A case of mistaken identity: HSPs are no DAMPs but DAMPERs

Until recently, the immune system was seen solely as a defense system with its primary task being the elimination of unwanted microbial invaders. Currently, however, the functional significance of the immune system has obtained a much wider perspective, to include among others the maintenance and restoration of homeostasis following tissue damage. In this latter aspect, there is a growing interest in the identification of molecules involved, such as the so-called danger or damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), also called alarmins. Since heat shock proteins are archetypical molecules produced under stressful conditions, such as tissue damage or inflammation, they are frequently mentioned as prime examples of DAMPs (Bianchi, J Leukoc Biol 81:1–5, 2007; Kono and Rock, Nat Rev Immunol 8:279–289, 2008; Martin-Murphy et al., Toxicol Lett 192:387–394, 2010). See for instance also a recent review (Chen and Nunez, Science 298:1395–1401, 2010). Contrary to this description, we recently presented some of the arguments against a role of heat shock protein as DAMPs (Broere et al., Nat Rev Immunol 11:565-c1, 2011). With this perspective and reflection article, we hope to elaborate on this debate and provide additional thoughts to further ignite this discussion on this critical and evolving issue

Antibody response to the human stress protein BiP in rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives. The human stress protein BiP (immunoglobulin binding protein) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) since BiP was found to stimulate synovial T-cell proliferation and anti-BiP antibodies are present in the serum of RA patients. The aim of this study was the development of a rapid and reproducible enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to determine the specificity and sensitivity of anti-BiP antibodies in RA. Methods. An ELISA was developed that detected antibodies to BiP. The prevalence of anti-BiP antibodies was determined in sera from patients with early and established RA, sera antedating the onset of RA and sera from patients with other inflammatory and autoimmune diseases and healthy controls. Results. We have confirmed the increased prevalence of antibodies to BiP in the sera of a large cohort of patients with established RA (specificity 71% and sensitivity 73%) and early RA (specificity 65% and sensitivity 66%). In pre-disease sera, median 2.5 yr (interquartile range 1.1-4.7) before symptoms of joint disease, the sensitivity for anti-BiP antibodies was 45% and the specificity was 65% for the development of RA. Conclusion. Antibodies to BiP are found in the sera of patients with RA and in sera antedating the onset of RA