EBV / bone marrow / RA patients response to rituximab

[rainer]

Epstein–Barr virus in bone marrow of rheumatoid arthritis patients predicts response to rituximab treatment

Results. Before RTX treatment, EBV was identified in 15 out of 35 patients (EBV-positive group), of which 4 expressed parvovirus. Parvovirus was further detected in eight patients (parvo-positive group). Twelve patients were negative for the analysed viruses. Following RTX, EBV was cleared, whereas parvovirus was unaffected. Eighteen patients were responders, of which 12 were EBV positive. The decrease in the DAS-28 was significantly higher in EBV-positive group compared with parvo-positive group (P = 0.002) and virus-negative patients (P = 0.04). Most of EBV-negative patients that responded to RTX (75%) required retreatment within the following 11 months compared with only 8% of responding EBV-positive patients. A decrease of RF, Ig-producing cells and CD19+ B cells was observed following RTX but did not distinguish between viral infections. However, EBV-infected patients had significantly higher levels of Fas-expressing B cells at baseline as compared with EBV-negative groups.

Conclusions. EBV and parvovirus genomes are frequently found in bone marrow of RA patients. The presence of EBV genome was associated with a better clinical response to RTX. Thus, presence of EBV genome may predict clinical response to RTX.

http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/ ... ull/keq159

Studies like these make me wonder if the answer is something like this:


Wild-type strains of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) can be distinguished on the basis of variations in the molecular weight of virus-encoded, growth transformation-associated proteins. This approach was used to study the persistence of EBV in two seropositive recipients of allogeneic bone marrow transplants. The first patient received marrow from her EBV-seronegative brother, became EBV seronegative after grafting, and remained so for greater than 1200 days. Subsequently, she became infected with a new EBV strain that differed from her pretransplant strain but was indistinguishable from the virus isolated from her husband. The second patient received marrow from his EBV-seropositive brother. This patient showed only a transient decrease in IgG antibodies to EBV capsid antigen. His pretransplant strain differed from the virus of his donor. On days 252 and 915 after transplantation, lymphoblastoid cell lines were grown from the peripheral blood of the patient and were found to carry exclusively the virus of the donor. These results suggest that the latently EBV-infected host cells reside in a cellular compartment that can be destroyed by graft-versus-host reactivity, irradiation, or cytotoxic drugs. Hemopoietic tissue is the most likely candidate.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2847171