine 55 coded sera from 13 patients with DM and 5 patients with other non-complement-mediated neuromuscular diseases, before and after treatment with IVIG or placebo. Patients with active DM had a significantly higher baseline C3 uptake compared with the others (geometric mean 12,190 vs 3,090 cpm). Post-IVIG but not post-placebo sera inhibited the C3 uptake, without depleting the complement components, by 70.6-93.4%. The maximum inhibition of C3 uptake occurred within hours after IVIG infusion, started to rebound 2 d later, and reached pretreatment levels after 30 d. The serum levels of SC5b-9 complex production were high at baseline but normalized after IVIG therapy. Repeat biopsies from muscles of improved patients showed disappearance of C3b NEO and MAC deposits from the endomysial capillaries and restoration of the capillary network. We conclude that IVIG exerts its beneficial clinical effect by intercepting the assembly and deposition of MAC on the endomysial capillaries through the formation of complexes between the infused immunoglobulins and C3b, thereby preventing the incorporation of activated C3 molecules into C5 convertase. These findings provide the first serological and in situ evidence that IVIG modulates complement attack in a human disease.

References

    1. J Clin Invest. 1985 Oct;76(4):1418-26
    1. J Immunol. 1984 Aug;133(2):855-62
    1. N Engl J Med. 1986 Feb 6;314(6):329-34
    1. Arthritis Rheum. 1986 Mar;29(3):426-30
    1. Arch Intern Med. 1986 Jul;146(7):1365-8
    1. N Engl J Med. 1986 Aug 7;315(6):341-7
    1. J Clin Invest. 1987 Nov;80(5):1492-7
    1. Blood. 1989 Jul;74(1):326-33
    1. J Clin Invest. 1989 Dec;84(6):1974-81
    1. Lancet. 1989 Dec 2;2(8675):1298-302
    1. Ann Neurol. 1990 Apr;27(4):343-56
    1. Blood. 1991 Jan 15;77(2):376-80
    1. Immunology. 1990 Nov;71(3):372-6
    1. BMJ. 1991 Apr 13;302(6781):880-1
    1. Blood. 1991 Aug 1;78(3):700-2
    1. Am J Med. 1991 Aug;91(2):162-8
    1. Am J Med. 1991 Aug;91(2):169-72
    1. N Engl J Med. 1991 Nov 21;325(21):1487-98
    1. Ann Neurol. 1992 Jan;31(1):46-52
    1. Curr Opin Neurol Neurosurg. 1992 Oct;5(5):645-54
    1. Clin Neuropharmacol. 1992 Oct;15(5):327-51
    1. Lancet. 1993 Mar 27;341(8848):789-90
    1. N Engl J Med. 1993 Dec 30;329(27):1993-2000
    1. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1969 Nov;134(2):279-84
    1. J Immunol. 1972 Jun;108(6):1517-25
    1. J Clin Invest. 1981 Mar;67(3):867-77
    1. Lancet. 1981 Jun 6;1(8232):1228-31
    1. J Pediatr. 1985 Nov;107(5):744-6

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren