Multi-omics study reveals different pathogenesis of the generation of skin lesions in SLE and IDLE patients

Le résumé fourni par la source

Lupus erythematosus (LE) is a heterogeneous, antibody-mediated autoimmune disease. Isolate discoid LE (IDLE) and systematic LE (SLE) are traditionally regarded as the two ends of the spectrum, ranging from skin-limited damage to life-threatening multi-organ involvement. Both belong to LE, but IDLE and SLE differ in appearance of skin lesions, autoantibody panels, pathological changes, treatments, and immunopathogenesis. Is discoid lupus truly a form of LE or is it a completely separate entity? This question has not been fully elucidated. We compared the clinical data of IDLE and SLE from our center, applied multi-omics technology, such as immune repertoire sequencing, high-resolution HLA alleles sequencing and multi-spectrum pathological system to explore cellular and molecular phenotypes in skin and peripheral blood from LE patients. Based on the data from 136 LE patients from 8 hospitals in China, we observed higher damage scores and fewer LE specific autoantibodies in IDLE than SLE patients, more uCDR3 sharing between PBMCs and skin lesion from SLE than IDLE patients, elevated diversity of V-J recombination in IDLE skin lesion and SLE PBMCs, increased SHM frequency and class switch ratio in IDLE skin lesion, decreased SHM frequency but increased class switch ratio in SLE PBMCs, HLA-DRB1*03:01:01:01, HLA-B*58:01:01:01, HLA-C*03:02:02:01, and HLA-DQB1*02:01:01:01 positively associated with SLE patients, and expanded Tfh-like cells with ectopic germinal center structures in IDLE skin lesions. These findings suggest a significant difference in the immunopathogenesis of skin lesions between SLE and IDLE patients. SLE is a B cell-predominate systemic immune disorder, while IDLE appears limited to the skin. Our findings provide novel insights into the pathogenesis of IDLE and other types of LE, which may direct more accurate diagnosis and novel therapeutic strategies.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.