Abstract
Few pathogens have historically been subjected to as intense scientific and clinical scrutiny as SARS-CoV-2. The genetic, immunological, and environmental factors influencing disease severity and post-infection clinical outcomes, known as correlates of immunity, remain largely undefined. Clinical outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection vary widely, ranging from asymptomatic cases to those with life-threatening COVID-19 symptoms. While most infected individuals return to their former health and fitness within a few weeks, some develop debilitating chronic symptoms, referred to as long-COVID. Autoimmune responses have been proposed as one of the factors influencing long-COVID and the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The association between viral infections and autoimmune pathologies is not new. Viruses such as Epstein-Barr virus and cytomegalovirus, among others, have been shown to induce the production of autoantibodies and the onset of autoimmune conditions. Given the extensive literature on SARS-CoV-2, here we review current evidence on SARS-CoV-2-induced autoimmune pathologies, with a focus on autoantibodies. We closely examine mechanisms driving autoantibody production, particularly their connection with disease severity and long-COVID.
1 Introduction
SARS-CoV-2 has profoundly impacted the lives of the global community since its emergence from Hubei province, China, in late 2019 (, ). This novel beta-coronavirus rapidly spread among humans and animals causing the COVID-19 pandemic. Fortunately, the prompt development of vaccines and extensive immunization efforts significantly reduced the mortality rate following infection. Nonetheless, over seven million deaths have so far been attributed to SARS-CoV-2 (). Despite these medical advances, the incidence of breakthrough infections and vaccine hesitancy among some individuals means that SARS-CoV-2 continues to impose a significant burden on healthcare systems worldwide (–).
While most infected individuals return to their pre-infection health levels, some do not. These individuals continue to experience ongoing and/or new chronic symptoms for months after the initial infection (–). Although diagnostic guidelines remain unclear, these individuals are generally referred to as having post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2, also known as long-COVID patients or long-haulers (–).
Another question that has stymied the scientific community is the highly heterogeneous nature of COVID-19 disease severity (, ). While many individuals experience mild or even asymptomatic infections (, ), others suffer severe infections requiring hospitalization, which can sometimes result in death (, ). Multiple studies have identified independent factors and co-morbidities that increase the likelihood of poor outcomes following infection, such as older age, respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular conditions, obesity, and weak antibody immunity (, ). However, these factors do not account for all severe clinical outcomes following infection. Given this conundrum, some have suggested that SARS-CoV-2-induced autoimmune pathologies may be a contributing factor (–). It has also been hypothesized that autoantibodies are a contributing factor to long-COVID ().
The underlying factors governing the etiology and development of autoimmune responses and disease are not well understood and are believed to have roots in genetics, demographic characteristics (e.g., age and sex), and environmental factors (–). Viruses are considered one of several central exogenous factors able to trigger autoimmunity (). Correlational studies have highlighted close links between certain viruses and the subsequent development of autoimmune pathologies. For example, Bjornevik et al. showed that individuals who seroconverted to Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) had a 32-fold increased risk of being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) (). Other studies have also linked EBV infections to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and other autoimmune pathologies (–). Type 1 diabetes mellitus is another example of a disease with possible linkages to viral infections and autoimmunity. Enteroviruses such as coxsackievirus and rotavirus have been linked with beta-cell autoimmunity (, –). Although multiple mechanisms have been proposed to explain viral-induced autoimmunity, the etiological link remains unclear due to the scarcity of underlying mechanistic evidence.
Here, we review the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and autoimmune pathologies, emphasizing the production of various autoantibody classes. We present current experimental evidence on the presence and induction of these autoantibodies in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and explore potential mechanisms underlying their emergence. Additionally, we address the complexities of establishing causal relationships between autoimmunity and disease processes, situating these findings within the broader context of SARS-CoV-2 disease severity and the evolving clinical picture of long-COVID.
2 Types of autoantibodies detected in SARS-CoV-2 infections
Autoantibodies are immunoglobulins that recognize and bind to self-antigens (e.g., serum proteins, cellular proteins, phospholipids, nucleic acids) (–). These antibodies, which seem to defy tolerance mechanisms, have been detected in many vertebrates including sharks, fish, turtles, mice, and humans (–). Their ubiquitous prevalence suggests a broader role in homeostasis (). Some propose that autoantibodies are important for immune regulation and function, clearance of apoptotic cells, transport and modulation of biologically active molecules, and other physiological processes (). Autoantibodies can differ in isotype and binding properties. Some can bind multiple self-antigens with varying affinities and can be constituted of minimally mutated recombined V(D)J gene sequences, while others have undergone more intense somatic hypermutation resulting in higher affinity autoantibodies (). While these antibodies can occur in healthy individuals without any obvious impact on health, environmental exposures such as viral infections can sometimes trigger the generation of pathogenic autoantibodies or increase existing autoantibodies to pathogenic levels. This section summarizes experimental evidence and describes various potentially pathogenic autoantibodies linked with SARS-CoV-2 infections (Figure 1).
Figure 1
2.1 Anti-nuclear antibodies
Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) are a well-known group of autoantibodies that recognize and bind to antigens within the nuclear compartment (–). These autoantibodies are generally classified into two large groups: (I) antibodies targeting DNA and histones, and (II) antibodies targeting extractable nuclear antigens, including RNA-binding proteins complexed to RNA (, ). Examples of ANA antibodies include anti-dsDNA, anti-histones, anti-Smith antigen, anti-SSA/Ro, anti-SSB/La, anti-Scl70, and anti-Jo-1 (). Their combinatorial presence has been used as laboratory biomarkers for several autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Sjögren’s disease, and systemic sclerosis (, –).
The prevalence of ANA autoantibodies in SARS-CoV-2 infections has been explored by multiple groups. Early in 2020, studies reported ANA seroprevalence in small cohorts of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals that ranged from 34.5% to 54.5% (–). Larger cohorts estimated ANA prevalence at around 35.6% by Gazzaruso et al., around 25% by Lerma et al., and around 57.5% by Sacchi et al. (–). Interestingly, ANA autoantibodies cannot simply be explained by hyperglobulinemia, as they are produced in different proportions to total immunoglobulin levels in plasma (). The notable heterogeneity in seroprevalence of ANA antibodies across studies could be explained by SARS-CoV-2 severity and cohort characteristics. For example, Taeschler et al. observed a higher trend of ANA antibodies in individuals with severe COVID-19 compared to those with milder infections (). Despite numerous seroprevalence studies on ANA, mechanistic studies are limited. Recently, a longitudinal cohort study of 106 convalescent individuals identified ANA antibodies as a predictor of long-COVID (). Interestingly, in another large recent study, the authors found an increased risk of an autoimmune pathology diagnosis after COVID-19 in those with detectable ANA antibodies (64). Nonetheless, it is important to note that ANA antibodies are also found in 14-27% of healthy individuals without symptomatic presentations (65–68). The low predictive value of positive antinuclear antibodies (ANA) requires careful correlation with clinical findings to support an autoimmune diagnosis. Consequently, studies linking SARS-CoV-2 infection with ANA positivity must be interpreted within the context of the study’s healthy control cohorts, the specific assays used, and the established positivity thresholds.
2.2 Anti-cytokine antibodies
Antibodies recognizing various cytokines have been described in the context of viral infections prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (69, 70). Anti-cytokine antibodies (ACA) have been shown to bind a vast array of common cytokines such as IL-1, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, GM-CSF, IFN-α, IFN-γ, and TNF-α (71–80). Interestingly, certain categories of anti-cytokine antibodies have been linked with disease. For example, anti-GM-CSF autoantibodies are believed to be responsible for idiopathic pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (PAP). While primary PAP is caused by a mutation in the GM-CSF receptor, idiopathic PAP is caused by the neutralization of GM-CSF itself (81–83). Anti-cytokine autoantibodies, particularly anti-IFN-γ, have been linked with poor clinical outcomes and increased disease severity in individuals infected with nontuberculous mycobacteria and other opportunistic infections (84–87). These antibodies can effectively neutralize interferon-gamma, leading to poor immune engagement and an overall compromised immune response (84, 88). Immune suppression by ACA has led to their inclusion in the IUIS classification of primary immunodeficiency diseases, commonly referred to as adult-onset immunodeficiency syndrome (AOID) (89, 90). Bastard et al. first reported that in a cohort of 987 individuals with severe COVID-19, 10.2% had detectable levels of autoantibodies against type I IFN. These autoantibodies were not found in individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. The overall seroprevalence of these autoantibodies in healthy individuals was approximately 0.33%, underscoring a significant association with severe COVID-19 (91). These observations have been confirmed by other groups across various demographics (92–96). Anti-IFN antibodies are thought to pre-exist in certain individuals rather than being induced by infection. This highlights their potential to exacerbate common infection severity through IFN neutralization, thereby inhibiting downstream antiviral signaling pathways (91). Other types of ACA have also been identified in severe cases of SARS-CoV-2. For example, Chang et al. used a multiplex protein array to identify antibodies targeting IL-1, -6, -10, -15, -17A, -22, -21, MIP-α, and VEGF-B (). Another group reported similar findings, including IFN-γ, GM-CSF, IL-12p70, IL-17F, and TNF-β, but only found anti-IL-12p70, anti-IL-22, and anti-IL-6 to be neutralizing. Non-neutralizing anti-cytokine antibodies can still have clinical relevance; however, their role in SARS-CoV-2 infection is not well defined. Key questions remain regarding the triggers for their induction and the persistence of ACA levels over time. Additionally, the clinical impact of most ACAs is poorly understood. In the context of long-COVID, there is currently no evidence to suggest that ACAs contribute to the condition.
2.3 Anti-ACE2 antibodies
Intensive research has centered on the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) protein, recognized as the entry receptor for both SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, ACE2 serves as the entry receptor for NL63, a common human alphacoronavirus (97). Given the key role of this protein in viral entry, some hypothesized that auto-reactivity to ACE2 could contribute to severe COVID-19 symptoms (, 98). Building on these questions, several studies examined anti-ACE2 autoantibodies in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. Arthur et al. found that antibodies recognizing ACE2 were detected in 93% of inpatients, and 81% of convalescent controls, but in none of the healthy controls (99). Another study found IgM antibodies to ACE2 in 27.2% of individuals with severe infections but only 3.8% of those with mild disease, similar to the control cohort (4%) (100). Additional studies have documented the presence of anti-ACE2 antibodies (101, 102). However, anti-ACE2 antibodies have not shown significant capacity to inhibit ACE2 enzymatic activity (99, 100). Interestingly, a study demonstrated the induction of anti-ACE2 antibodies following immunization with recombinant RBD in mice (101). While there is evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection can induce anti-ACE2 autoantibodies, the topic remains controversial. For example, Chang et al. did not find elevated anti-ACE2 autoantibodies in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients compared to other autoantibodies (). In a cohort study of 464 individuals, anti-ACE2 IgG autoantibodies were detected in 10.3% of participants, IgA in 6.3%, and IgM in 18.8%, with no association found with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or infection (103). ACE2 autoantibodies are not exclusive to SARS-CoV-2 infection, having been detected in conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, vasculopathy, and rheumatoid arthritis (104–108). The presence and function of anti-ACE2 antibodies in serum remain unclear, with mixed evidence of their association with SARS-CoV-2 infections.
2.4 Anti-phospholipid antibodies
Anti-phospholipid antibodies (APLAs) target phospholipids and phospholipid-binding proteins such as cardiolipin (CL), β2-glycoprotein-1 (β2GP1), and non-classical antigens like prothrombin (PT) and annexin-V (109–113). These autoantibodies are primarily associated with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), a condition characterized by thrombotic events and pregnancy complications (113, 114). While murine models have demonstrated APLA pathogenicity in APS, the underlying etiology remains unclear (115, 116).
Historically, APLAs were first identified in fetuses with congenital syphilis in 1906 and have since been linked to infections such as HIV and HCV (117, 118). COVID-19 coagulopathy shares similarities with thrombotic events observed in both standard and catastrophic APS (119, 120). In early 2020, a case report suggested a potential role for APLAs in severe COVID-19 (121). Subsequent studies have further explored this association. For example, critically ill COVID-19 patients were reported to exhibit elevated levels of APLAs, such as IgA against CL and IgG/IgA against β2GP1 (122).
While several other studies have also highlighted the prevalence of elevated APLAs in COVID-19 patients (, 123–125), Trahtemberg et al., however, found that APLAs associated with increased disease severity of patients with respiratory failure regardless if they were infected by SARS-CoV-2 or not (126). Reports have also correlated APLAs with thrombosis. Helms et al., for instance, identified APLAs in 87.7% of 57 SARS-CoV-2 patients with coagulation abnormalities (127). Supporting evidence from other studies has confirmed similar findings (122, 128).
Mechanistically, Zuo et al. demonstrated that IgG fractions from COVID-19 patients with APLAs induced neutrophil extracellular trap (NET) release in healthy neutrophils and promoted venous thrombosis in mice (129). However, Serrano et al. observed elevated anti-β2GP1 levels in COVID-19 patients but found no association with thrombosis (130). Additionally, some studies reported no link between APLAs and thrombosis (123, 124, 131).The relationship between COVID-19-associated coagulopathy and APLAs remains ambiguous. It is unclear whether these coagulopathies are independent of APLAs, whether APLA prevalence is specific to COVID-19, or if it is simply a feature of severe illness and hospitalization. Uncharacterized APLAs may play a role in these coagulopathies. Notably, baseline APLA levels vary with age and may be influenced by other infections or autoimmune disorders (118, 132, 133).
2.5 Rheumatoid factors
Rheumatoid factors (RFs) are a common class of autoantibodies that recognize and bind the Fc region of IgG immunoglobulins (Figure 1) (134, 135). RFs can be of any isotype and have been described extensively in the context of rheumatoid arthritis but have also been associated with other autoimmune conditions (e.g., SLE, Sjögren’s disease) (136–138). Notably, RFs have also been described in the context of viral infections, such as hepatitis C virus (HCV) (139, 140). Recently, RFs have been linked to COVID-19. In a cohort of 129 individuals, Xu et al. detected RFs in 20% of individuals infected with COVID-19 (141). Other studies have reported a variable RF seroprevalence among COVID-19 patients, ranging from 20% to 50% (141–144). One study found higher rates of death, ICU admission, and mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 patients that were RF-positive, suggesting a link with disease severity (142). Interestingly, another study identified novel polyreactive RFs in COVID-19, with one RF able to bind epitopes on IgG and the spike protein (145). The role of RFs in SARS-CoV-2 infection and recovery remains unclear. Previous research has suggested that RFs may neutralize virus-antibody complexes (146) and enhance viral clearance (147). Additionally, RF-positive B cells have been shown to present antigens to T cells, potentially augmenting cellular immune responses during viral infections (148).These findings raise the possibility that RFs may play a protective role during SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, further mechanistic studies are required to elucidate their exact function.
2.6 Other types of autoantibodies
Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) are a notable class of autoantibodies that recognize peptides containing citrulline, a post-translational modification of arginine (149). ACPAs are strongly associated with autoimmunity and serve as a hallmark marker of rheumatoid arthritis (150–152). Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, a case study reported a potential association between ACPAs and SARS-CoV-2 infection (153). However, subsequent studies have produced mixed results, with some supporting a connection between ACPAs and COVID-19, while others have not found a significant link (154–156).
Another group of autoantibodies relevant to SARS-CoV-2 infections are anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCAs). These autoantibodies are primarily associated with ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) (157). Case reports have documented instances of AAV occurring in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection (158, 159). However, the association of both ACPAs and ANCAs with COVID-19 requires validation through studies involving larger cohorts.
Recent advancements in high-throughput multiplexed approaches have significantly enhanced our understanding of autoantibody prevalence. For instance, human exoproteome display analysis using a yeast library has facilitated the profiling of several hundred potential autoantigens. These techniques have been applied to studies of SARS-CoV-2 infection and long-COVID. Interestingly, Klein et al. utilized these methods to evaluate autoantibodies against thousands of putative self-antigens. They observed no significant differences in autoantibody levels or specific enrichment in individuals with long COVID (160). However, in severe COVID-19 cases, the same approach revealed a broad range of autoantibodies targeting lymphocyte function, cytokines, complement factors, growth factors, cell surface proteins, and more (95). Other high-throughput approaches confirmed that severe SARS-CoV-2 infections induce autoantibodies against a broad array of secreted and non-secreted proteins (, 161, 162). These unbiased assays provide a comprehensive assessment of circulating autoantibody distributions.
3 Mechanisms for autoantibody induction during viral infection
Studies on the prevalence of autoantibodies across various health conditions, including viral infections such as SARS-CoV-2, are relatively common; however, the mechanisms leading to increased self-tolerance breakdown during viral infections remain unclear. In this review, we describe, explain, and discuss the most relevant mechanisms thought to drive autoantibody production and potential pathogenesis in the context of viral infections (Figure 2). These mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, and multiple pathways may contribute to the pool of circulating autoantibodies. While T cells are also crucial in the generation and maintenance of autoantibodies, their role is beyond the scope of this review.
Figure 2
3.1 Natural autoantibodies
Natural autoantibodies are commonly occurring, low-specificity, and polyreactive antibodies found in all vertebrates (, 163–165). These antibodies can occur independently of antigenic encounters and are able to recognize both endogenous and exogenous antigens (, 166, 167). Networks of natural antibodies have been proposed to be remnants of evolution prior to the appearance of specific adaptive immune responses (163, 168). The presence of natural autoantibodies raises critical questions about our understanding of self-tolerance mechanisms. Central and peripheral tolerance mechanisms during B cell development are designed to eliminate autoreactive clones. For instance, in the bone marrow, negative selection of immature B cells upon recognition of self-antigens can lead to B cell receptor (BCR) editing (169). In addition, auto-reactive immature B cells that are unable to rescue a self-reactive BCR may undergo apoptosis by a mechanism known as clonal deletion (170). Despite this, a large number of self-reactive clones persist in the periphery where other tolerance checkpoints are in place such as B cell anergy (171). Nevertheless, the immune system appears capable of maintaining a repertoire of B cell receptors that are polyreactive and can secrete polyreactive immunoglobulins. These are believed to be secreted primarily by B1-cells co-expressing CD5, although other subsets have been reported (172–175). Given this, it is crucial to consider that some of the autoantibodies detected during and after SARS-CoV-2 infection may be natural autoantibodies or could result from the expansion or upregulation of polyreactive B cells already present in circulation due to inflammation or immune system activation during infection. A better characterization of the affinities and rate of somatic hypermutation, as well as identifying B-cell subsets able to generate such autoantibodies is critical to understand if natural antibodies play a key role in SARS-CoV-2 related autoantibodies.
3.2 Molecular mimicry
Molecular mimicry is one of the most widely recognized mechanisms associated with autoimmunity. In its simplest form, it refers to the phenomenon where certain exogenous antigens, such as viral proteins, including those from SARS-CoV-2, share common epitopes with endogenous antigens (, 176–178). Antibodies raised against these regions of high homology can in some cases lead to cross-reactive antibodies that can be pathogenic to the host (179–181). In 1962, the work and observations of Kaplan et al. showed that antibodies against group A streptococci can cross-react with cardiac tissues, leading to the death of an individual due to rheumatic pancarditis caused by a streptococcal infection (182). In the following years, multiple lines of evidence led to the acceptance of molecular mimicry as a mechanism explaining cross-reactive antibodies following infection. In fact, molecular mimicry has been observed with various viruses such as Influenza, Zika, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and others (183–189). For instance, mimicry between EBV nuclear antigen 1 (EBNA1) and the central nervous system protein glial cell adhesion molecule (GlialCAM) has been shown to generate cross-reactive antibodies, which are detected in approximately 25% of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients (190).
Recent computational analyses of structural homology between SARS-CoV-2 antigens and the human proteome have identified several shared epitopes. For example, Kanduc et al. identified several linear hexapeptide epitopes that displayed conserved homology between SARS-CoV-2 proteins and 460 human proteins (191). Other groups, using slightly different approaches, have also reported several SARS-CoV-2 proteins containing regions that can be referred to as “molecular mimicry hot-spots” (192–194). Interestingly, immunization of mice with the receptor-binding domain (RBD) protein, as demonstrated by Lai et al. generated antibodies capable of binding to ACE2, suggesting the presence of cross-reactive epitopes (101). Validation of these findings from animal models in larger cohorts of vaccinated individuals remains to be conducted. Importantly, molecular mimicry is not a binary “all-or-nothing” model; genetic factors, such as HLA haplotypes, and environmental factors, such as infections, can influence antigen processing and peptide presentation (195).
3.3 Anti-idiotype antibodies
Anti-idiotype antibodies are not often discussed in the context of autoimmunity. However, these types of antibodies remain interesting as they could explain, at least partially, some of the autoantibodies detected during SARS-CoV-2 infections. The concept of anti-idiotype antibodies, first introduced by Niels Jerne in 1974, suggests that antibodies generated in response to infection (Ab1) possess an immunogenic component within their variable regions that constitutes the idiotype. This region could then be recognized as an antigen, and as such, new antibodies (Ab2) generated against this region would structurally mimic the original antigen (196). This can hypothetically have ramifications whereby anti-idiotype Ab2 antibodies could bind membrane-bound proteins of the host, form immune complexes, and potentially drive pathogenic effects (197, 198). In the context of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, one can hypothesize that antibodies against the spike protein could represent the Ab1, and newly generated Ab2 antibodies would be able to bind Ab1 antibodies, but also potentially the ACE2 protein. Interestingly, anti-idiotype antibodies have been explored as possible vaccine candidates for infectious diseases and cancer therapies (199–203). Despite this intriguing hypothesis, at the time of writing this review, no experimental evidence has been reported to support this mechanism in the context of SARS-CoV-2.
3.4 Epitope spreading
Epitope spreading (ES) can be described as the broadening of reactive lymphocytes to other antigen/epitopes (204, 205). Epitope spreading can be subdivided into intramolecular ES when reactive lymphocytes are able to react with cryptic, non-presented, non-available, or sub-dominant epitopes (206, 207). In contrast, ES can also occur through the diversification of reactive T and B lymphocytes toward antigens distinct from the initially presented antigen that triggered their expansion, a phenomenon commonly referred to as intermolecular ES. Intermolecular ES is frequently discussed in contexts of tissue damage, whether caused by direct trauma or by tissue destruction through phagocytic and inflammatory mechanisms (208, 209). Several factors influence the magnitude of ES, some of which include the type and intensity of the primary inflammatory process and the magnitude of the tissue damage (210). It is also important to consider that ES can be a normal feature of immunity, allowing for more efficient and diverse adaptive responses (208). While ES has been associated with multiple viruses, whether ES contributes to SARS-CoV-2-related autoantibodies remains inconclusive (, 211). However, tissue damage has been extensively described in severe COVID-19 (212, 213). As such, it is reasonable to suggest that ES is a valid possibility that could explain the generation of some of the autoantibodies identified following SARS-CoV-2 infections.
3.5 Bystander activation
Bystander activation has been proposed as a mechanism that may explain the activation of auto-reactive lymphocytes independently of their BCR/TCR specificity (214, 215). This antigen-independent activation relies on several co-stimulatory signals that decouple the requirement of BCR/TCR signaling with their specific antigen (214, 216). Some of these signaling mediators include ligands (co-signaling receptors, pathogen-associated molecular patterns), cytokines, and chemokines (214, 217–221). These signaling mediators can all occur during infection, resulting in a localized pro-inflammatory environment that can trigger bystander activation of nearby lymphocytes. For example, during primary HIV infection, CD8+ T cells against influenza, EBV, and CMV show markers of activation and expansion in some individuals, despite the absence of cognate antigens (219). Several autoimmune disorders have been associated with bystander activation such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Grave’s disease, and Hashimoto’s thyroiditis (222–225). While direct evidence of bystander activation in SARS-CoV-2 infections is limited, it is well known that severe infections have been correlated with an overall release of pro-inflammatory cytokines (226, 227), which have the potential to initiate bystander activation in some individuals.
3.6 Other proposed mechanisms
In addition to the mechanisms discussed in this review, several other processes may contribute to the generation of autoantibodies. These include direct infection of lymphocytes, the activity of superantigens, and the breakdown of immune tolerance mechanisms (228, 229). It is also important to recognize that polyreactive antibody-secreting cells can positively contribute to antibody-mediated immune responses during infection. For instance, in the context of influenza infections, polyreactive monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have demonstrated increased binding breadth to antigenically drifted and shifted influenza A virus (IAV) antigens (230). Similarly, in HIV infections, two well-characterized broadly neutralizing mAbs were found to be polyreactive and cross-reactive to cardiolipin (231).
4 Possible regulatory roles of autoantibodies
Autoantibodies have also been linked to the relief of inflammatory pathologies, suggesting possible regulatory functions. It is important to consider that autoantibodies may not all be pathogenic, and some may possibly be important features of normal physiology. For example, Sjöwall et al. showed that in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) a reduction of TNFα autoantibodies was linked with disease exacerbation (78). Similarly, another group showed that autoantibodies against type 1 IFN in SLE correlated with lower levels of IFN bioactivity and reduced downstream IFN pathways, which correlated with a lower disease score (77). It is also important to consider the regulatory role of antibodies in the treatment of numerous autoimmune or inflammatory conditions. For example, Guillain-Barré syndrome, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, vasculitis, immune thrombocytopenic purpura, and several others are often treated with intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) (232–234). Anti-idiotype interactions, inhibition of complement deposition, saturation of the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) involved in antibody recycling, and competitive blockade of activating Fc gamma receptors are all non-exclusive mechanisms proposed to explain the effects of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (233, 235). These examples highlight that antibodies, including autoantibodies, can be important in controlling aberrant or excessive inflammatory processes. Whether autoantibodies associated with SARS-CoV-2 are of regulatory importance in viral infections or post-infection physiological processes remains unclear but represents an interesting proposition.
5 Link with disease severity
Research on autoantibodies in individuals infected with or recovering from SARS-CoV-2 has primarily focused on those with severe COVID-19, aiming to elucidate their role in adverse outcomes. As a result, most studies have reported autoantibody presence in hospitalized patients with severe disease, leaving limited data on those with mild or asymptomatic infections. The definitive relationship between autoantibody production and disease severity remains under investigation.
A recent study stratified participants by disease severity, including healthy controls, and found an increased prevalence of autoantibodies—particularly those targeting cardiolipin, claudin, and platelet glycoproteins—with escalating disease severity and advancing age (236). Mechanistically, severe SARS-CoV-2 infections may result in a temporary loss of T cell tolerance. Woodruff et al. demonstrated that severe COVID-19 is associated with the expansion of antibody-secreting B cell populations with low somatic hypermutation, which contract upon recovery, indicating a transient period of reduced selection pressure (229). Similar findings have been observed in acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by bacterial pneumonia, suggesting this phenomenon may represent a physiological response to severe pulmonary infections (229). Recent data from Jaycox et al. suggest that the increase in autoantibodies seen in SARS-CoV-2 infections is not a feature of mRNA vaccinations, suggesting that severe infection may well be the cause (237). While anecdotal reports and small cohort studies have identified autoantibodies after vaccination (238, 239), vaccination remains protective against the development of autoimmune diseases (240, 241).
The underlying mechanisms driving autoantibody production during SARS-CoV-2 infection remain unclear. It is hypothesized that factors such as the intensity of the immune response, inflammation (e.g., cytokine storm), or viral proteins may contribute to their development. Variability in symptom profiles and infection characteristics, such as viral variants, may also influence autoantibody production.
Interestingly, one study highlighted that autoantibodies are not unique to SARS-CoV-2 but are a common feature in critically ill patients with non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infections (242).Anti-cytokine autoantibodies were more prevalent in critically ill patients with non-SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to non-infected critically ill individuals (242). Although baseline levels of anti-cytokine autoantibodies (ACAs) in SARS-CoV-2 patients remain understudied, ACAs are recognized as potential risk factors for severe disease. Future longitudinal studies are needed to quantify the risk of severe COVID-19 associated with pre-existing ACAs and to monitor whether specific ACAs are induced during infection.
6 Interpretation and considerations related to SARS-CoV-2-induced autoantibodies
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the established link between viral infections and autoantibodies with a remarkable volume of literature emerging on this topic. Reaching robust conclusions about the causative factors behind autoantibody production and their physiological roles is challenging due to the wide diversity of study designs (e.g., cross-sectional, longitudinal, retrospective, case reports), laboratory assay methodologies, and the varying characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infections and clinical outcomes (e.g., disease severity, hospitalization, viral variants, therapeutic interventions, vaccination status, and co-morbidities) (Figure 3).
Figure 3
6.1 Interpretation of laboratory assay data
The wide range of validated and in-house assays used to measure autoantibodies results in variability in reporting and interpretation, which often depends on the specific method employed. Taking ANA detection as an example, it has traditionally been performed using indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), which is considered the gold standard method (243). However, the development of alternative methods, such as solid-phase assays and bead-based multiplex platforms, has introduced challenges in standardizing results across different techniques (244). Beyond the challenges of standardization, each experimental system has distinct sensitivity and specificity profiles. While most assays used in clinical settings have been validated, in-house assays are inherently more flexible but their performance more heterogeneous. Therefore, it is essential to carefully select the assay type based on the specific research questions being asked. Furthermore, the choice of thresholds for seroprevalence measurements should be considered when comparing findings across different studies.
6.2 Pathogenicity potential of autoantibodies
The presence of autoreactive antibodies during and after SARS-CoV-2 infection is of significant clinical interest, but whether these antibodies are directly induced by the virus remains unclear. For example, Lebedin et al. demonstrated that some autoantibodies associated with COVID-19 are non-specific, polyreactive IgG. These polyreactive antibodies can interfere with the accurate quantification of target-specific and functionally relevant autoantibodies, which may have greater clinical importance (245). Additionally, the profiles of these autoantibodies before, during, and after infection are becoming increasingly well-characterized, enabling the proposal of distinct autoantibody trajectories (Figure 4).
Figure 4
Observational studies and those with limited control cohorts often cannot establish whether SARS-CoV-2 infection directly triggers autoantibody production. Given the heterogeneity of autoantibodies observed across various diseases, it is plausible that some findings may be unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 infection (246). For cases where a link between SARS-CoV-2 and autoantibodies has been demonstrated, a key question remains: are these autoantibodies induced de novo, or are pre-existing antibodies elevated to higher titers? For instance, Bastard et al. showed that autoantibodies targeting interferons (IFNs), associated with severe COVID-19, were present prior to infection but did not cause symptoms (91). This indicates that such autoantibodies may preexist in predisposed individuals. Further longitudinal studies that assess baseline autoantibody levels are needed to clarify their trajectories over time and elucidate their origins.
It is important to understand that the presence of autoreactive antibodies does not automatically indicate a causal relationship with the onset of autoimmune diseases. Notably, conditions associated with autoimmunity, such as myocarditis, arthritis, vasculitis, and encephalitis, have been reported following SARS-CoV-2 infection (247, 248). Retrospective studies in unvaccinated individuals have confirmed that SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly increases the risk of developing autoimmune disorders (240, 247). One study reported a 42.6% higher likelihood of autoimmune disease in individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 (249). However, no definitive mechanistic studies have linked these conditions to autoantibodies, making it difficult to establish causality.
Despite this, the detection of autoantibodies raises important questions about their clinical significance and their potential utility as biomarkers for disease. Future research should focus on disentangling the pathogenic and non-pathogenic roles of these autoantibodies to better understand their implications in post-infection outcomes.
7 Conclusion
Autoantibodies have been extensively reported in association with SARS-CoV-2 infections, reinforcing the notion that viral infections, are important environmental factors that can induce de novo autoantibody production or amplify existing autoantibody levels. However, there remains a significant gap in our understanding of the precise mechanisms by which these autoantibodies are generated following infection and, more specifically, whether and how they contribute to pathology in the host. It is also plausible that some autoantibodies contribute to regulatory physiological processes during infection or recovery, highlighting their multiple complex roles beyond their known pathogenic effects. Moreover, there is a scarcity of studies exploring therapeutic interventions, such as plasmapheresis or immunosuppressants, specifically targeting these autoantibodies. These gaps in our knowledge represent both challenges and valuable research opportunities. The findings related to SARS-CoV-2 and its association to autoantibodies underscore the complex and intertwined relationship between viral infections and autoimmunity, inviting further exploration into their clinical significance and therapeutic potential.
Statements
Author contributions
YG: Conceptualization, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CC: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. M-AL: Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition.
Funding
The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This study was supported in part by a COVID-19 Rapid Response grant by the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) (VR2-172722) and by a grant supplement by the Canadian Immunity Task Force (CITF) to M-AL. YG holds a Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) Frederick Banting and Charles Best graduate scholarship (CGS-Doctoral) (476885). M-AL holds the Faculty of Medicine Chair of Excellence in Pandemic Viruses and Preparedness Research.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. It was used as a tool for English editing purposes only.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
WuFZhaoSYuBChenYMWangWSongZGet al. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature. (2020) 579:265–9. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3
2
ZhuNZhangDWangWLiXYangBSongJet al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. (2020) 382:727–33. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
3
WHO. COVID-19 dashboard geneva (2023). Available online at: https://covid19.who.int/ (Accessed November 14, 2024).
