POS0370 TYPE I INTERFERON PATHWAY ASSAYS IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC AND MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASES - SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW (SLR) AND DEVELOPMENT OF CONSENSUS TERMINOLOGY FROM A EULAR TASKFORCE

Background:

The interferon (IFN) pathway is a complex system with multiple proteins and diverse downstream effects on gene and protein expression. IFNs have been implicated in multiple RMDs. Despite significant potential, IFN assays have not progressed into clinical practice.

Objectives:

To perform a SLR on IFN assays in RMDs and propose a consensus terminology.

Methods:

OvidMedline, Embase and Web of Science were searched for reports of IFN and RMDs up to October 2019. Information about the properties of assays measuring type I IFN and measures of truth were extracted and summarised. Terminology was agreed through an interactive consensus process with reference to the existing evidence.

Results:

10037 abstracts were identified. 275 fulfilled eligibility criteria, and were used for data extraction. Some used more than one technique to measure IFN-I pathway activation. Hence, 275 papers generated data on 393 methods. There was great heterogeneity in the methods used and presentation of results. IFN-I pathway activation was measured using: qPCR (n=121), immunoassays (n=101), microarray (n=69), reporter cell assay (n=38), DNA methylation (n=14), flow cytometry (n=14), cytopathic effect assay (n=11), RNA sequencing (n=9), Plaque reduction assay (n=8), Nanostring (n=5), bisulphite sequencing (n=3). All papers fulfilled Face Validity. Due to lack of gold standard for IFN-I pathway activation, evidence of criterion validity was variable. Concurrent validity was presented for n=150 assays. The terminology used to describe aspects of type I IFN pathway activation was not consistent, so a consensus terminology for IFN research (Table 1) was proposed by the taskforce.

Table 1.

Consensus terminology

TermAbbreviationDefinitionInterferonIFNProteins with anti-viral activity; IFNs are mediators of an anti-viral response. They belong to the Type I, Type II and Type III IFN families.Type I interferonIFN-IThe IFNs alpha, beta, omega, kappa, epsilon, secreted by any nucleated cell, and binding to the IFNAR, which is expressed on any nucleated cell.Type II interferonIFN-IIIFN gamma, mostly secreted by T cells, binding to the IFNGR, which is expressed on most leucocytes.Type III interferonIFN-IIIIFN lambda, which are structurally more similar to IL-10 but share downstream signalling and gene expression with IFN-I.Interferon-stimulated genesISGsGenes whose expression is known to be upregulated by any kind of IFN. Individual ISGs may not exclusively represent Type I IFN pathway activation.Type I Interferon pathway activationAny evidence for function of the components of the Type I IFN pathway. This includes: secretion of a Type I IFN protein, binding to the IFNAR, initiation of JAK/STAT signalling pathways, expression of IFN-stimulated genes, expression of IFN-stimulated proteins.Type I interferon pathway assayAn assay measuring one or more components of the Type I IFN pathway at a molecular or functional level.Interferon stimulated gene expression signatureA qualitative description of coordinated expression of a set of ISGs that is indicative of Type I IFN pathway activation.Interferon stimulated gene expression scoreA quantitative variable derived from expression of a defined set of ISGs that is indicative of Type I IFN pathway activation.Interferon stimulated protein scoreA variable derived from expression of a defined set of soluble biomarkers known to be upregulated by IFN, although not specific for Type I IFN.InterferonopathyMonogenic diseases in which there is constitutive Type I IFN pathway activation with a causal role in pathology. The clinical picture may resemble rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases. However, most diseases with IFN pathway activation are not Interferonopathies.

Conclusion:

Diverse methods have been reported as IFN assays and these differ in what elements of type IFN-I pathway activation they measure. The taskforce consensus terminology on type I IFN reporting should be considered for research and clinical applications.

