Siglec‐1, an easy and contributory inflammation marker in rheumatology

Valentina Boz,Alessandra Tesser,Francesca Burlo,Nicola Donadel,Serena Pastore,Alessandro Amaddeo,Francesca Vittoria,Matteo Padovan,Marianna Di Rosa,Alberto Tommasini,Erica Valencic
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cti2.1520
2024-06-27
Clinical & Translational Immunology
Abstract:In this study, we found that Siglec‐1 expression on monocytes correlates with the interferon score. In our setting, Siglec‐1 expression can reveal interferon inflammation in rheumatological disorders and in infections, even with normal erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C‐reactive protein. Moreover, we highlighted, with in vitro studies, the significance of percentage of positive cells compared with median fluorescence intensity of Siglec‐1. Objectives Inflammatory markers such as erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C‐reactive protein (CRP) are poorly informative about interferon (IFN)‐related disorders. In these conditions, the measure of the interferon score (IS), obtained by measuring the expression of IFN‐stimulated genes, has been proposed. Flow cytometry‐based assays measuring sialic‐acid‐binding Ig‐like lectin 1 (Siglec‐1) expression could be a more practical tool for evaluating IFN‐inflammation. The study compared Siglec‐1 measures with IS and other inflammatory indexes. We compared Siglec‐1 measures with IS and other inflammatory indexes in real‐world paediatric rheumatology experience. Methods We recruited patients with immuno‐rheumatological conditions, acute infectious illness and patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery as controls. Siglec‐1 expression was measured in all samples, and IS, ESR and CRP were also recorded if available. Results Overall, 98 subjects were enrolled in the study, with a total of 104 measures of Siglec‐1. Compared with IS, Siglec‐1 expression showed good accuracy (86.0%), specificity (72.7%) and sensitivity (85.7%). The measure of the percentage of Siglec‐1‐positive cells performed best at low levels of IFN‐inflammation, while the measure of mean fluorescence intensity performed best at higher levels. Ex vivo studies on IFN‐stimulated monocytes confirmed this behaviour. There was no link between Siglec‐1 expression and either ESR or CRP, and positive Siglec‐1 results were found even when ESR and CRP were normal. A high Siglec‐1 expression was also recorded in subjects with acute infections. Conclusion Siglec‐1 measurement by flow cytometry is an easy tool to detect IFN‐related inflammation, even in subjects with normal results of common inflammation indexes.
immunology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?