4
MyersLCLiuVX. The COVID-19 pandemic strikes again and again and again. JAMA Network Open. (2022) 5:e221760–e. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.1760
5
BlumenthalDFowlerEJAbramsMCollinsSR. Covid-19 — Implications for the health care system. New Engl J Med. (2020) 383:1483–8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb2021088
6
FarrenkopfPM. The cost of ignoring vaccines. Yale J Biol Med. (2022) 95:265–9.
7
DuongDVogelL. Canada’s public health system is stretched “dangerously thin. Can Med Assoc J. (2022) 194:E57–E. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1095983
8
PeghinMPaleseAVenturiniMDe MartinoMGerussiVGrazianoEet al. Post-COVID-19 symptoms 6 months after acute infection among hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. Clin Microbiol Infection. (2021) 27:1507–13. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.05.033
9
AugustinMSchommersPStecherMDewaldFGieselmannLGruellHet al. Post-COVID syndrome in non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a longitudinal prospective cohort study. Lancet Regional Health - Europe. (2021) 6:100122. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100122
10
Fernández-de-las-PeñasCPalacios-CeñaDGómez-MayordomoVFlorencioLLCuadradoMLPlaza-ManzanoGet al. Prevalence of post-COVID-19 symptoms in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Internal Med. (2021) 92:55–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2021.06.009
11
CrookHRazaSNowellJYoungMEdisonP. Long covid—mechanisms, risk factors, and management. BMJ. (2021) 374::n1648. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n1648
12
DavisHEMcCorkellLVogelJMTopolEJ. Long COVID: major findings, mechanisms and recommendations. Nat Rev Microbiol. (2023) 133–46. doi: 10.1038/s41579-022-00846-2
13
ProalADVanElzakkerMB. Long COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC): an overview of biological factors that may contribute to persistent symptoms. Front Microbiol. (2021) 12. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.698169
14
WiersingaWJRhodesAChengACPeacockSJPrescottHC. Pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A review. Jama. (2020) 324:782–93. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.12839
15
LamersMMHaagmansBL. SARS-coV-2 pathogenesis. Nat Rev Microbiol. (2022) 20:270–84. doi: 10.1038/s41579-022-00713-0
16
OranDPTopolEJ. The proportion of SARS-coV-2 infections that are asymptomatic. Ann Internal Med. (2021) 174:655–62. doi: 10.7326/M20-6976
17
SahPFitzpatrickMCZimmerCFAbdollahiEJuden-KellyLMoghadasSMet al. Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci. (2021) 118:e2109229118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2109229118
18
ZhouFYuTDuRFanGLiuYLiuZet al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. (2020) 395:1054–62. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30566-3
19
GohKJChoongMCCheongEHKalimuddinSDuu WenSPhuaGCet al. Rapid progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome: review of current understanding of critical illness from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Ann Acad Med Singap. (2020) 49:108–18. doi: 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.
20
NgWHTipihTMakoahNAVermeulenJGGoedhalsDSempaJBet al. Comorbidities in SARS-coV-2 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. mBio. (2021) 12. doi: 10.1128/mBio.03647-20
21
MasonKEMaudsleyGMcHalePPenningtonADayJBarrB. Age-adjusted associations between comorbidity and outcomes of COVID-19: A review of the evidence from the early stages of the pandemic. Front Public Health. (2021) 9. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.584182
22
McMillanPDexhiemerTNeubigRRUhalBD. COVID-19—A theory of autoimmunity against ACE-2 explained. Front Immunol. (2021) 12. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.582166
23
MobasheriLNasirpourMHMasoumiEAzarnaminyAFJafariMEsmaeiliS-A. SARS-CoV-2 triggering autoimmune diseases. Cytokine. (2022) 154:155873. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2022.155873
24
KocivnikN. Velnar T. A Rev Pertaining to SARS-CoV-2 Autoimmune Diseases: What Is Connection? Life. (2022) 12:1918. doi: 10.3390/life12111918
25
AnayaJ-MHerránMBeltránSRojasM. Is post-COVID syndrome an autoimmune disease? Expert Rev Clin Immunol. (2022) 18:653–66. doi: 10.1080/1744666X.2022.2085561
26
SmattiMKCyprianFSNasrallahGKAl ThaniAAAlmishalROYassineHM. Viruses and autoimmunity: A review on the potential interaction and molecular mechanisms. Viruses. (2019) 11. doi: 10.3390/v11080762
27
ArleevskayaMIManukyanGInoueRAminovR. Editorial: microbial and environmental factors in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Front Immunol. (2017) 8:243. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00243
28
RosenblumMDRemediosKAAbbasAK. Mechanisms of human autoimmunity. J Clin Invest. (2015) 125:2228–33. doi: 10.1172/JCI78088
29
BjornevikKCorteseMHealyBCKuhleJMinaMJLengYet al. Longitudinal analysis reveals high prevalence of Epstein-Barr virus associated with multiple sclerosis. Science. (2022) 375:296–301. doi: 10.1126/science.abj8222
30
MoonUYParkSJOhSTKimWUParkSHLeeSHet al. Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus have abnormally elevated Epstein-Barr virus load in blood. Arthritis Res Ther. (2004) 6:R295–302. doi: 10.1186/ar1181
31
DraborgAHJørgensenJMMüllerHNielsenCTJacobsenSIversenLVet al. Epstein-Barr virus early antigen diffuse (EBV-EA/D)-directed immunoglobulin A antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Scand J Rheumatol. (2012) 41:280–9. doi: 10.3109/03009742.2012.665944
32
DraborgAHDuusKHouenG. Epstein-Barr virus and systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin Dev Immunol. (2012) 2012:370516. doi: 10.1155/2012/370516
33
DostálCNewkirkMMDuffyKNPaleckováABosákVCernáMet al. Herpes viruses in multicase families with rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann N Y Acad Sci. (1997) 815:334–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1997.tb52078.x
34
LaitinenOHHonkanenHPakkanenOOikarinenSHankaniemiMMHuhtalaHet al. Coxsackievirus B1 is associated with induction of β-cell autoimmunity that portends type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. (2014) 63:446–55. doi: 10.2337/db13-0619
35
YeungWCRawlinsonWDCraigME. Enterovirus infection and type 1 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational molecular studies. Bmj. (2011) 342:d35. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d35
36
HoneymanMCCoulsonBSStoneNLGellertSAGoldwaterPNSteeleCEet al. Association between rotavirus infection and pancreatic islet autoimmunity in children at risk of developing type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. (2000) 49:1319–24. doi: 10.2337/diabetes.49.8.1319
37
ElkonKCasaliP. Nature and functions of autoantibodies. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. (2008) 4:491–8. doi: 10.1038/ncprheum0895
38
LutzHUBinderCJKaveriS. Naturally occurring auto-antibodies in homeostasis and disease. Trends Immunol. (2009) 30:43–51. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2008.10.002
39
CasaliPSchettinoEW. Structure and function of natural antibodies. In: Immunology of silicones. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (1996).
40
AdelmanMKSchluterSFMarchalonisJJ. The natural antibody repertoire of sharks and humans recognizes the potential universe of antigens. Protein J. (2004) 23:103–18. doi: 10.1023/B:JOPC.0000020077.73751.76
41
GonzalezRCharlemagneJMahanaWAvrameasS. Specificity of natural serum antibodies present in phylogenetically distinct fish species. Immunology. (1988) 63:31–6.
42
HunterKWduPréSASharpTSandmeierFCTracyCR. Western blot can distinguish natural and acquired antibodies to Mycoplasma agassizii in the desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii). J Microbiological Methods. (2008) 75:464–71. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2008.07.022
43
HauryMSundbladAGrandienABarreauCCoutinhoANobregaA. The repertoire of serum IgM in normal mice is largely independent of external antigenic contact. Eur J Immunol. (1997) 27:1557–63. doi: 10.1002/eji.1830270635
44
AvrameasS. Natural autoantibodies: from ‘horror autotoxicus’ to ‘gnothi seauton’. Immunol Today. (1991) 12:154–9. doi: 10.1016/S0167-5699(05)80045-3
45
SiloşiISiloşiCABoldeanuMVCojocaruMBiciuşcăVAvrămescuCSet al. The role of autoantibodies in health and disease. Rom J Morphol Embryol. (2016) 57:633–8.
46
DetanicoTSt ClairJBAviszusKKirchenbaumGGuoWWysockiLJ. Somatic mutagenesis in autoimmunity. Autoimmunity. (2013) 46:102–14. doi: 10.3109/08916934.2012.757597
47
LiHZhengYChenLLinS. High titers of antinuclear antibody and the presence of multiple autoantibodies are highly suggestive of systemic lupus erythematosus. Sci Rep. (2022) 12:1687. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-05807-6
48
HolborowEJWeirDMJohnsonGD. A serum factor in lupus erythematosus with affinity for tissue nuclei. Br Med J. (1957) 2:732–4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.5047.732
49
Irure-VenturaJLópez-HoyosM. The past, present, and future in antinuclear antibodies (ANA). Diagnostics (Basel). (2022) 12. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12030647
50
PisetskyDS. Antinuclear antibody testing — misunderstood or misbegotten? Nat Rev Rheumatol. (2017) 13:495–502. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2017.74
51
KumarYBhatiaAMinzRW. Antinuclear antibodies and their detection methods in diagnosis of connective tissue diseases: a journey revisited. Diagn Pathol. (2009) 4:1. doi: 10.1186/1746-1596-4-1
52
Schulte-PelkumJFritzlerMMahlerM. Latest update on the Ro/SS-A autoantibody system. Autoimmun Rev. (2009) 8:632–7. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2009.02.010
53
HoffmanIEPeeneIMeheusLHuizingaTWCebecauerLIsenbergDet al. Specific antinuclear antibodies are associated with clinical features in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis. (2004) 63:1155–8. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.013417
54
GunawardenaH. The clinical features of myositis-associated autoantibodies: a review. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. (2017) 52:45–57. doi: 10.1007/s12016-015-8513-8
55
GagiannisDSteinestelJHackenbrochCSchreinerBHannemannMBlochWet al. Clinical, serological, and histopathological similarities between severe COVID-19 and acute exacerbation of connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease (CTD-ILD). Front Immunol. (2020) 11. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.587517
56
ZhouYHanTChenJHouCHuaLHeSet al. Clinical and autoimmune characteristics of severe and critical cases of COVID-19. Clin Transl Sci. (2020) 13:1077–86. doi: 10.1111/cts.12805
57
VlachoyiannopoulosPGMagiraEAlexopoulosHJahajETheophilopoulouKKotanidouAet al. Autoantibodies related to systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases in severely ill patients with COVID-19. Ann Rheumatic Diseases. (2020) 79:1661–3. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-218009
58
LermaLAChaudharyABryanAMorishimaCWenerMHFinkSL. Prevalence of autoantibody responses in acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). J Transl Autoimmun. (2020) 3:100073. doi: 10.1016/j.jtauto.2020.100073
59
GazzarusoCCarlo StellaNMarianiGNaiCCoppolaANaldaniDet al. High prevalence of antinuclear antibodies and lupus anticoagulant in patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV2 pneumonia. Clin Rheumatol. (2020) 39:2095–7. doi: 10.1007/s10067-020-05180-7
60
SacchiMCTamiazzoSStobbionePAgateaLDe GaspariPSteccaAet al. SARS-CoV-2 infection as a trigger of autoimmune response. Clin Transl Sci. (2021) 14:898–907. doi: 10.1111/cts.12953
61
ChangSEFengAMengWApostolidisSAMackEArtandiMet al. New-onset IgG autoantibodies in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Nat Commun. (2021) 12:5417. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-25509-3
62
TaeschlerPCerviaCZurbuchenYHaslerSPouCTanZet al. Autoantibodies in COVID-19 correlate with antiviral humoral responses and distinct immune signatures. Allergy. (2022) 77:2415–30. doi: 10.1111/all.15302
63
SonKJamilRChowdhuryAMukherjeeMVenegasCMiyasakiKet al. Circulating anti-nuclear autoantibodies in COVID-19 survivors predict long COVID symptoms. Eur Respir J. (2023) 61. doi: 10.1183/13993003.00970-2022
64
HilemanCOMalakootiSKPatilNSingerNGMcComseyGA. New-onset autoimmune disease after COVID-19. Front Immunol. (2024) 15. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1337406
65
WatanabeAKoderaMSugiuraKUsudaTTanEMTakasakiYet al. Anti-DFS70 antibodies in 597 healthy hospital workers. Arthritis Rheumatism. (2004) 50:892–900. doi: 10.1002/art.20096
66
WandstratAECarr-JohnsonFBranchVGrayHFairhurstA-MReimoldAet al. Autoantibody profiling to identify individuals at risk for systemic lupus erythematosus. J Autoimmunity. (2006) 27:153–60. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2006.09.001
67
LiXLiuXCuiJSongWLiangYHuYet al. Epidemiological survey of antinuclear antibodies in healthy population and analysis of clinical characteristics of positive population. J Clin Lab Analysis. (2019) 33:e22965. doi: 10.1002/jcla.22965
68
Grygiel-GórniakBRogackaNPuszczewiczM. Antinuclear antibodies in healthy people and non-rheumatic diseases - diagnostic and clinical implications. Reumatologia. (2018) 56:243–8. doi: 10.5114/reum.2018.77976
69
KnightVMerkelPAO'SullivanMD. Anticytokine autoantibodies: association with infection and immune dysregulation. Antibodies (Basel). (2016) 5. doi: 10.3390/antib5010003
70
BrowneSKHollandSM. Anticytokine autoantibodies in infectious diseases: pathogenesis and mechanisms. Lancet Infect Dis. (2010) 10:875–85. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70196-1
71
MizutaniHOhmotoYKupperTSShimizuM. Endogenous neutralizing anti-IL-1 alpha autoantibodies in inflammatory skin diseases: possible natural inhibitor for over expressed epidermal IL-1. J Dermatol Sci. (1998) 20:63–71. doi: 10.1016/s0923-1811(98)00074-7
72
TakemuraHSuzukiHYoshizakiKOgataAYuharaTAkamaTet al. Anti-interleukin-6 autoantibodies in rheumatic diseases. Increased frequency sera patients systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheumatol. (1992) 35:940–3. doi: 10.1002/art.1780350814
73
FudalaRKrupaAStankowskaDAllenTCKurdowskaAK. Anti-interleukin-8 autoantibody:interleukin-8 immune complexes in acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome. Clin Sci (Lond). (2008) 114:403–12. doi: 10.1042/CS20070272
74
MeagerAVincentANewsom-DavisJWillcoxN. Spontaneous neutralising antibodies to interferon–alpha and interleukin-12 in thymoma-associated autoimmune disease. Lancet. (1997) 350:1596–7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)64012-3
75
UchidaKBeckDCYamamotoTBerclazPYAbeSStaudtMKet al. GM-CSF autoantibodies and neutrophil dysfunction in pulmonary alveolar proteinosis. N Engl J Med. (2007) 356:567–79. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa062505
76
CzajaCAMerkelPAChanEDLenzLLWolfMLAlamRet al. Rituximab as successful adjunct treatment in a patient with disseminated nontuberculous mycobacterial infection due to acquired anti-interferon-γ autoantibody. Clin Infect Dis. (2014) 58:e115–8. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit809
77
MorimotoAMFlesherDTYangJWolslegelKWangXBradyAet al. Association of endogenous anti-interferon-α autoantibodies with decreased interferon-pathway and disease activity in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. (2011) 63:2407–15. doi: 10.1002/art.30399
78
SjöwallCErnerudhJBengtssonAASturfeltGSkoghT. Reduced anti-TNFalpha autoantibody levels coincide with flare in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Autoimmun. (2004) 22:315–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2004.02.003
79
StrunzBMaucourantCMehtaAWanHDuLSunDet al. Type I interferon autoantibodies correlate with cellular immune alterations in severe COVID-19. J Infect Diseases. (2024) 230:e318–e26. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiae036
80
Saheb Sharif-AskariNSaheb Sharif-AskariFBayramOSHafeziSAlsayedHAHKasimFet al. Salivary autoantibodies to type I IFNs: Mirror plasma levels, predispose to severe COVID-19, and enhance feasibility for clinical screening. Heart Lung. (2024) 66:31–6. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.03.005
81
RosenSHCastlemanBLiebowAA. Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis. N Engl J Med. (1958) 258:1123–42. doi: 10.1056/NEJM195806052582301
82
UchidaKNakataKTrapnellBCTerakawaTHamanoEMikamiAet al. High-affinity autoantibodies specifically eliminate granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor activity in the lungs of patients with idiopathic pulmonary alveolar proteinosis. Blood. (2004) 103:1089–98. doi: 10.1182/blood-2003-05-1565
83
KitamuraTTanakaNWatanabeJUchidaKanegasakiSYamadaYet al. Idiopathic pulmonary alveolar proteinosis as an autoimmune disease with neutralizing antibody against granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor. J Exp Med. (1999) 190:875–80. doi: 10.1084/jem.190.6.875
84
HöflichCSabatRRosseauSTemmesfeldBSlevogtHDöckeWDet al. Naturally occurring anti-IFN-gamma autoantibody and severe infections with Mycobacterium cheloneae and Burkholderia cocovenenans. Blood. (2004) 103:673–5. doi: 10.1182/blood-2003-04-1065
85
DöffingerRHelbertMRBarcenas-MoralesGYangKDupuisSCeron-GutierrezLet al. Autoantibodies to interferon-gamma in a patient with selective susceptibility to mycobacterial infection and organ-specific autoimmunity. Clin Infect Dis. (2004) 38:e10–4. doi: 10.1086/380453
86
PatelSYDingLBrownMRLantzLGayTCohenSet al. Anti-IFN-gamma autoantibodies in disseminated nontuberculous mycobacterial infections. J Immunol. (2005) 175:4769–76. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.175.7.4769
87
IshiiTTamuraAMatsuiHNagaiHAkagawaSHebisawaAet al. Disseminated Mycobacterium avium complex infection in a patient carrying autoantibody to interferon-γ. J Infect Chemother. (2013) 19:1152–7. doi: 10.1007/s10156-013-0572-2
88
KampmannBHemingwayCStephensADavidsonRGoodsallAAndersonSet al. Acquired predisposition to mycobacterial disease due to autoantibodies to IFN-gamma. J Clin Invest. (2005) 115:2480–8. doi: 10.1172/JCI19316
89
Al-HerzWBousfihaACasanovaJLChatilaTConleyMECunningham-RundlesCet al. Primary immunodeficiency diseases: an update on the classification from the international union of immunological societies expert committee for primary immunodeficiency. Front Immunol. (2014) 5:162. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00162
90
BousfihaAJeddaneLPicardCAilalFBobby GasparHAl-HerzWet al. The 2017 IUIS phenotypic classification for primary immunodeficiencies. J Clin Immunol. (2018) 38:129–43. doi: 10.1007/s10875-017-0465-8
91
BastardPRosenLBZhangQMichailidisEHoffmannH-HZhangYet al. Autoantibodies against type I IFNs in patients with life-threatening COVID-19. Science. (2020) 370:eabd4585. doi: 10.1126/science.abd4585
92
GoncalvesDMezidiMBastardPPerretMSakerKFabienNet al. Antibodies against type I interferon: detection and association with severe clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients. Clin Trans Immunol. (2021) 10:e1327. doi: 10.1002/cti2.v10.8
93
TroyaJBastardPPlanas-SerraLRyanPRuizMde CarranzaMet al. Neutralizing autoantibodies to type I IFNs in >10% of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia hospitalized in madrid, Spain. J Clin Immunol. (2021) 41:914–22. doi: 10.1007/s10875-021-01036-0
94
KoningRBastardPCasanovaJ-LBrouwerMCvan de BeekDvan AgtmaelMet al. Autoantibodies against type I interferons are associated with multi-organ failure in COVID-19 patients. Intensive Care Med. (2021) 47:704–6. doi: 10.1007/s00134-021-06392-4
95
WangEYMaoTKleinJDaiYHuckJDJaycoxJRet al. Diverse functional autoantibodies in patients with COVID-19. Nature. (2021) 595:283–8. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03631-y
96
SolanichXRigo-BonninRGumucioV-DBastardPRosainJPhilippotQet al. Pre-existing autoantibodies neutralizing high concentrations of type I interferons in almost 10% of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care in barcelona. J Clin Immunol. (2021) 41:1733–44. doi: 10.1007/s10875-021-01136-x
97
HofmannHPyrcKvan der HoekLGeierMBerkhoutBPöhlmannS. Human coronavirus NL63 employs the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus receptor for cellular entry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. (2005) 102:7988–93. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0409465102
98
TownsendA. Autoimmunity to ACE2 as a possible cause of tissue inflammation in Covid-19. Med Hypotheses. (2020) 144:110043. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110043
99
ArthurJMForrestJCBoehmeKWKennedyJLOwensSHerzogCet al. Development of ACE2 autoantibodies after SARS-CoV-2 infection. PloS One. (2021) 16:e0257016. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257016
100
Casciola-RosenLThiemannDRAndradeFTrejo-ZambranoMILeonardEKSpanglerJBet al. IgM anti-ACE2 autoantibodies in severe COVID-19 activate complement and perturb vascular endothelial function. JCI Insight. (2022) 7. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.158362
101
LaiY-CChengY-WChaoC-HChangY-YChenC-DTsaiW-Jet al. Antigenic cross-reactivity between SARS-coV-2 S1-RBD and its receptor ACE2. Front Immunol. (2022) 13. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.868724
102
Rodriguez-PerezAILabandeiraCMPedrosaMAValenzuelaRSuarez-QuintanillaJACortes-AyasoMet al. Autoantibodies against ACE2 and angiotensin type-1 receptors increase severity of COVID-19. J Autoimmun. (2021) 122:102683. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2021.102683
103
GalipeauYCastonguayNMcCluskiePSSonodaMTKeeshanACollinsEet al. Autoantibodies targeting angiotensin converting enzyme 2 are prevalent and not induced by SARS-coV-2 infection. medRxiv. (2024). 2024.11.18.24317488. doi: 10.1101/2024.11.18.24317488
104
Khajeh PourSScovilleCTavernierSSAghazadeh-HabashiA. Plasma angiotensin peptides as biomarkers of rheumatoid arthritis are correlated with anti-ACE2 auto-antibodies level and disease intensity. Inflammopharmacology. (2022) 30:1295–302. doi: 10.1007/s10787-022-01008-9
105
LabandeiraCMPedrosaMAQuijanoAValenzuelaRGarrido-GilPSanchez-AndradeMet al. Angiotensin type-1 receptor and ACE2 autoantibodies in Parkinson´s disease. NPJ Parkinson's Disease. (2022) 8:76. doi: 10.1038/s41531-022-00340-9
106
TakahashiYHagaSIshizakaYMimoriA. Autoantibodies to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in patients with connective tissue diseases. Arthritis Res Ther. (2010) 12:R85. doi: 10.1186/ar3012
107
MiziołekBSieńczykMGrzywaRŁupicka-SłowikAKucharzEKotylaPet al. The prevalence and role of functional autoantibodies to angiotensin-converting-enzyme-2 in patients with systemic sclerosis. Autoimmunity. (2021) 54:181–6. doi: 10.1080/08916934.2021.1916915
108
MecoliCAYoshidaAPaikJJLinCTDanoffSHanaokaHet al. Presence and implications of anti-angiotensin converting enzyme-2 immunoglobulin M antibodies in anti-melanoma-differentiation-associated 5 dermatomyositis. ACR Open Rheumatol. (2022) 4:457–63. doi: 10.1002/acr2.11423
109
CristianoAFortunatiVCherubiniFBernardiniSNuccetelliM. Anti-phospholipids antibodies and immune complexes in COVID-19 patients: a putative role in disease course for anti-annexin-V antibodies. Clin Rheumatol. (2021) 40:2939–45. doi: 10.1007/s10067-021-05580-3
110
DeeganMJ. Anti-phospholipid antibodies. Am J Clin Pathology. (1992) 98:390–1. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/98.4.390
111
ShoenfeldYTwigGKatzUShererY. Autoantibody explosion in antiphospholipid syndrome. J Autoimmunity. (2008) 30:74–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2007.11.011
112
RauchJD'AgnilloPSubangRLevineJS. Anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPL) and apoptosis: prothrombin-dependent aPL as a paradigm for phospholipid-dependent interactions with apoptotic cells. Thromb Res. (2004) 114:371–82. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2004.08.007
113
Mackworth-YoungCG. Antiphospholipid syndrome: multiple mechanisms. Clin Exp Immunol. (2004) 136:393–401. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2004.02497.x
114
LevineJSBranchDWRauchJ. The antiphospholipid syndrome. New Engl J Med. (2002) 346:752–63. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra002974
115
BranchDWDudleyDJMitchellMDCreightonKAAbbottTMHammondEHet al. Immunoglobulin G fractions from patients with antiphospholipid antibodies cause fetal death in BALB/c mice: A model for autoimmune fetal loss. Am J Obstetrics Gynecology. (1990) 163:210–6. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9378(11)90700-5
116
MasonANMageedRAMackworth-YoungCG. The effects of a human IgM monoclonal anticardiolipin antibody on pregnancy in a transgenic mouse model. Lupus. (2001) 10:289–94. doi: 10.1191/096120301680416986
117
WassermannANeisserABruckC. Eine serodiagnostische Reaktion bei Syphilis. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. (1906) 32:745–6. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1142018
118
UthmanIWGharaviAE. Viral infections and antiphospholipid antibodies. Semin Arthritis Rheumatism. (2002) 31:256–63. doi: 10.1053/sarh.2002.28303
119
CerveraRRodríguez-PintóIEspinosaG. The diagnosis and clinical management of the catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome: A comprehensive review. J Autoimmun. (2018) 92:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2018.05.007
120
SerranoMEspinosaGSerranoACerveraR. Antigens and antibodies of the antiphospholipid syndrome as new allies in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 coagulopathy. Int J Mol Sci. (2022) 23. doi: 10.3390/ijms23094946
121
ZhangYXiaoMZhangSXiaPCaoWJiangWet al. Coagulopathy and antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with covid-19. N Engl J Med. (2020) 382:e38. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2007575
122
XiaoMZhangYZhangSQinXXiaPCaoWet al. Antiphospholipid antibodies in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Arthritis Rheumatol. (2020) 72:1998–2004. doi: 10.1002/art.v72.12
123
BowlesLPlattonSYarteyNDaveMLeeKHartDPet al. Lupus anticoagulant and abnormal coagulation tests in patients with covid-19. N Engl J Med. (2020) 383:288–90. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2013656
124
SiguretVVoicuSNeuwirthMDelrueMGayatEStépanianAet al. Are antiphospholipid antibodies associated with thrombotic complications in critically ill COVID-19 patients? Thromb Res. (2020) 195:74–6. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2020.07.016
125
DevreeseKMJLinskensEABenoitDPeperstraeteH. Antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with COVID&x2010;19: A relevant observation? J Thromb Haemostasis. (2020) 18:2191–201. doi: 10.1111/jth.14994
126
TrahtembergURottapelRDos SantosCCSlutskyASBakerAFritzlerMJ. Anticardiolipin and other antiphospholipid antibodies in critically ill COVID-19 positive and negative patients. Ann Rheum Dis. (2021) 80:1236–40. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-220206
127
HelmsJTacquardCSeveracFLeonard-LorantIOhanaMDelabrancheXet al. High risk of thrombosis in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med. (2020) 46:1089–98. doi: 10.1007/s00134-020-06062-x
128
Gil-EtayoFJGarcinuñoSLaluezaADíaz-SimónRGarcía-ReyneAPleguezueloDEet al. Anti-phospholipid antibodies and COVID-19 thrombosis: A co-star, not a supporting actor. Biomedicines. (2021) 9. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines9080899
129
ZuoYEstesSKAliRAGandhiAAYalavarthiSShiHet al. Prothrombotic autoantibodies in serum from patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Sci Transl Med. (2020) 12. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abd3876
130
SerranoMEspinosaGLaluezaABravo-GallegoLYDiaz-SimónRGarcinuñoSet al. Beta-2-glycoprotein-I deficiency could precipitate an antiphospholipid syndrome-like prothrombotic situation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. ACR Open Rheumatol. (2021) 3:267–76. doi: 10.1002/acr2.11245
131
PrevitaliGSeghezziMMoioliVSonzogniACeruttiLMarozziRet al. The pathogenesis of thromboembolic disease in covid-19 patients: Could be a catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome? Thromb Res. (2020) 194:192–4. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2020.06.042
132
MeroniPLBorghiMO. Antiphospholipid antibodies and COVID-19 thrombotic vasculopathy: one swallow does not make a summer. Ann Rheumatic Diseases. (2021) 80:1105–7. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-220520
133
ManukyanDRossmannHSchulzAZellerTPfeifferNBinderHet al. Distribution of antiphospholipid antibodies in a large population-based German cohort. Clin Chem Lab Med (CCLM). (2016) 54:1663–70. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2016-0014
134
PikeRMSulkinSECoggeshallHC. Serological reactions in rheumatoid arthritis: I. Factors affecting the agglutination of sensitized sheep erythrocytes in rheumatoid-arthritis serum1. J Immunol. (1949) 63:441–6. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.63.4.441
135
IngegnoliFCastelliRGualtierottiR. Rheumatoid factors: clinical applications. Dis Markers. (2013) 35:726598. doi: 10.1155/2013/726598
136
WitteTHartungKSachseCMatthiasTFrickeMKaldenJRet al. Rheumatoid factors in systemic lupus erythematosus: association with clinical and laboratory parameters. SLE study Group Rheumatol Int. (2000) 19:107–11. doi: 10.1007/s002960050112
137
MaślińskaMMańczakMKwiatkowskaBRamspergerVShenLSureshL. IgA immunoglobulin isotype of rheumatoid factor in primary Sjögren's syndrome. Rheumatol Int. (2021) 41:643–9. doi: 10.1007/s00296-020-04782-3
138
MooreSRuskaKPetersLOlsenNJ. Associations of IgA and IgA-rheumatoid factor with disease features in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Immunol Invest. (1994) 23:355–65. doi: 10.3109/08820139409066831
139
BanksSERileyTR3rdNaidesSJ. Musculoskeletal complaints and serum autoantibodies associated with chronic hepatitis C and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Dig Dis Sci. (2007) 52:1177–82. doi: 10.1007/s10620-006-9109-7
140
CharlesEDOrloffMINishiuchiEMarukianSRiceCMDustinLB. Somatic hypermutations confer rheumatoid factor activity in hepatitis C virus-associated mixed cryoglobulinemia. Arthritis Rheumatol. (2013) 65:2430–40. doi: 10.1002/art.38041
141
XuCFanJLuoYZhaoZTangPYangGet al. Prevalence and characteristics of rheumatoid-associated autoantibodies in patients with COVID-19. J Inflammation Res. (2021) 14:3123–8. doi: 10.2147/JIR.S312090
142
JeongHBaekARParkSWKimTChooEJJeonCH. Rheumatoid factor is associated with severe COVID-19. Int J Rheumatic Diseases. (2023) 26:850–61. doi: 10.1111/1756-185X.14647
143
ElghaliMBannourITouilIChanguelMBrahemYJaouedOet al. Increased Rheumatoid Factor production in patients with severe COVID-19. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. (2024) 109:116284. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116284
144
AnayaJMMonsalveDMRojasMRodríguezYMontoya-GarcíaNMancera-NavarroLMet al. Latent rheumatic, thyroid and phospholipid autoimmunity in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. J Transl Autoimmun. (2021) 4:100091. doi: 10.1016/j.jtauto.2021.100091
145
AmjadiMFParkerMHAdyniecRRZhengZRobbinsAMBasharSJet al. Novel and unique rheumatoid factors cross-react with viral epitopes in COVID-19. J Autoimmun. (2024) 142:103132. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2023.103132
146
AsheWKDanielsCAScottGSNotkinsAL. Interaction of rheumatoid factor with infectious herpes simplex virus-antibody complexes. Science. (1971) 172:176–7. doi: 10.1126/science.172.3979.176
147
Van SnickJLVan RoostEMarkowetzBCambiasoCLMassonPL. Enhancement by IgM rheumatoid factor of in vitro ingestion by macrophages and in vivo clearance of aggregated IgG or antigen-antibody complexes. Eur J Immunol. (1978) 8:279–85. doi: 10.1002/eji.1830080412
148
RoosnekELanzavecchiaA. Efficient and selective presentation of antigen-antibody complexes by rheumatoid factor B cells. J Exp Med. (1991) 173:487–9. doi: 10.1084/jem.173.2.487
149
AlghamdiMAlasmariDAssiriAMattarEAljaddawiAAAlattasSGet al. An overview of the intrinsic role of citrullination in autoimmune disorders. J Immunol Res. (2019) 2019:7592851. doi: 10.1155/2019/7592851
150
Girbal-NeuhauserEDurieuxJJArnaudMDalbonPSebbagMVincentCet al. The epitopes targeted by the rheumatoid arthritis-associated antifilaggrin autoantibodies are posttranslationally generated on various sites of (pro)filaggrin by deimination of arginine residues. J Immunol. (1999) 162:585–94. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.162.1.585
151
Rantapää-DahlqvistSde JongBABerglinEHallmansGWadellGStenlundHet al. Antibodies against cyclic citrullinated peptide and IgA rheumatoid factor predict the development of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. (2003) 48:2741–9. doi: 10.1002/art.v48:10
152
WillemzeATrouwLAToesREMHuizingaTWJ. The influence of ACPA status and characteristics on the course of RA. Nat Rev Rheumatol. (2012) 8:144–52. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2011.204
153
PerrotLHemonMBusnelJMMuis-PistorOPicardCZandottiCet al. First flare of ACPA-positive rheumatoid arthritis after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Lancet Rheumatol. (2021) 3:e6–8. doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30396-9
154
DerksenVFAMKisselTLamers-KarnebeekFBGvan der BijlAEVenhuizenACHuizingaTWJet al. Onset of rheumatoid arthritis after COVID-19: coincidence or connected? Ann Rheumatic Dis. (2021) 80:1096–8. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-219859
155
UrsiniFRuscittiPD'AngeloSCacciapagliaFDe AngelisRCampochiaroCet al. Broad clinical spectrum of SARS-CoV-2-associated inflammatory joint disease in adults: a report of 35 cases from the COVID-19 & Autoimmune Systemic Disease Italian study group. Ann Rheumatic Diseases. (2021) 80:1498–501. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-220606
156
LingelHMeltendorfSBillingUThurmCVogelKMajerCet al. Unique autoantibody prevalence in long-term recovered SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. J Autoimmun. (2021) 122:102682. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2021.102682
157
KitchingARAndersH-JBasuNBrouwerEGordonJJayneDRet al. ANCA-associated vasculitis. Nat Rev Dis Primers. (2020) 6:71. doi: 10.1038/s41572-020-0204-y
158
SelvarajVMoustafaADapaah-AfriyieKBirkenbachMP. COVID-19-induced granulomatosis with polyangiitis. BMJ Case Rep. (2021) 14:e242142. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2021-242142
159
UppalNNKelloNShahHHKhaninYDe OleoIREpsteinEet al. De novo ANCA-associated vasculitis with glomerulonephritis in COVID-19. Kidney Int Rep. (2020) 5:2079–83. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2020.08.012
160
KleinJWoodJJaycoxJRDhodapkarRMLuPGehlhausenJRet al. Distinguishing features of long COVID identified through immune profiling. Nature. (2023) 623:139–48. doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06651-y
161
CredleJJGunnJSangkhapreechaPMonacoDRZhengXATsaiH-Jet al. Unbiased discovery of autoantibodies associated with severe COVID-19 via genome-scale self-assembled DNA-barcoded protein libraries. Nat Biomed Engineering. (2022) 6:992–1003. doi: 10.1038/s41551-022-00925-y
162
MatsudaKMKawaseYIwadohKKuranoMYatomiYOkamotoKet al. Proteome-wide autoantibody screening and holistic autoantigenomic analysis unveil COVID-19 signature of autoantibody landscape. medRxiv. (2024). 2024.06.07.24308592. doi: 10.1101/2024.06.07.24308592
163
AvrameasSAlexopoulosHMoutsopoulosHM. Natural autoantibodies: an undersugn hero of the immune system and autoimmune disorders—A point of view. Front Immunol. (2018) 9. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01320
164
BoesM. Role of natural and immune IgM antibodies in immune responses. Mol Immunol. (2000) 37:1141–9. doi: 10.1016/S0161-5890(01)00025-6
165
LeeWGacaJGEdwardsLABraedehoeftSJParkerWDavisRD. Binding of polyreactive antibodies to self versus foreign antigens. Immunobiology. (2002) 205:95–107. doi: 10.1078/0171-2985-00113
166
CoutinhoAKazatchkineMDAvrameasS. Natural autoantibodies. Curr Opin Immunol. (1995) 7:812–8. doi: 10.1016/0952-7915(95)80053-0
167
MaddurMSLacroix-DesmazesSDimitrovJDKazatchkineMDBayryJKaveriSV. Natural antibodies: from first-line defense against pathogens to perpetual immune homeostasis. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. (2020) 58:213–28. doi: 10.1007/s12016-019-08746-9
168
StewartJ. Immunoglobulins did not arise in evolution to fight infection. Immunol Today. (1992) 13:396–9. doi: 10.1016/0167-5699(92)90088-O
169
DuongBHOtaTAoki-OtaMCooperABAit-AzzouzeneDVelaJLet al. Negative selection by igM superantigen defines a B cell central tolerance compartment and reveals mutations allowing escape. J Immunol. (2011) 187:5596–605. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1102479
170
NemazeeD. Mechanisms of central tolerance for B cells. Nat Rev Immunol. (2017) 17:281–94. doi: 10.1038/nri.2017.19
171
CambierJCGauldSBMerrellKTVilenBJ. B-cell anergy: from transgenic models to naturally occurring anergic B cells? Nat Rev Immunol. (2007) 7:633–43. doi: 10.1038/nri2133
172
BaumgarthN. B-1 cell heterogeneity and the regulation of natural and antigen-induced igM production. Front Immunol. (2016) 7. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00324
173
LalorPA. An evolutionarily-conserved role for murine ly-1 B cells in protection against bacterial infections. Autoimmunity. (1991) 10:71–6. doi: 10.3109/08916939108997150
174
BaumgarthN. The double life of a B-1 cell: self-reactivity selects for protective effector functions. Nat Rev Immunol. (2011) 11:34–46. doi: 10.1038/nri2901
175
ZhouZHNotkinsAL. Polyreactive antigen-binding B (PAB-) cells are widely distributed and the PAB population consists of both B-1+ and B-1- phenotypes. Clin Exp Immunol. (2004) 137:88–100. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2004.02511.x
176
RojasMRestrepo-JiménezPMonsalveDMPachecoYAcosta-AmpudiaYRamírez-SantanaCet al. Molecular mimicry and autoimmunity. J Autoimmunity. (2018) 95:100–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2018.10.012
177
KohmAPFullerKGMillerSD. Mimicking the way to autoimmunity: an evolving theory of sequence and structural homology. Trends Microbiol. (2003) 11:101–5. doi: 10.1016/S0966-842X(03)00006-4
178
KanducDStufanoALuccheseGKusalikA. Massive peptide sharing between viral and human proteomes. Peptides. (2008) 29:1755–66. doi: 10.1016/j.peptides.2008.05.022
179
Agmon-LevinNBlankMPazZShoenfeldY. Molecular mimicry in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus. (2009) 18:1181–5. doi: 10.1177/0961203309346653
180
OldstoneMB. Molecular mimicry and immune-mediated diseases. FASEB J. (1998) 12:1255–65. doi: 10.1096/fasebj.12.13.1255
181
WildnerGDiedrichs-MöhringM. Molecular mimicry and uveitis. Front Immunol. (2020) 11. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.580636
182
KaplanMMeyeserianM. An immunological cross-reaction between group-A streptococcal cells and human heart tissue. Lancet. (1962) 279:706–10. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(62)91653-7
183
HeDZhangHXiaoJZhangXXieMPanDet al. Molecular and clinical relationship between live-attenuated Japanese encephalitis vaccination and childhood onset myasthenia gravis. Ann Neurol. (2018) 84:386–400. doi: 10.1002/ana.25267
184
LuccheseGKanducD. Zika virus and autoimmunity: From microcephaly to Guillain-Barré syndrome, and beyond. Autoimmun Rev. (2016) 15:801–8. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2016.03.020
185
LindseyJW. Antibodies to the Epstein-Barr virus proteins BFRF3 and BRRF2 cross-react with human proteins. J Neuroimmunol. (2017) 310:131–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2017.07.013
186
RobinsonWHSteinmanL. Epstein-Barr virus and multiple sclerosis. Science. (2022) 375:264–5. doi: 10.1126/science.abm7930
187
AnayaJ-MRamirez-SantanaCSalgado-CastanedaIChangCAnsariAGershwinME. Zika virus and neurologic autoimmunity: the putative role of gangliosides. BMC Med. (2016) 14:49. doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0601-y
188
LuoGAmbatiALinLBonvaletMPartinenMJiXet al. Autoimmunity to hypocretin and molecular mimicry to flu in type 1 narcolepsy. Proc Natl Acad Sci. (2018) 115:E12323–E32. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1818150116
189
ZhaoZ-SGranucciFYehLSchafferPACantorH. Molecular mimicry by herpes simplex virus-type 1: autoimmune disease after viral infection. Science. (1998) 279:1344–7. doi: 10.1126/science.279.5355.1344
190
LanzTVBrewerRCHoPPMoonJSJudeKMFernandezDet al. Clonally expanded B cells in multiple sclerosis bind EBV EBNA1 and GlialCAM. Nature. (2022) 603:321–7. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04432-7
191
KanducD. From anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses to COVID-19 via molecular mimicryAntibodies (Basel). (2020) 9. doi: 10.3390/antib9030033
192
KhavinsonVTerekhovAKormiletsDMaryanovichA. Homology between SARS CoV-2 and human proteins. Sci Rep. (2021) 11:17199. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-96233-7
193
O'DonoghueSISchafferhansASiktaNStolteCKaurSHoBKet al. SARS-CoV-2 structural coverage map reveals viral protein assembly, mimicry, and hijacking mechanisms. Mol Syst Biol. (2021) 17:e10079. doi: 10.15252/msb.202010079
194
Nunez-CastillaJStebliankinVBaralPBalbinCASobhanMCickovskiTet al. Potential autoimmunity resulting from molecular mimicry between SARS-coV-2 spike and human proteins. Viruses. (2022) 14. doi: 10.3390/v14071415
195
LiblauRGautamAM. HLA. molecular mimicry and multiple sclerosis. Rev Immunogenet. (2000) 2:95–104.
196
JerneNK. Towards a network theory of the immune system. Ann Immunol (Paris). (1974) 125c:373–89.