Disclosure of Interests:

Agata Burska: None declared, Javier Rodriguez Carrio: None declared, Philip G Conaghan: None declared, Willem A Dik: None declared, Robert Biesen: None declared, Maija-leena Eloranta: None declared, Giulio Cavalli: None declared, Marianne Visser: None declared, Dimitrios Boumpas: None declared, George Bertsias: None declared, Marie Wahren-Herlenius: None declared, Jan Rehwinkel: None declared, Marie-Louise Frémond: None declared, Mary K. Crow Consultant of: AstraZeneca, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Lilly, Shannon Pharmaceuticals, Grant/research support from: Gilead, Lars Ronnblom Consultant of: AstraZeneca, Edward Vital Speakers bureau: GSK, Consultant of: AURINIA, SANDOZ, GSK, AstraZeneca, Roche, Modus, Grant/research support from: AstraZeneca, Marjan Versnel: None declared

Exploring the Economics of Motorcycle Helmet Laws — Implications for Low and Middle-Income Countries

This paper reviews economic evaluations of motorcycle helmet interventions in preventing injuries. A comprehensive literature review focusing on the e fectiveness of motorcycle helmet use, and on mandatory helmet laws and their enforcement was done. When helmet laws were lifted between 1976-80, 48 states within the USA experienced a cost of $342,047 per excess fatality of annual net savings. Helmet laws in the USA had a benefit-cost ratio of 1.33 to 5.07. Taiwan witnessed a 14% decline in motorcycle fatalities and a 22% reduction of head injury fatalities with the introduction of a helmet law. In Thailand, where 70-90% of all crashes involve motorcycle, after enforcement of a helmet law, helmet-use increased five-fold, the number of injured motorcyclists decreased by 33.5%, head injuries decreased by 41.4%, and deaths decreased by 20.8%. There is considerable evidence that mandatory helmet laws with enforcement alleviate the burden of tra fic injuries greatly. For low and middle-income countries with high rates of motorcycle injuries, enforced, mandatory motorcycle helmet laws are potentially one of the most cost-e fective interventions available. Asia Pac J Public Health 2007; 19(2): 16—22.

Viruses transfer the antiviral second messenger cGAMP between cells

Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) detects cytosolic DNA during virus infection and induces an antiviral state. cGAS signals by synthesis of a second messenger, cyclic GMP-AMP (cGAMP), which activates stimulator of interferon genes (STING). We show that cGAMP is incorporated into viral particles, including lentivirus and herpesvirus virions, when these are produced in cGAS-expressing cells. Virions transferred cGAMP to newly infected cells and triggered a STING-dependent antiviral program. These effects were independent of exosomes and viral nucleic acids. Our results reveal a way by which a signal for innate immunity is transferred between cells, potentially accelerating and broadening antiviral responses. Moreover, infection of dendritic cells with cGAMP-loaded lentiviruses enhanced their activation. Loading viral vectors with cGAMP therefore holds promise for vaccine development.

MicroRNAs silence gene expression by repressing protein expression and/or by promoting mRNA decay

microRNAs (miRNAs) represent a novel class of genome-encoded eukaryotic regulatory RNAs that silence gene expression posttranscriptionally. Although the proteins mediating miRNA biogenesis and function have been identified, the precise mechanism by which miRNAs regulate the expression of target mRNAs remains unclear. We summarize recent work from our laboratory demonstrating that miRNAs silence gene expression by at least two independent mechanisms: by repressing translation and/or by promoting mRNA degradation. In Drosophila, both mechanisms require Argonaute 1 (AGO1) and the P-body component GW182. Moreover, mRNA degradation by miRNAs is effected by the enzymes involved in general mRNA decay, including deadenylases and decapping enzymes, which also localize to P bodies. Our findings suggest a model for miRNA function in which AGO1 associates with miRNA targets through miRNA:mRNA base-pairing interactions. GW182 interacts with AGO1 and recruits deadenylases and decapping enzymes, leading to mRNA degradation. However, not all miRNA targets are degraded: Some stay in a translationally silent state, from which they may eventually be released. We propose that the final outcome of miRNA regulation (i.e., degradation vs. translational repression) is influenced by other RNA-binding proteins interacting with the targeted mRNA.