Next Article in Journal
Structure-Function of the Human WAC Protein in GABAergic Neurons: Towards an Understanding of Autosomal Dominant DeSanto–Shinawi Syndrome
Previous Article in Journal
Gender-Related Differences in the Correlation between Odor Threshold, Discrimination, Identification, and Cognitive Reserve Index in Healthy Subjects
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Biology
Volume 12
Issue 4
10.3390/biology12040587
biology-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluation of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L in Ocrelizumab-Treated pwMS and Infectious Risk

by
Maria Antonella Zingaropoli
1,*,
Patrizia Pasculli
1,
Matteo Tartaglia
2,
Federica Dominelli
1,
Federica Ciccone
1,
Ambra Taglietti
1,
Valentina Perri
1,
Leonardo Malimpensa
2,
Gina Ferrazzano
2,
Marco Iannetta
3,
Cosmo Del Borgo
4,
Miriam Lichtner
4,5,
Claudio Maria Mastroianni
1,
Antonella Conte
2,6 and
Maria Rosa Ciardi
1
1
Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
2
Department of Human Neurosciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
3
Infectious Disease Unit, Department of System Medicine, Tor Vergata University and Hospital, 00133 Rome, Italy
4
Infectious Diseases Unit, Santa Maria Goretti Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, 04110 Latina, Italy
5
Department of Neurosciences Mental Health and Sensory Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
6
IRCCS Neuromed, 86077 Pozzilli, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Biology 2023, 12(4), 587; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12040587
Submission received: 2 March 2023 / Revised: 4 April 2023 / Accepted: 11 April 2023 / Published: 12 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Neuroscience)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Since B cells have been linked to multiple sclerosis (MS) and its progression as well as T cells, the second-generation anti-CD20 recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody ocrelizumab has been approved for MS treatment. Although ocrelizumab efficiently depletes B cells in peripheral blood, some B cells and CD20 negative plasma cells persist in lymphatic organs, and their survival is regulated by the B-cell-activating factor (BAFF)/a proliferation-inducing ligand (APRIL) system. Moreover, ocrelizumab may result in higher infectious risk. Herein, we investigated plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels and their relationship with infectious risk in ocrelizumab-treated people with (pw) MS at baseline, at 6 months and at 12 months after starting the treatment, comparing the above-mentioned findings with a control group. At baseline, plasma levels of all three cytokines were higher compared to the control group. In pwMS, the longitudinal assessment showed a significant increase in plasma BAFF levels and a significant reduction in plasma APRIL and CD40L. Moreover, when stratifying pwMS according to the onset of an infectious event during the 12-month follow-up period, significantly higher plasma BAFF levels were found at all time-points in the group with an infectious event than in the group without an infectious event. Hence, BAFF may have a role as a marker of immune dysfunction and infectious risk.

Abstract

Background: The anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody ocrelizumab has been widely employed in the treatment of people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). However, its B-cell-depleting effect may induce a higher risk of infectious events and alterations in the secretion of B-cell-activating factors, such as BAFF, APRIL and CD40L. Methods: The aim of this study was to investigate plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels and their relationship with infectious risk in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS at baseline (T0), at 6 months (T6) and at 12 months (T12) after starting the treatment. As a control group, healthy donors (HD) were enrolled too. Results: A total of 38 pwMS and 26 HD were enrolled. At baseline, pwMS showed higher plasma BAFF (p < 0.0001), APRIL (p = 0.0223) and CD40L (p < 0.0001) levels compared to HD. Compared to T0, plasma BAFF levels were significantly increased at both T6 and T12 (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Whereas plasma APRIL and CD40L levels were decreased at T12 (p = 0.0003 and p < 0.0001, respectively). When stratifying pwMS according to the development of an infectious event during the 12-month follow-up period in two groups—with (14) and without an infectious event (24)—higher plasma BAFF levels were observed at all time-points; significantly, in the group with an infectious event compared to the group without an infectious event (T0: p < 0.0001, T6: p = 0.0056 and T12: p = 0.0400). Conclusions: BAFF may have a role as a marker of immune dysfunction and of infectious risk.

1. Introduction

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is one of the most frequent neurological disorders affecting young adults in the world, characterized by widespread presence of inflammatory foci in the central nervous system (CNS) accompanied by focal demyelination and glial scarring in particular in the initial relapsing–remitting phase in which new neurological symptoms occur with or without disability accumulation [1]. Accumulation of focal and diffuse damage in both white and gray matter with progressive disability characterizes the progressive phase of the disease [2,3]. In progressive MS, chronic inflammation persists in both parenchymal and meningeal spaces, being at least partly compartmentalized across a relatively intact blood–brain barrier [4,5]. This phase is associated with neurodegeneration that strengthens over time, thus leading to irreversible tissue damage [6].
The growing understanding of the immunopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS) has led to the development of innovative treatments, and disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have become the gold standard. [7]. According to numerous experimental animal model studies, the chronic inflammation associated with MS was primarily considered a T-cell-mediated process. However, B cells have been linked to MS and its progression as well as T cells [8], and the second-generation anti-CD20 recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb) ocrelizumab has been approved for the treatment of both relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS) and primary progressing MS (PPMS) [7,9,10,11]. It selectively induces B cell depletion, resulting in an immunosuppressive effect [12,13,14,15]. Although ocrelizumab efficiently depletes B cells in blood, some B cells and CD20 negative plasma cells persist in lymphatic organs and the inflamed central nervous system (CNS). Their survival is regulated by the B-cell-activating factor (BAFF)/a proliferation-inducing ligand (APRIL) system. As B cell activation markers, BAFF, APRIL and CD40 ligand (CD40L) have been implicated in the persistence of self-reactive immune responses and may have a proinflammatory role [16,17,18,19,20,21].
The role of B cells in MS is not fully understood. Clinical trials had demonstrated a dual function of B cells in MS. Indeed, B cells have both inflammatory and anti-inflammatory functions in MS. It is generally believed that B cells contribute to MS by producing autoantibodies, expressing inflammatory cytokines and presenting antigens to T helper cells [22]. The anti-CD20 clinical trials in people with MS (pwMS) provide evidence regarding the inflammatory function of B cells [23]. However, drugs targeting the BAFF/APRIL system that have been adopted for the treatment of other autoimmune disorders have, to date, provided unsatisfactory results in MS. Indeed, clinical trials with atacicept, a recombinant fusion protein that suppresses B cell function and proliferation, blocking BAFF and APRIL, increased disease activity in MS, demonstrating that some B cell subsets may have anti-inflammatory functions [24]. Although depleting B cells with anti-CD20 antibodies is effective in treating MS, atacicept treatment, blocking BAFF and APRIL, paradoxically increases disease activity in pwMS. The reason behind the failure of atacicept is not well understood.
Finally, despite its remarkable efficacy, ocrelizumab is associated with an increased risk of infection and reactivation [12,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. Considering the intense B cell depletion induced by ocrelizumab, the aim of this study was to investigate the alterations in B cell activation markers prior to and during ocrelizumab treatment and their relationship with the occurrence of infectious events.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Participants

This study was evaluated and approved by the Ethics Committee of Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome (protocol numbers 130/13 and 353/20). Study participation was conditional upon written informed consent.
As previously described [31], at the Policlinico Umberto I Neuroinfectious Unit, people with MS (pwMS) were evaluated and enrolled. Specifically, in the context of a collaboration between the MS Centre and the Neuroinfectious Unit, all pwMS are evaluated every six months to recognize new or reactivation of latent infections.
MS diagnosis was based on the 2017 McDonald criteria, and pwMS neurological disability was assessed according to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score.

2.2. Sample Collection

As reported in Figure 1, ocrelizumab was administered on a 6-month schedule. To evaluate the plasma levels of B cell activation markers in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS, peripheral blood samples were routinely collected in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes from pwMS at three time-points: before the administration of the first (T0), the second (T6) and the third (T12) ocrelizumab infusions (Figure 1).
No pwMS received corticosteroids or other prescription or non-prescription drugs for at least 2 months prior to the start of ocrelizumab treatment. Finally, peripheral blood samples were also collected at a single time-point from age- and sex-matched healthy donors (HD) for baseline comparison.
Upon withdrawal, all samples were collected and centrifuged at 3000× g for 10 min to separate the plasma component, according to what the World Health Organization recommends [34]. Plasma samples were then stored at −80 °C until use.

2.3. Measurement of Plasma B-Cell-Activating Factors and Immunoglobulin Levels

Plasma levels of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L were assessed via the commercial cytometric bead-based multiplex panel immunoassay (CBA) LEGENDplex™ (BioLegend, San Diego, CA, USA), acquired using MACSQuant (Miltenyi Biotec, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany) and analyzed using FlowJo™ v10.8.1 software. B cell activation markers were expressed as plasma concentration (pg/mL).
As part of routine evaluation, baseline immunoglobulin (Ig) M, IgG and IgA plasma levels were assessed in all pwMS.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Median values with interquartile ranges (IQR; 25th–75th percentiles) were reported for all quantitative data. The statistical analyses were carried out using GraphPad Prism 9. The median comparisons between pwMS and HD and between pwMS subgroups were performed via the non-parametric comparative Mann–Whitney test. Patient characteristics were compared using chi-square for categorical variables. The median longitudinal evaluations were performed via the non-parametric Friedman test. The median comparisons between pwMS and HD were performed via Dunn’s multiple comparison post-test. The correlations were obtained via the Spearman test.
In the analyses, p values below or equal to 0.05 (≤0.05) were considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Demographics and Clinical Characteristics of Study Population

From February 2018 to April 2021, 38 pwMS with RRMS (female/male: 14/24) with median age of 54 (47–61) years and 26 HD (female/male: 13/13) with median age of 52 (46–61) years were enrolled.
Among pwMS, the median time of disease was 11 (6–19) years and the median EDSS value was 5.5 (4.0–7.0). At enrollment, 34.2% (13/38) of pwMS were naïve to MS treatment. Among the non-naïve pwMS, the most common prior DMTs were fingolimod (24.0%), dimethyl fumarate (16.0%), IFN-β (12.0%) and natalizumab (12.0%).
The demographic and clinical characteristics of the ocrelizumab subpopulation are reported in Table 1.

3.2. Evaluation of Plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L Levels

At baseline, significantly higher plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels were observed in pwMS than in HD (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0223 and p < 0.0001, respectively) (Figure 2, Table 2).
At baseline, no differences in plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels were observed between non-naïve and naïve pwMS (BAFF: 739 [491–1257] and 1111 [494–1596], respectively; APRIL: 748 [465–1686] and 649 [321–1357], respectively; CD40L: 1111 [6432–2554] and 1063 [466–1601], respectively). Finally, no association between pre-treatment and infectious events was observed. Indeed, the occurrence of infectious events was 32% (8/25) in non-naïve pwMS and 46.2% (6/13) in naïve pwMS.
In pwMS, plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels were assessed longitudinally throughout T0, T6 and T12. The longitudinal values were then compared to HD. An overview of the plasma level evaluations of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS and HD is reported in Table 2.
The longitudinal evaluation showed a significant increase in plasma BAFF levels at T12 compared to T0 (p < 0.0001), with a steep incremental rise between T0 and T6 (p < 0.0001) and a less marked but significant increase between T6 and T12 (p = 0.0026) (Figure 3A, Table 2). Upon comparison with HD, significant elevations in the plasma BAFF levels of pwMS were consistently observed at both T6 and T12 (p < 0.0001and p < 0.0001, respectively) (Figure 3A, Table 2).
On the other hand, in pwMS, plasma APRIL levels significantly decreased at T12 compared to T0 (p = 0.0003), as well as at T12 compared to T6 (p = 0.0250) (Figure 3B, Table 2). No significant differences in plasma APRIL levels at both T6 and T12 compared to HD were observed (Figure 3B, Table 2).
Likewise, significant decreases in plasma CD40L levels were observed in pwMS at T0 compared to T12 (p < 0.0001), as well as at T12 compared to T6 (p = 0.0124) (Figure 3C, Table 2). Higher plasma CD40L levels were seen in pwMS at T6 compared to HD (p = 0.0035) (Figure 3C, Table 2). No significant differences in plasma CD40L levels at T12 compared to HD were observed (Figure 3C, Table 2).

3.3. Correlation between B Lymphocyte Activation Markers and Immunoglobulin Levels

At T0, correlations between Ig plasma levels and B cell activation markers were investigated in pwMS. Positive correlations were identified between plasma levels of APRIL and IgG (Spearman ρ = 0.3847 and p = 0.0432) (Figure 4A), as well as between plasma levels of CD40L and IgG (Spearman ρ = 0.5348 and p = 0.0034) (Figure 4B).

3.4. Infectious Events and Plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L Levels

During the 12-month follow-up period, 14 pwMS out of 38 developed clinically significant infectious events. The infectious conditions reported included HSV-1 reactivations, recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) and respiratory tract infections (RTIs) (Table 3). In all pwMS that developed infectious events, specific antiviral or antibiotic treatment was required. Hence, the 38 pwMS were stratified in two subgroups: with and without infectious events (Table 3).
In the pwMS subgroups (with and without infectious event), plasma levels of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L were evaluated across the three time-points. In the with infectious event subgroup, significantly higher plasma BAFF levels were observed at all time-points compared to the without subgroup (T0: 1391 [1241–1841] and 576 [427–801] pg/mL, respectively, p < 0.0001; T6: 1782 [1506–2569] and 1162 [807–1794] pg/mL, respectively, p = 0.0056; T12: 2301 [1896–2546] and 1647 [1143–2420] pg/mL, respectively, p = 0.0400) (Figure 5A). Conversely, no significant differences were observed in plasma APRIL and CD40L levels between the two subgroups (Figure 5B,C). Similarly, at baseline, no differences in plasma Ig levels were observed (IgG: 11.3 [7.4–14.6] and 8.9 [8.1–12.3] g/L, respectively; IgA: 2.4 [1.6–3.7] and 2.2 [1.1–2.5] g/L, respectively; IgM: 1.0 [0.7–1.3] and 1.1 [0.8–1.3] g/L, respectively).

4. Discussion

The development of effective DMTs has considerably changed the management of MS with a deep positive impact on patients’ prognoses, annual relapse rates, disability progression and, most importantly, quality of life [7,35,36]. These advancements unraveled over the past three decades and much is yet to be investigated about their long-term effects and possible adverse events through real-life active monitoring and observation [36,37]. Although highly effective, DMTs carry an array of adverse effects [38,39] inducing patients to delay or discontinue MS treatment. Accordingly, the induction of varying degrees of immunosuppression in DMT-treated pwMS has been associated with an increased infectious risk, secondary to newly acquired or latent pathogens [31,40,41,42].
Despite the fact that chronic inflammation associated with MS was primarily considered a T-cell-mediated process, there is increasing evidence of the important role of B cells and humoral immunity in the genesis of demyelinating lesions [43]. Indeed, B cells are implicated in MS pathogenesis [44,45] by producing antibodies against myelin sheaths and axons [10,11]. However, an increased number of studies focused on further potential B cell functions, independently from the antibody–complement pathway, show that these have a relevant role in the production of inflammatory mediators [43] and cytotoxic molecules [46].
Immunotherapy targeting B cell populations has been found to slow disease progression, suggesting the role of B cells in both pathogenesis and progression [11,47]. However, compared with other B cell specific therapies, such as anti-CD20, atacicept targets BAFF and APRIL, cytokines mainly involved in B cell differentiation. Hence, anti-BAFF/APRIL agents do not further deplete B cell subsets as B cell progenitors and memory B cells that may play a substantial role in MS pathogenesis. Furthermore, the targeting of cytokines such as BAFF and APRIL might disrupt regulatory B cell pathways, which, in turn, could modulate T cell responses, thereby creating a proinflammatory environment and leading to an increase in relapses.
Finally, B cells are involved in the response to infections [48,49] and vaccination [50,51]. Thus, in the present study, the B cell activation markers BAFF, APRIL and CD40L were analyzed longitudinally in pwMS treated with ocrelizumab, correlating these findings to the occurrence of infectious events.
At baseline, higher levels of all three cytokines compared with HD were observed. These findings are consistent with previous reports on pwMS as well as reports on several autoimmune and inflammatory states [16,17,18,19,20,52,53,54]. Specifically, DMTs reportedly influence plasma BAFF levels in pwMS, but the significance of these changes remains unclear.
Upon longitudinal evaluation of the cytokine plasma levels in pwMS, plasma BAFF levels significantly increased across all time-points, whereas reduction in plasma APRIL and CD40L were observed. These temporal dynamic patterns may be reconducted to their different roles and activity on various B cell maturation phases [55,56,57]. BAFF specifically induces survival and maturation of naïve B cells, promoting B cell homeostasis [56,58]. During anti-CD20 treatment, the majority of cells that respond to BAFF stimulation are depleted [59]; thus, the increase in plasma BAFF levels could be due to either the lack of cells with receptors for BAFF, especially BAFF-R, or due to a feedback mechanism with the purpose of promoting B cell repopulation [57,60,61,62,63]. Moreover, MS induces a state of constant and intense immunoactivation, which may lead to immune dysfunction and, eventually, premature exhaustion [8,64]. In these conditions, BAFF is involved in the vicious cycle of persistent immunoactivation and may be uncontrollably increased [17]. The increase in plasma BAFF during anti-CD20 therapy has been documented in several reports about Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), Sjögren syndrome and, recently, in MS too [57,60,61,62,63].
On the other hand, as APRIL and CD40L are mostly involved in the antigen-dependent phases of B cell maturation and in the formation and maintenance of germinal centers [55,65,66], their plasma levels are reduced if such processes are blunted by anti-CD20 therapy [62]. Similar reductions in APRIL have also been observed in SLE patients after rituximab treatment [62]. Moreover, in this study, a positive correlation was observed between IgG levels and the plasma levels of APRIL and CD40L, respectively. This finding confirms the involvement of APRIL and CD40L in the germinal center reactions that lead to antibody synthesis, antigen affinity development and Ig isotype switch [66,67,68,69].
Furthermore, the association between B cell activation markers and the infectious risk in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS was evaluated. In the with infectious event subgroup, significantly higher plasma levels of BAFF were observed at baseline, and this incremental trend was retained throughout the first 12 months of treatment, compared to the without infectious event subgroup. This finding may be ascribed to the fact that pwMS with marked BAFF elevations may have more profound immune dysregulation [70,71,72]. Similar findings can be observed in subjects with persistent infections and inflammatory states [67,73]. In individuals suffering from chronic hepatitis B or C, higher plasma levels of BAFF during the acute phase of the disease have been correlated with disease severity, and the increase in B cell activation could promote the development of the dysregulated autoimmune phenomena associated with HCV [67,73]. Additionally, the significant increase in BAFF plasma levels observed in pwMS may be further augmented in the setting of infectious complications [67,74].
The limitations of our study include the lack of longitudinal evaluation of plasma Ig levels in the pwMS cohort. Moreover, prolonging the follow-up could be useful to better understand and potentially confirm our observations in pwMS during ocrelizumab treatment.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS, an increase in plasma BAFF levels and, over time, a reduction in plasma APRIL and CD40L levels are present. Furthermore, pwMS with high plasma levels of BAFF might have a more severe immune dysfunction and an ineffective immune response against community-acquired pathogens. Therefore, in this setting, BAFF might have a predictive role of immune dysfunction and, consequently, increase infection risk in pwMS.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.A.Z., M.I. and M.R.C.; methodology, M.A.Z.; validation, M.I., C.D.B. and M.L.; formal analysis, F.D. and V.P.; investigation, P.P., M.T., F.C. and G.F.; resources, M.T., L.M. and G.F.; data curation, M.A.Z., P.P., M.T., L.M. and G.F.; writing-original draft preparation, M.A.Z., A.T. and F.D.; writing-review and editing, M.A.Z., A.T., F.D., A.C. and M.R.C.; visualization, M.A.Z., A.T. and F.D.; supervision, M.L., C.M.M., A.C. and M.R.C.; funding acquisition, C.M.M., A.C. and M.R.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome (protocol numbers 130/13 and 353/20).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all participants for their participation in this study. Furthermore, this research was supported by the Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases of Policlinico Umberto I, Rome.