197
MurphyWJLongoDL. A possible role for anti-idiotype antibodies in SARS-coV-2 infection and vaccination. New Engl J Med. (2021) 386:394–6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcibr2113694
198
ShuklaAKMisraS. Clinical implications of anti-idiotype antibodies in COVID-19. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. (2022) 33:727–33. doi: 10.1515/jbcpp-2022-0123
199
BurdetteSSchwartzRS. Idiotypes and idiotypic networks. New Engl J Med. (1987) 317:219–24. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198707233170407
200
LanierLLBabcockGFRaybourneRBArnoldLWWarnerNLHaughtonG. Mechanism of B cell lymphoma immunotherapy with passive xenogeneic anti-idiotype serum. J Immunol. (1980) 125:1730–6. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.125.4.1730
201
HamblinTCattanAGlennieMMacKenzieMStevensonFWattsHet al. Initial experience in treating human lymphoma with a chimeric univalent derivative of monoclonal anti-idiotype antibody. Blood. (1987) 69:790–7. doi: 10.1182/blood.V69.3.790.790
202
BonaCMoranT. Idiotype vaccines. Annales l'Institut Pasteur / Immunologie. (1985) 136:299–312. doi: 10.1016/S0769-2625(85)80002-7
203
SharpeAHGaultonGNMcDadeKKFieldsBNGreeneMI. Syngeneic monoclonal antiidiotype can induce cellular immunity to reovirus. J Exp Med. (1984) 160:1195–205. doi: 10.1084/jem.160.4.1195
204
PowellAMBlackMM. Epitope spreading: protection from pathogens, but propagation of autoimmunity? Clin Exp Dermatol. (2001) 26:427–33. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2230.2001.00852.x
205
LehmannPVForsthuberTMillerASercarzEE. Spreading of T-cell autoimmunity to cryptic determinants of an autoantigen. Nature. (1992) 358:155–7. doi: 10.1038/358155a0
206
LiNAokiVHans-FilhoGRivittiEADiazLA. The role of intramolecular epitope spreading in the pathogenesis of endemic pemphigus foliaceus (fogo selvagem). J Exp Med. (2003) 197:1501–10. doi: 10.1084/jem.20022031
207
DidonaDDi ZenzoG. Humoral epitope spreading in autoimmune bullous diseases. Front Immunol. (2018) 9. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00779
208
VanderlugtCLMillerSD. Epitope spreading in immune-mediated diseases: implications for immunotherapy. Nat Rev Immunol. (2002) 2:85–95. doi: 10.1038/nri724
209
ChanLSVanderlugtCJHashimotoTNishikawaTZoneJJBlackMMet al. Epitope spreading: lessons from autoimmune skin diseases. J Invest Dermatol. (1998) 110:103–9. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1747.1998.00107.x
210
CornabyCGibbonsLMayhewVSloanCSWellingAPooleBD. B cell epitope spreading: Mechanisms and contribution to autoimmune diseases. Immunol Letters. (2015) 163:56–68. doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2014.11.001
211
MillerSDKatz-LevyYNevilleKLVanderlugtCL. Virus-induced autoimmunity: Epitope spreading to myelin autoepitopes in theiler's virus infection of the central nervous system. Adv Virus Res 56: Acad Press;. (2001) p:199–217. doi: 10.1016/S0065-3527(01)56008-X
212
D’AgnilloFWaltersK-AXiaoYShengZ-MScherlerKParkJet al. Lung epithelial and endothelial damage, loss of tissue repair, inhibition of fibrinolysis, and cellular senescence in fatal COVID-19. Sci Trans Med. (2021) 13:eabj7790. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abj7790
213
SauterJLBaineMKButnorKJBuonocoreDJChangJCJungbluthAAet al. Insights into pathogenesis of fatal COVID-19 pneumonia from histopathology with immunohistochemical and viral RNA studies. Histopathology. (2020) 77:915–25. doi: 10.1111/his.14201
214
PachecoYAcosta-AmpudiaYMonsalveDMChangCGershwinMEAnayaJ-M. Bystander activation and autoimmunity. J Autoimmunity. (2019) 103:102301. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2019.06.012
215
ToughDFBorrowPSprentJ. Induction of bystander T cell proliferation by viruses and type I interferon in vivo. Science. (1996) 272:1947–50. doi: 10.1126/science.272.5270.1947
216
LeeHJeongSShinE-C. Significance of bystander T cell activation in microbial infection. Nat Immunol. (2022) 23:13–22. doi: 10.1038/s41590-021-00985-3
217
Di GenovaGSavelyevaNSuchackiAThirdboroughSMStevensonFK. Bystander stimulation of activated CD4+ T cells of unrelated specificity following a booster vaccination with tetanus toxoid. Eur J Immunol. (2010) 40:976–85. doi: 10.1002/eji.200940017
218
EberlGRBrawandPMacDonaldHR. Selective bystander proliferation of memory CD4+ and CD8+ T cells upon NK T or T cell activation. J Immunol. (2000) 165:4305–11. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.165.8.4305
219
DoisneJ-MUrrutiaALacabaratz-PorretCCcGMeyerLChaixM-Let al. Cytomegalovirus, and influenza virus are activated during primary HIV infection1. J Immunol. (2004) 173:2410–8. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.173.4.2410
220
ChuTTyznikAJRoepkeSBerkleyAMWoodward-DavisAPattaciniLet al. Bystander-activated memory CD8 T cells control early pathogen load in an innate-like, NKG2D-dependent manner. Cell Rep. (2013) 3:701–8. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.02.020
221
KimT-SShinE-C. The activation of bystander CD8+ T cells and their roles in viral infection. Exp Mol Med. (2019) 51:1–9. doi: 10.1038/s12276-019-0316-1
222
PanQLiuZLiaoSYeLLuXChenXet al. Current mechanistic insights into the role of infection in systemic lupus erythematosus. Biomedicine Pharmacotherapy. (2019) 117:109122. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109122
223
QuagliaMMerlottiGDe AndreaMBorgognaCCantaluppiV. Viral infections and systemic lupus erythematosus: new players in an old story. Viruses. (2021) 13. doi: 10.3390/v13020277
224
KobayashiMYasuiNIshimaruNArakakiRHayashiY. Development of autoimmune arthritis with aging via bystander T cell activation in the mouse model of Sjögren's syndrome. Arthritis Rheumatol. (2004) 50:3974–84. doi: 10.1002/art.v50:12
225
McLachlanSMRapoportB. Breaking tolerance to thyroid antigens: changing concepts in thyroid autoimmunity. Endocrine Rev. (2014) 35:59–105. doi: 10.1210/er.2013-1055
226
MontazersahebSHosseiniyan KhatibiSMHejaziMSTarhrizVFarjamiAGhasemian SorbeniFet al. COVID-19 infection: an overview on cytokine storm and related interventions. Virol J. (2022) 19:92. doi: 10.1186/s12985-022-01814-1
227
NeufeldtCJCerikanBCorteseMFrankishJLeeJ-YPlociennikowskaAet al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces a pro-inflammatory cytokine response through cGAS-STING and NF-κB. Commun Biol. (2022) 5:45. doi: 10.1038/s42003-021-02983-5
228
WucherpfennigKW. Mechanisms for the induction of autoimmunity by infectious agents. J Clin Invest. (2001) 108:1097–104. doi: 10.1172/JCI200114235
229
WoodruffMCRamonellRPHaddadNSAnamFARudolphMEWalkerTAet al. Dysregulated naive B cells and de novo autoreactivity in severe COVID-19. Nature. (2022) 611:139–47. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05273-0
230
GuthmillerJJLanLYFernández-QuinteroMLHanJUtsetHABitarDJet al. Polyreactive Broadly Neutralizing B cells Are Selected to Provide Defense against Pandemic Threat Influenza Viruses. Immunity. (2020) 53:1230–44.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2020.10.005
231
HaynesBFFlemingJSt. ClairEWKatingerHStieglerGKunertRet al. Cardiolipin polyspecific autoreactivity in two broadly neutralizing HIV-1 antibodies. Science. (2005) 308:1906–8. doi: 10.1126/science.1111781
232
JollesSSewellWAMisbahSA. Clinical uses of intravenous immunoglobulin. Clin Exp Immunol. (2005) 142:1–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2005.02834.x
233
BergerMMcCallusDELinCS. Rapid and reversible responses to IVIG in autoimmune neuromuscular diseases suggest mechanisms of action involving competition with functionally important autoantibodies. J Peripher Nerv Syst. (2013) 18:275–96. doi: 10.1111/jns5.2013.18.issue-4
234
SiragamVCrowARBrincDSongSFreedmanJLazarusAH. Intravenous immunoglobulin ameliorates ITP via activating Fcγ receptors on dendritic cells. Nat Med. (2006) 12:688–92. doi: 10.1038/nm1416
235
Ben MkaddemSBenhamouMMonteiroRC. Understanding fc receptor involvement in inflammatory diseases: from mechanisms to new therapeutic tools. Front Immunol. (2019) 10. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00811
236
FonsecaDLMFilgueirasISMarquesAHCVojdaniEHalpertGOstrinskiYet al. Severe COVID-19 patients exhibit elevated levels of autoantibodies targeting cardiolipin and platelet glycoprotein with age: a systems biology approach. NPJ Aging. (2023) 9:21. doi: 10.1038/s41514-023-00118-0
237
JaycoxJRLucasCYildirimIDaiYWangEYMonteiroVet al. SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines decouple anti-viral immunity from humoral autoimmunity. Nat Commun. (2023) 14:1299. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-36686-8
238
SacchiMCPelazzaCBertolottiMAgateaLDe GaspariPTamiazzoSet al. The onset of de novo autoantibodies in healthcare workers after mRNA based anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: a single centre prospective follow-up study. Autoimmunity. (2023) 56:2229072. doi: 10.1080/08916934.2023.2229072
239
NingWXuWCongXFanHGilkesonGWuXet al. COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 induces autoantibodies against type I interferons in a healthy woman. J Autoimmun. (2022) 132:102896. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2022.102896
240
PengKLiXYangDChanSCWZhouJWanEYFet al. Risk of autoimmune diseases following COVID-19 and the potential protective effect from vaccination: a population-based cohort study. EClinicalMedicine. (2023) 63:102154. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102154
241
OlivieriBBetterleCZanoniG. Vaccinations and autoimmune diseases. Vaccines (Basel). (2021) 9. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9080815
242
FengAYangEYMooreARDhingraSChangSEYinXet al. Autoantibodies are highly prevalent in non–SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infections and critical illness. JCI Insight. (2023) 8. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.163150
243
MeroniPLSchurPH. ANA screening: an old test with new recommendations. Ann Rheumatic Diseases. (2010) 69:1420–2. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.127100
244
MahlerM. Lack of standardisation of ANA and implications for drug development and precision medicine. Ann Rheumatic Diseases. (2019) 78:e33–e. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-213374
245
LebedinMGarcíaCVSpattLRatswohlCThibeaultCOstendorfLet al. Discriminating promiscuous from target-specific autoantibodies in COVID-19. Eur J Immunol. (2023) 53:e2250210. doi: 10.1002/eji.202250210
246
ShomeMChungYChavanRParkJGQiuJLaBaerJ. Serum autoantibodyome reveals that healthy individuals share common autoantibodies. Cell Rep. (2022) 39:110873. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2022.110873
247
ChangRYen-Ting ChenTWangS-IHungY-MChenH-YWeiC-CJ. Risk of autoimmune diseases in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study. eClinicalMedicine. (2023) 56. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101783
248
MachhiJHerskovitzJSenanAMDuttaDNathBOleynikovMDet al. The natural history, pathobiology, and clinical manifestations of SARS-coV-2 infections. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol. (2020) 15:359–86. doi: 10.1007/s11481-020-09944-5
249
TeschFEhmFViviritoAWendeDBatramMLoserFet al. Incident autoimmune diseases in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a matched cohort study. Clin Rheumatol. (2023) 42:2905–14. doi: 10.1007/s10067-023-06670-0
Summary
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, autoantibodies, ACE2, autoimmunity, long-COVID, post-acute sequelae
Citation
Galipeau Y, Cooper C and Langlois M-A (2025) Autoantibodies in COVID-19: implications for disease severity and clinical outcomes. Front. Immunol. 15:1509289. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1509289
Received
10 October 2024
Accepted
13 December 2024
Published
06 January 2025
Volume
15 - 2024
Edited by
Pei-Hui Wang, Shandong University, China
Reviewed by
Yaping Sun, Yale University, United States
Miriam A. Shelef, University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States
Angel Robles-Marhuenda, La Paz Hospital, Spain
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Galipeau, Cooper and Langlois.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Marc-André Langlois, langlois@uottawa.ca
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.