Differential expression of interferon‐induced genes and other tissue‐based biomarkers in acute graft‐versus‐host disease vs. lupus erythematosus in skin

• Published in: Clinical and experimental dermatology Vol. 44; no. 4; pp. e81 - e88
• Main Authors: Lehman, J. S., Dasari, S., Damodaran, S. S., el‐Azhary, R. A., Gibson, L. E., Hashmi, S. K., Hogan, W. J., Kenderian, S. J., Patnaik, M. S., Litzow, M. R., Lazarus, H. M., Meves, A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Oxford University Press 01.06.2019
• Subjects: Acute Disease; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antigen presentation; Biomarkers; Cytokines - metabolism; Feasibility studies; Female; Gene expression; Gene Expression - genetics; Graft vs Host Disease - metabolism; Graft vs Host Disease - pathology; Graft-versus-host reaction; Humans; Inflammation; Interferon; Interferons - genetics; Lupus; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic - metabolism; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic - pathology; Male; Middle Aged; Myxovirus resistance proteins; Regression analysis; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction - methods; Reverse transcription; Skin Diseases - pathology; Stat3 protein; Systemic lupus erythematosus
• ISSN: 0307-6938; 1365-2230
• DOI: 10.1111/ced.13759

Summary Background In both acute graft‐versus‐host disease (GVHD) and lupus erythematosus (LE), the patient's own tissues are subjected to immunological assault via complex mechanisms influenced by interferon (IFN) and other cytokines. Although not typically confused clinically, these entities have overlapping histopathological findings in the skin. Aim To assess whether GVHD can be differentiated from LE using molecular methods on skin specimens. Methods We developed a quantitative reverse transcription PCR assay based on previously identified tissue‐based biomarkers of cutaneous GVHD, and compared gene expression in GVHD with that in LE. Results Both entities showed robust expression of IFN‐induced genes and of genes encoding proteins involved in antigen presentation, cell signalling and tissue repair. Levels of gene expression differed significantly in GVHD compared with LE, particularly those of IFN‐induced genes such as MX1, OAS3, TAP1 and STAT3 (P < 0.01). Three logistic regression models could differentiate the two entities with a high degree of certainty (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 1.0). Conclusion The study demonstrates the feasibility of distinguishing between microscopically similar inflammatory dermatoses using tissue‐based molecular techniques.