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Compston, A.; Coles, A. Multiple Sclerosis. Lancet Lond. Engl. 2008, 372, 1502–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Calabrese, M.; Poretto, V.; Favaretto, A.; Alessio, S.; Bernardi, V.; Romualdi, C.; Rinaldi, F.; Perini, P.; Gallo, P. Cortical Lesion Load Associates with Progression of Disability in Multiple Sclerosis. Brain J. Neurol. 2012, 135, 2952–2961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Scalfari, A.; Romualdi, C.; Nicholas, R.S.; Mattoscio, M.; Magliozzi, R.; Morra, A.; Monaco, S.; Muraro, P.A.; Calabrese, M. The Cortical Damage, Early Relapses, and Onset of the Progressive Phase in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 2018, 90, e2107–e2118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Howell, O.W.; Reeves, C.A.; Nicholas, R.; Carassiti, D.; Radotra, B.; Gentleman, S.M.; Serafini, B.; Aloisi, F.; Roncaroli, F.; Magliozzi, R.; et al. Meningeal Inflammation Is Widespread and Linked to Cortical Pathology in Multiple Sclerosis. Brain J. Neurol. 2011, 134, 2755–2771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Machado-Santos, J.; Saji, E.; Tröscher, A.R.; Paunovic, M.; Liblau, R.; Gabriely, G.; Bien, C.G.; Bauer, J.; Lassmann, H. The Compartmentalized Inflammatory Response in the Multiple Sclerosis Brain Is Composed of Tissue-Resident CD8+ T Lymphocytes and B Cells. Brain J. Neurol. 2018, 141, 2066–2082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Mahad, D.H.; Trapp, B.D.; Lassmann, H. Pathological Mechanisms in Progressive Multiple Sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. 2015, 14, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Tintore, M.; Vidal-Jordana, A.; Sastre-Garriga, J. Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis—Success from Bench to Bedside. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 2019, 15, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Liu, R.; Du, S.; Zhao, L.; Jain, S.; Sahay, K.; Rizvanov, A.; Lezhnyova, V.; Khaibullin, T.; Martynova, E.; Khaiboullina, S.; et al. Autoreactive Lymphocytes in Multiple Sclerosis: Pathogenesis and Treatment Target. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 996469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Montalban, X.; Hauser, S.L.; Kappos, L.; Arnold, D.L.; Bar-Or, A.; Comi, G.; de Seze, J.; Giovannoni, G.; Hartung, H.-P.; Hemmer, B.; et al. Ocrelizumab versus Placebo in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 376, 209–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kappos, L.; Li, D.; Calabresi, P.A.; O’Connor, P.; Bar-Or, A.; Barkhof, F.; Yin, M.; Leppert, D.; Glanzman, R.; Tinbergen, J.; et al. Ocrelizumab in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Phase 2, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Multicentre Trial. Lancet 2011, 378, 1779–1787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hauser, S.L.; Bar-Or, A.; Comi, G.; Giovannoni, G.; Hartung, H.-P.; Hemmer, B.; Lublin, F.; Montalban, X.; Rammohan, K.W.; Selmaj, K.; et al. Ocrelizumab versus Interferon Beta-1a in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 376, 221–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Buonomo, A.R.; Viceconte, G.; Calabrese, M.; De Luca, G.; Tomassini, V.; Cavalla, P.; Maniscalco, G.T.; Ferraro, D.; Nociti, V.; Radaelli, M.; et al. Management of Hepatitis B Virus Prophylaxis in Patients Treated with Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis: A Multicentric Italian Retrospective Study. J. Neurol. 2022, 269, 3301–3307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Barkhof, F.; Kappos, L.; Wolinsky, J.S.; Li, D.K.B.; Bar-Or, A.; Hartung, H.-P.; Belachew, S.; Han, J.; Julian, L.; Sauter, A.; et al. Onset of Clinical and MRI Efficacy of Ocrelizumab in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 2019, 93, e1778–e1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Margoni, M.; Preziosa, P.; Filippi, M.; Rocca, M.A. Anti-CD20 Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis: Current Status and Future Perspectives. J. Neurol. 2022, 269, 1316–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Forsthuber, T.G.; Cimbora, D.M.; Ratchford, J.N.; Katz, E.; Stüve, O. B Cell-Based Therapies in CNS Autoimmunity: Differentiating CD19 and CD20 as Therapeutic Targets. Ther. Adv. Neurol. Disord. 2018, 11, 1756286418761697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Avery, D.T.; Kalled, S.L.; Ellyard, J.I.; Ambrose, C.; Bixler, S.A.; Thien, M.; Brink, R.; Mackay, F.; Hodgkin, P.D.; Tangye, S.G. BAFF Selectively Enhances the Survival of Plasmablasts Generated from Human Memory B Cells. J. Clin. Investig. 2003, 112, 286–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Kannel, K.; Alnek, K.; Vahter, L.; Gross-Paju, K.; Uibo, R.; Kisand, K.V. Changes in Blood B Cell-Activating Factor (BAFF) Levels in Multiple Sclerosis: A Sign of Treatment Outcome. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0143393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Samy, E.; Wax, S.; Huard, B.; Hess, H.; Schneider, P. Targeting BAFF and APRIL in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Other Antibody-Associated Diseases. Int. Rev. Immunol. 2017, 36, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Karnell, J.L.; Rieder, S.A.; Ettinger, R.; Kolbeck, R. Targeting the CD40-CD40L Pathway in Autoimmune Diseases: Humoral Immunity and Beyond. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2019, 141, 92–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zahednasab, H.; Siroos, B.; Balood, M.; Aleagha, M.S.E.; Harirchian, M.H. Soluble CD40 Ligand Derived from Serum Is Not Correlated with Early MS. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2017, 14, 29–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gorbacheva, V.; Ayasoufi, K.; Fan, R.; Baldwin, W.M.; Valujskikh, A. B Cell Activating Factor (BAFF) and a Proliferation Inducing Ligand (APRIL) Mediate CD40-Independent Help by Memory CD4 T Cells. Am. J. Transplant. 2015, 15, 346–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Von Büdingen, H.-C.; Bar-Or, A.; Zamvil, S.S. B Cells in Multiple Sclerosis: Connecting the Dots. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2011, 23, 713–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Castillo-Trivino, T.; Braithwaite, D.; Bacchetti, P.; Waubant, E. Rituximab in Relapsing and Progressive Forms of Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e66308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Kappos, L.; Hartung, H.-P.; Freedman, M.S.; Boyko, A.; Radü, E.W.; Mikol, D.D.; Lamarine, M.; Hyvert, Y.; Freudensprung, U.; Plitz, T.; et al. Atacicept in Multiple Sclerosis (ATAMS): A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Phase 2 Trial. Lancet Neurol. 2014, 13, 353–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Weber, M.S.; Buttmann, M.; Meuth, S.G.; Dirks, P.; Muros-Le Rouzic, E.; Eggebrecht, J.C.; Hieke-Schulz, S.; Leemhuis, J.; Ziemssen, T. Safety, Adherence and Persistence in a Real-World Cohort of German MS Patients Newly Treated With Ocrelizumab: First Insights From the CONFIDENCE Study. Front. Neurol. 2022, 13, 863105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ciardi, M.R.; Iannetta, M.; Zingaropoli, M.A.; Salpini, R.; Aragri, M.; Annecca, R.; Pontecorvo, S.; Altieri, M.; Russo, G.; Svicher, V.; et al. Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus With Immune-Escape Mutations After Ocrelizumab Treatment for Multiple Sclerosis. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2018, 6, ofy356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Epstein, D.J.; Dunn, J.; Deresinski, S. Infectious Complications of Multiple Sclerosis Therapies: Implications for Screening, Prophylaxis, and Management. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2018, 5, ofy174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Moiola, L.; Barcella, V.; Benatti, S.; Capobianco, M.; Capra, R.; Cinque, P.; Comi, G.; Fasolo, M.M.; Franzetti, F.; Galli, M.; et al. The Risk of Infection in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Treated with Disease-Modifying Therapies: A Delphi Consensus Statement. Mult. Scler. Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2021, 27, 331–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dudek, M.I.R.; Thies, K.; Kammenhuber, S.; Bösel, J.; Rösche, J. HSV-2-Encephalitis in a Patient with Multiple Sclerosis Treated with Ocrelizumab. J. Neurol. 2019, 266, 2322–2323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Terrault, N.A.; Lok, A.S.F.; McMahon, B.J.; Chang, K.-M.; Hwang, J.P.; Jonas, M.M.; Brown, R.S.; Bzowej, N.H.; Wong, J.B. Update on Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B: AASLD 2018 Hepatitis B Guidance. Hepatology 2018, 67, 1560–1599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Zingaropoli, M.A.; Pasculli, P.; Iannetta, M.; Perri, V.; Tartaglia, M.; Crisafulli, S.G.; Merluzzo, C.; Baione, V.; Mazzochi, L.; Taglietti, A.; et al. Infectious Risk in Multiple Sclerosis Patients Treated with Disease-Modifying Therapies: A Three-Year Observational Cohort Study. Mult. Scler. J. Exp. Transl. Clin. 2022, 8, 20552173211065732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Ciardi, M.R.; Zingaropoli, M.A.; Iannetta, M.; Prezioso, C.; Perri, V.; Pasculli, P.; Lichtner, M.; d’Ettorre, G.; Altieri, M.; Conte, A.; et al. JCPyV NCCR Analysis in PML Patients with Different Risk Factors: Exploring Common Rearrangements as Essential Changes for Neuropathogenesis. Virol. J. 2020, 17, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Prezioso, C.; Ciotti, M.; Brazzini, G.; Piacentini, F.; Passerini, S.; Grimaldi, A.; Landi, D.; Nicoletti, C.G.; Zingaropoli, M.A.; Iannetta, M.; et al. Diagnostic Value of JC Polyomavirus Viruria, Viremia, Serostatus and MicroRNA Expression in Multiple Sclerosis Patients Undergoing Immunosuppressive Treatment. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. World Health Organization. Diagnostic Imaging and Laboratory Technology Use of Anticoagulants in Diagnostic Laboratory Investigations. 2002. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/65957 (accessed on 4 April 2023).
  35. Winkelmann, A.; Loebermann, M.; Barnett, M.; Hartung, H.-P.; Zettl, U.K. Vaccination and Immunotherapies in Neuroimmunological Diseases. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 2022, 18, 289–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. McGinley, M.P.; Goldschmidt, C.H.; Rae-Grant, A.D. Diagnosis and Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis: A Review. JAMA 2021, 325, 765–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Liu, Z.; Liao, Q.; Wen, H.; Zhang, Y. Disease Modifying Therapies in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Autoimmun. Rev. 2021, 20, 102826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kurtzke, J.F. A Reassessment of the Distribution of Multiple Sclerosis. Acta Neurol. Scand. 1975, 51, 137–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kurtzke, J.F. Multiple Sclerosis in Time and Space—Geographic Clues to Cause. J. Neurovirol. 2000, 6 (Suppl. 2), S134–S140. [Google Scholar]
  40. Brück, W.; Gold, R.; Lund, B.T.; Oreja-Guevara, C.; Prat, A.; Spencer, C.M.; Steinman, L.; Tintoré, M.; Vollmer, T.L.; Weber, M.S.; et al. Therapeutic Decisions in Multiple Sclerosis: Moving beyond Efficacy. JAMA Neurol. 2013, 70, 1315–1324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Grebenciucova, E.; Pruitt, A. Infections in Patients Receiving Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Therapies. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2017, 17, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Prezioso, C.; Zingaropoli, M.A.; Iannetta, M.; Rodio, D.M.; Altieri, M.; Conte, A.; Vullo, V.; Ciardi, M.R.; Palamara, A.T.; Pietropaolo, V. Which Is the Best PML Risk Stratification Strategy in Natalizumab-Treated Patients Affected by Multiple Sclerosis? Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2020, 41, 102008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Li, R.; Patterson, K.R.; Bar-Or, A. Reassessing B Cell Contributions in Multiple Sclerosis. Nat. Immunol. 2018, 19, 696–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Pröbstel, A.-K.; Sanderson, N.S.R.; Derfuss, T. B Cells and Autoantibodies in Multiple Sclerosis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 16576–16592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Krumbholz, M.; Meinl, E. B Cells in MS and NMO: Pathogenesis and Therapy. Semin. Immunopathol. 2014, 36, 339–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Lisak, R.P.; Nedelkoska, L.; Benjamins, J.A.; Schalk, D.; Bealmear, B.; Touil, H.; Li, R.; Muirhead, G.; Bar-Or, A. B Cells from Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Induce Cell Death via Apoptosis in Neurons in Vitro. J. Neuroimmunol. 2017, 309, 88–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Montalban, X.; Belachew, S.; Wolinsky, J.S. Ocrelizumab in Primary Progressive and Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 376, 1694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Lam, J.H.; Smith, F.L.; Baumgarth, N. B Cell Activation and Response Regulation During Viral Infections. Viral Immunol. 2020, 33, 294–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Elsner, R.A.; Shlomchik, M.J. Germinal Center and Extrafollicular B Cell Responses in Vaccination, Immunity, and Autoimmunity. Immunity 2020, 53, 1136–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Iannetta, M.; Landi, D.; Cola, G.; Campogiani, L.; Malagnino, V.; Teti, E.; Coppola, L.; Di Lorenzo, A.; Fraboni, D.; Buccisano, F.; et al. B- and T-Cell Responses After SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Receiving Disease Modifying Therapies: Immunological Patterns and Clinical Implications. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 796482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Dominelli, F.; Zingaropoli, M.A.; Tartaglia, M.; Tortellini, E.; Guardiani, M.; Perri, V.; Pasculli, P.; Ciccone, F.; Malimpensa, L.; Baione, V.; et al. Multiple Sclerosis-Disease Modifying Therapies Affect Humoral and T-Cell Response to MRNA COVID-19 Vaccine. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 1050183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Krumbholz, M.; Theil, D.; Derfuss, T.; Rosenwald, A.; Schrader, F.; Monoranu, C.-M.; Kalled, S.L.; Hess, D.M.; Serafini, B.; Aloisi, F.; et al. BAFF Is Produced by Astrocytes and Up-Regulated in Multiple Sclerosis Lesions and Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma. J. Exp. Med. 2005, 201, 195–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Ospina, F.E.; Betancur, J.F.; Suso, J.P.; Muñoz-Buitron, E.; Cañas, C.A.; Tobón, G.J. Role of the Cytokine BAFF in Autoimmune Diseases: Physiopathology and Therapeutic Targets. Rev. Colomb. Reumatol. Engl. Ed. 2016, 23, 177–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Cuellar-Tamez, R.X.; Villarreal-Calderon, J.R.; Rubio-Infante, N.; Castillo, E.C.; García-Garza, M.; Elizondo-Montemayor, L.; García-Rivas, G. Bariatric Surgery-Induced Weight Loss Reduces B Cell Activating Cytokines and IgG Immunoglobulins Related to Autoimmunity. Surg. Endosc. 2021, 35, 5147–5158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Mackay, F.; Schneider, P. Cracking the BAFF Code. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2009, 9, 491–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Ng, L.G.; Mackay, C.R.; Mackay, F. The BAFF/APRIL System: Life beyond B Lymphocytes. Mol. Immunol. 2005, 42, 763–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ho, S.; Oswald, E.; Wong, H.K.; Vural, A.; Yilmaz, V.; Tüzün, E.; Türkoğlu, R.; Straub, T.; Meinl, I.; Thaler, F.; et al. Ocrelizumab Treatment Modulates B-Cell Regulating Factors in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurol. Neuroimmunol. Neuroinflamm. 2023, 10, e200083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Craxton, A.; Draves, K.E.; Gruppi, A.; Clark, E.A. BAFF Regulates B Cell Survival by Downregulating the BH3-Only Family Member Bim via the ERK Pathway. J. Exp. Med. 2005, 202, 1363–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dörner, T.; Radbruch, A.; Burmester, G.R. B-Cell-Directed Therapies for Autoimmune Disease. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 2009, 5, 433–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Seror, R.; Sordet, C.; Guillevin, L.; Hachulla, E.; Masson, C.; Ittah, M.; Candon, S.; Guern, V.L.; Aouba, A.; Sibilia, J.; et al. Tolerance and Efficacy of Rituximab and Changes in Serum B Cell Biomarkers in Patients with Systemic Complications of Primary Sjögren’s Syndrome. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2007, 66, 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lavie, F.; Miceli-Richard, C.; Ittah, M.; Sellam, J.; Gottenberg, J.; Mariette, X. Increase of B Cell-activating Factor of the TNF Family (BAFF) after Rituximab Treatment: Insights into a New Regulating System of BAFF Production. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2007, 66, 700–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Vallerskog, T.; Heimbürger, M.; Gunnarsson, I.; Zhou, W.; Wahren-Herlenius, M.; Trollmo, C.; Malmström, V. Differential Effects on BAFF and APRIL Levels in Rituximab-Treated Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis. Arthritis Res. Ther. 2006, 8, R167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Cambridge, G.; Stohl, W.; Leandro, M.J.; Migone, T.-S.; Hilbert, D.M.; Edwards, J.C.W. Circulating Levels of B Lymphocyte Stimulator in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Following Rituximab Treatment: Relationships with B Cell Depletion, Circulating Antibodies, and Clinical Relapse. Arthritis Rheum. 2006, 54, 723–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Baecher-Allan, C.; Kaskow, B.J.; Weiner, H.L. Multiple Sclerosis: Mechanisms and Immunotherapy. Neuron 2018, 97, 742–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Liu, Z.; Liu, S.; Zhang, Y.; Zeng, W.; Wang, S.; Ji, P.; Pan, M.; Zhu, C.; Wang, Y. Distinct Roles of ICOS and CD40L in Human T-B Cell Adhesion and Antibody Production. Cell. Immunol. 2021, 368, 104420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Tang, Y.C.; Thoman, M.; Linton, P.-J.; Deisseroth, A. Use of CD40L Immunoconjugates to Overcome the Defective Immune Response to Vaccines for Infections and Cancer in the Aged. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2009, 58, 1949–1957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Sakai, J.; Akkoyunlu, M. The Role of BAFF System Molecules in Host Response to Pathogens. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2017, 30, 991–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Datta, S.K.; Kalled, S.L. CD40-CD40 Ligand Interaction in Autoimmune Disease. Arthritis Rheum. 1997, 40, 1735–1745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Aarts, S.A.B.M.; Seijkens, T.T.P.; van Dorst, K.J.F.; Dijkstra, C.D.; Kooij, G.; Lutgens, E. The CD40-CD40L Dyad in Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis and Multiple Sclerosis. Front. Immunol. 2017, 8, 1791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Bornacelly, A.; Mercado, D.; Acevedo, N.; Caraballo, L. The Strength of the Antibody Response to the Nematode Ascaris Lumbricoides Inversely Correlates with Levels of B-Cell Activating Factor (BAFF). BMC Immunol. 2014, 15, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Gasperi, C.; Stüve, O.; Hemmer, B. B Cell-Directed Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurodegener. Dis. Manag. 2016, 6, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Vaknin-Dembinsky, A.; Brill, L.; Orpaz, N.; Abramsky, O.; Karussis, D. Preferential Increase of B-Cell Activating Factor in the Cerebrospinal Fluid of Neuromyelitis Optica in a White Population. Mult. Scler. Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2010, 16, 1453–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Tarantino, G.; Marco, V.D.; Petta, S.; Almasio, P.L.; Barbaria, F.; Licata, A.; Bosco, G.L.; Tripodo, C.; Stefano, R.D.; Craxì, A. Serum BLyS/BAFF Predicts the Outcome of Acute Hepatitis C Virus Infection. J. Viral Hepat. 2009, 16, 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Toubi, E.; Gordon, S.; Kessel, A.; Rosner, I.; Rozenbaum, M.; Shoenfeld, Y.; Zuckerman, E. Elevated Serum B-Lymphocyte Activating Factor (BAFF) in Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: Association with Autoimmunity. J. Autoimmun. 2006, 27, 134–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Biology 12 00587 g001 550
Figure 1. Timeline of ocrelizumab administration and concomitant peripheral blood sample withdrawal in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS. Ocrelizumab was administered within a 0.9% sodium chloride solution and the infusions were performed on a 6-month schedule. The first ocrelizumab dose was subdivided into two separate infusions (300 mg in 250 mL each), administered within a 14-day interval, whereas the subsequent doses were prepared as single infusions (600 mg in 500 mL). EDTA: ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion.
Figure 1. Timeline of ocrelizumab administration and concomitant peripheral blood sample withdrawal in ocrelizumab-treated pwMS. Ocrelizumab was administered within a 0.9% sodium chloride solution and the infusions were performed on a 6-month schedule. The first ocrelizumab dose was subdivided into two separate infusions (300 mg in 250 mL each), administered within a 14-day interval, whereas the subsequent doses were prepared as single infusions (600 mg in 500 mL). EDTA: ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion.
Biology 12 00587 g001
Biology 12 00587 g002 550
Figure 2. Baseline evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS. (A) Comparison of plasma BAFF levels between pwMS compared to HD. (B) Comparison of plasma APRIL levels in pwMS compared to HD. (C) Comparison of plasma CD40L levels at T0 in pwMS compared to HD. The non-parametric comparative Mann–Whitney test was used to compare medians between pwMS and HD. BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; pwMS: people with MS; HD: healthy donors. **: p < 0.01; ****: p < 0.0001.
Figure 2. Baseline evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS. (A) Comparison of plasma BAFF levels between pwMS compared to HD. (B) Comparison of plasma APRIL levels in pwMS compared to HD. (C) Comparison of plasma CD40L levels at T0 in pwMS compared to HD. The non-parametric comparative Mann–Whitney test was used to compare medians between pwMS and HD. BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; pwMS: people with MS; HD: healthy donors. **: p < 0.01; ****: p < 0.0001.
Biology 12 00587 g002
Biology 12 00587 g003 550
