Correlation of IgH-CDR3 Immune Repertoire Diversity Test in Peripheral Blood of Neuromyelitis Spectrum Diseases

Abstract

Neuroretinitis spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is generally regarded as an acute or subacute inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, mainly involving the optic nerve and spinal cord, mediated by humoral immunity. To address these questions, this work established an immunomic library of the heavy chain complementarity determinant 3 (gHI-CDR3) of peripheral blood lymphocyte B cell receptors. The library was established in patients with a spectrum of neurosyphilis-retinitis disorders. Six NMOSD patients and six healthy volunteers were recruited, and the NMOSD group was divided into an early-onset group and a stable group according to treatment conditions. The IgH-CDR3 gene fragment cultured in vitro was amplified by multiplex PCR technology, and the gene was sequenced by the second-generation high-throughput sequencing technology, and the statistical analysis was carried out by the method without reference. The quantity, type, and diversity of IgH-CDR3 in peripheral blood B lymphocytes of NMOSD patients were significantly lower than those of normal group ( P > 0.05 ); the variation of IgH-CDR3 sequence in the initial stage of treatment was higher than that in the stable stage ( P > 0.05 ); the replication frequency of the characteristic gene “CASSICLGSGCGGYYYGMDVW” was significantly increased in patients at the initial stage of NMOSD treatment ( P < 0.05 ). The conclusion was that the gene expression and gene expression analysis of NMOSD patients could accurately judge the condition of NMOSD patients, evaluate their efficacy, and provide new molecular targets and new theoretical basis for clinical application.

Retracted: Correlation of IgH-CDR3 Immune Repertoire Diversity Test in Peripheral Blood of Neuromyelitis Spectrum Diseases

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Peer-review manipulation …”