Figure 3. Longitudinal evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS and comparison with HD. (A) Longitudinal evaluation of plasma BAFF levels at T0, T6 and T12 in pwMS, as well as comparison with HD. (B) Longitudinal evaluation of plasma APRIL levels at the three time-points in pwMS, as well as comparison with HD. (C) Longitudinal evaluation of plasma CD40L levels at T0, T6 and T12 in pwMS, as well as comparison with HD. BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; pwMS: people with MS; HD: healthy donors; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001.
Figure 3. Longitudinal evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS and comparison with HD. (A) Longitudinal evaluation of plasma BAFF levels at T0, T6 and T12 in pwMS, as well as comparison with HD. (B) Longitudinal evaluation of plasma APRIL levels at the three time-points in pwMS, as well as comparison with HD. (C) Longitudinal evaluation of plasma CD40L levels at T0, T6 and T12 in pwMS, as well as comparison with HD. BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; pwMS: people with MS; HD: healthy donors; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001.
Biology 12 00587 g003
Biology 12 00587 g004 550
Figure 4. Correlations between plasma IgG and APRIL and CD40L levels. (A) Positive correlation between APRIL and IgG plasma levels. Linear correlation was evaluated by using the regression test, R2 = 0.2285 p = 0.0101. (B) Positive correlation between plasma CD40L and IgG levels. Linear correlation was evaluated by using the regression test, R2 = 0.1975 p = 0.0178. All correlations were performed using the Spearman test. The Spearman coefficient (ρ) and statistical significance (p) are reported in the graphics. IgG: immunoglobulin G; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand.
Figure 4. Correlations between plasma IgG and APRIL and CD40L levels. (A) Positive correlation between APRIL and IgG plasma levels. Linear correlation was evaluated by using the regression test, R2 = 0.2285 p = 0.0101. (B) Positive correlation between plasma CD40L and IgG levels. Linear correlation was evaluated by using the regression test, R2 = 0.1975 p = 0.0178. All correlations were performed using the Spearman test. The Spearman coefficient (ρ) and statistical significance (p) are reported in the graphics. IgG: immunoglobulin G; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand.
Biology 12 00587 g004
Biology 12 00587 g005 550
Figure 5. Evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS stratified according to the occurrence of infectious event. (A) Evaluation of plasma BAFF levels at T0, T6 and T12 between the with and without infectious event subgroups. (B) Evaluation of plasma APRIL levels at T0, T6 and T12 between the with and without infectious event subgroups. (C) Evaluation of plasma CD40L levels at T0, T6 and T12 between the with and without infectious event subgroups. BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; pwMS: people with MS; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; **** p < 0.0001.
Figure 5. Evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS stratified according to the occurrence of infectious event. (A) Evaluation of plasma BAFF levels at T0, T6 and T12 between the with and without infectious event subgroups. (B) Evaluation of plasma APRIL levels at T0, T6 and T12 between the with and without infectious event subgroups. (C) Evaluation of plasma CD40L levels at T0, T6 and T12 between the with and without infectious event subgroups. BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; pwMS: people with MS; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; **** p < 0.0001.
Biology 12 00587 g005
Table
Table 1. Clinical and demographic features of enrolled pwMS.
Table 1. Clinical and demographic features of enrolled pwMS.
pwMS (n = 38)
Female/Male14/24
Age, median (IQR)54 (47–61)
Years of disease, median (IQR)11 (6–19)
EDSS, median (IQR)5.5 (4.0–7.0)
Prior treatment
alemtuzumab1
azathioprine2
daclizumab1
dimethyl fumarate4
fingolimod6
glatiramer acetate2
IFN-β3
natalizumab3
rituximab1
teriflunomide2
none13
Plasma Ig levels
IgG (g/L)5.8 (2.8–10.5)
IgA (g/L)2.0 (1.6–2.7)
IgM (g/L)0.9 (0.8–1.2)
IQR: interquartile range; EDSS: Expanded Disability Status Scale; pwMS: people with MS; IFN-β: interferon-βeta; Ig: immunoglobulin.
Table
Table 2. Longitudinal evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS and comparison HD.
Table 2. Longitudinal evaluation of plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels in pwMS and comparison HD.
pwMS HD
T0T6T12p § p †p ††p †††
BAFF (pg/mL)781 (495–1288)1462 (1060–2011)1891 (1506–2497)<0.0001494 (211–611)0.0073<0.0001<0.0001
APRIL (pg/mL)724 (443–1548)642 (407–919)383 (319–791)0.0004477 (303–751)0.0223nsns
CD40L (pg/mL)1087 (519–2281)965 (474–1781)665.50 (298–1599)<0.0001417 (298–724)0.00020.0035ns
Plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L levels were longitudinally evaluated in pwMS at T0, T6 and T12. §: The non-parametric comparative Friedman test was used to compare medians between T0, T6 and T12. The longitudinal plasma BAFF, APRIL and CD40L values of pwMS were compared to the levels displayed by HD. †: Dunn’s multiple comparison post-test was used for comparing medians between T0 and HD; ††: Dunn’s multiple comparison post-test was used for comparing medians between T6 and HD; †††: Dunn’s multiple comparison post-test was used for comparing medians between T12 and HD. pwMS: people with MS; HD: healthy donors; BAFF: B-cell-activating factor; APRIL: a proliferation-inducing ligand; CD40L: CD40 ligand; T0: before first infusion; T6: before second infusion; T12: before third infusion.
Table
Table 3. Clinical and demographic features of pwMS stratified according to the occurrence of infectious event.
Table 3. Clinical and demographic features of pwMS stratified according to the occurrence of infectious event.
pwMS (n = 38)
With Infectious Event (n = 14)Without Infectious Event (n = 24)
Female/Male3/1111/13
Age, median years [IQR]60 (50–65)51 (47–56)
Years of disease, median (IQR)17 (11–23)9 (5–14)
EDSS, median (IQR)6.5 (5.5–7)5 (3–6)
Infectious event:
HSV-1 reactivation2-
UTIs9-
RTIs5-
Antiviral/antibiotic treatment14-
IQR: interquartile range; pwMS: people with MS; EDSS: Expanded Disability Status Scale; HSV-1: Herpes simplex virus 1; UTIs: urinary tract infections; RTIs: respiratory tract infections.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zingaropoli, M.A.; Pasculli, P.; Tartaglia, M.; Dominelli, F.; Ciccone, F.; Taglietti, A.; Perri, V.; Malimpensa, L.; Ferrazzano, G.; Iannetta, M.; et al. Evaluation of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L in Ocrelizumab-Treated pwMS and Infectious Risk. Biology 2023, 12, 587. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12040587

AMA Style

Zingaropoli MA, Pasculli P, Tartaglia M, Dominelli F, Ciccone F, Taglietti A, Perri V, Malimpensa L, Ferrazzano G, Iannetta M, et al. Evaluation of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L in Ocrelizumab-Treated pwMS and Infectious Risk. Biology. 2023; 12(4):587. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12040587

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zingaropoli, Maria Antonella, Patrizia Pasculli, Matteo Tartaglia, Federica Dominelli, Federica Ciccone, Ambra Taglietti, Valentina Perri, Leonardo Malimpensa, Gina Ferrazzano, Marco Iannetta, and et al. 2023. "Evaluation of BAFF, APRIL and CD40L in Ocrelizumab-Treated pwMS and Infectious Risk" Biology 12, no. 4: 587. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12040587

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop