4. Discussion
RA is a widespread inflammatory autoimmune disorder that affects approximately 1%–2% of the world’s population [
65]. The incidence of RA is steadily rising by 8.2% annually [
65]. This condition is characterized by a multifaceted clinical profile, encompassing abnormal immune responses, inflammatory pathways, genetic and epigenetic factors, as well as the regulation of immunometabolism [
66]. If left untreated, RA can frequently result in bone erosion and eventual joint destruction. It can also affect extra-articular organs such as the heart, lungs, eyes, and blood vessels, potentially reducing the lifespan of RA patients [
67]. Therefore, early and accurate diagnosis of RA is essential to decrease functional disability and enhance quality of life. Uncovering the pathogenesis of RA and expediting clinical transformation are imminently in need [
68]. However, RA can be challenging to diagnose in its early stages when typical disease features are not yet apparent [
61]. Diagnosis involves a complex process that integrates various data points, surpassing simplistic algorithm-based criteria. Hence, establishing definitive diagnostic criteria for RA is not straightforward. Recommendations and guidelines have been developed to aid in the management and treatment of RA [
69]. Importantly, classification criteria are not intended to be used for diagnosis. Nonetheless, they are commonly used to support the diagnostic process in clinical decision-making and facilitate the timely implementation of therapeutic measures. Classification criteria, on the other hand, are used to serve as a standardized method for selecting a well-defined group of patients in clinical studies, ensuring better comparability between studies. [
69,
70].
The current recommended standard for RA diagnosis was the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria [
61]. These criteria include clinical assessments such as joint counts, acute phase reactants (APR) like inflammation markers (C reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate), and crucially, the identification of rheumatoid factor (RF) and anticitrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPAs), which were the hallmark autoantibodies in RA. RF and ACPAs were commonly utilized as serological biomarkers in the diagnosis of RA, each playing a significant role in the pathogenic process. The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria were also proposed as a tool to take advantage of therapeutic interventions in the early stages of RA. On the other hand, these new criteria emphasized the significance of utilizing biomarkers to guide therapeutic decisions in clinical practice. In the realm of clinical findings, RF, ACPA, and APR stood out as the most frequently used biomarkers in clinical settings for guiding the diagnosis and prognosis of RA. RF, which was first described in 1940, remains a cornerstone laboratory tool for diagnosis and prognosis of RA in its early stages [
71]. Nevertheless, the utilization and interpretation of RF have been conditioned by the emergence of ACPAs [
14,
50]. The sensitivity of RF in diagnosing RA ranges from 30% to 70% in early cases and increases to 80%-85% in progressive cases, but its specificity is ~40% as it could also be present in patients with other diseases and even in healthy individuals [
14,
50]. In contrast, ACPAs exhibited a sensitivity of 60~80% and a high specificity of 95%~98% [
14]. Despite their widespread use, both RF and ACPA, along with APR (which are not specific to RA and may not change with disease progression), have proven to be inadequate in satisfactorily responding to the high heterogeneity of RA [
20,
72]. Clinical practice still faced challenges with misdiagnosis and missed diagnoses, which could result in unwarranted initiation of DMARD therapy [
20,
72]. Therefore, issues arose on how comprehensive the criteria should be and whether they should be updated and adapted to findings from the past two decades that might increase both their specificity and sensitivity [
20,
72]. Additionally, the added value of other antimodified protein antibodies or biomarkers to the increased sensitivity and/or specificity of the criteria remains a topic of debate [
20,
72].
Biomarkers are defined as interaction parameters that provide objective information on measurable changes in physiology, biochemistry, or morphology, which are evaluable at the molecular, biochemical, or cellular level [
73]. These biomarkers serve as indicators of functional biological processes, pathogenic states, or responses to medical interventions [
74]. Biological markers are considered as physiological signals induced by exposure to a foreign substance, such as cellular exposure, precocious cellular response, or inherent/acquired susceptibility [
75]. Biomarkers are classified based on their specific nature and the type of biological study they originate from. One primary classification is omics, which encompasses genomics for genetic research, proteomics for the study of proteins, and metabolomics for the analysis of metabolites [
14]. Another category is epigenetics, which involves DNA alterations related to certain pathologies [
76,
77]. Biomarkers also include microRNA molecules, which exhibit varying levels of expression in either normal or cancerous cells (genomics/transcriptomics) [
78]. Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration further categorizes biomarkers as diagnostic biomarker, prognostic biomarker, safety biomarker, monitoring biomarker, and pharmacodynamic response biomarkers [
79]. Ideal biomarkers should be able to provide diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic information [
14]. They should be obtainable from a patient’s clinical data and possess specific chemical-analytical characteristics [
14]. These characteristics include high specificity, where the measurement of a biomarker must be specific to a disease; specimen collection should be minimally invasive, with saliva being preferred over urine and urine over blood; representativeness, meaning levels of biomarkers in the sample should be representative of levels in the organism; and stability, where the kinetics must be known [
14].
Multiple studies have provided evidence of significant differences in the functions of GRP78/BiP depending on its extracellular or intracellular location [
32,
34,
36,
37,
80,
81]. This versatility allows GRP78/BiP to be classified as a true moonlighting protein, with two distinct roles in vivo [
38]. The intracellular form of GRP78/BiP serves as a critical chaperone in protein folding within ER and possesses anti-apoptotic properties, aiding in cell protection under stressful conditions. Conversely, the extracellular form of GRP78/BiP exhibits potent immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects, although the specific cell-surface receptor through which it acts remains unidentified, with expression being mainly on monocytes. This dual role of GRP78/BiP underscores its importance in both intracellular and extracellular processes, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic target for various conditions [
82]. During the pathogenesis process of RA, GRP78/BiP appears as a product of stress response and patients are likely to develop autoantibodies to GRP78/BiP [
82]. Many studies have confirmed the elevated levels of GRP78/BiP and anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies in RA patients [
42,
47]. Additionally, the upregulation of GRP78/BiP seems to be distinctive of RA and independent of drug treatment [
83]. Antibodies to BiP have also been detected in the sera of individuals antedating the onset of RA [
47]. These findings suggest that GRP78/BiP or anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies could be explored as a potential biomarker to enhance the diagnostic algorithms for RA.
Various techniques have been applied to characterize the proteomic profile of saliva [
40], synovium [
41,
42], serum [
42,
47], and SF [
47,
58] in RA, yielding promising outcomes. The use of mass spectrometry (MS) and WB techniques in evaluating the diagnostic value of RA in saliva indicated that GRP78/BiP exhibited high specificity (0.95), sensitivity (0.83), pooled positive likelihood ratio (16.66), and diagnostic odds ratio (94.77) [
40].The potential applicability of the findings deriving from this study will be represented by the possibility of identifying novel, non-invasively collected salivary proteomic biomarkers in order to significantly improve the diagnostic algorithms of RA. Antibodies to GRP78/BiP in serum, as measured by ELISA, exhibit a sensitivity of 73% and a specificity of 71% for established RA, and 66% and 65% for early RA, respectively [
47]. The antibody levels to GRP78/BiP increased as the patient approaches the onset of arthritis, with a significant rise in anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies by the time of early RA diagnosis compared to controls. Anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies were also found in SF of RA patients at levels similar to those in serum, significantly higher than in control SF [
47]. A study demonstrated that the dominant immunoreaction in the majority of tested RA serum was with a 68 kDa antigen known as GRP78/BiP, which was probably ubiquitously expressed [
42]. Antibodies targeting GRP78/BiP autoantigen were present in both serum and synoviocytes in 64% of 167 RA patients tested via WB, and could also be found in seronegative RA patients, but were rarely present in patients with other rheumatic diseases (1% out of 98 patients) [
42]. Notably, these antibodies were absent in 55 healthy controls. Antibodies to a GRP78/BiP antigen with sensitivities comparable to that of the synovial GRP78/BiP antigen (64%) were observed in lymphocyte and HeLa total protein preparations (75% and 58%) [
42]. These findings suggested that anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies were produced in both primary and secondary lymphoid organs as well as the joint, potentially serving as a diagnostic biomarker for identifying RA in patients with early arthritis. Cell-free GRP78/BiP, as measured by WB, has been identified in SF of patients with RA, with a higher prevalence in SF samples (72%) compared to samples from patients with other inflammatory joint diseases (38%) [
58]. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) responded to GRP78/BiP by secreting an anti-inflammatory profile of cytokines. Although GRP78/BiP stimulated the early production of inflammatory cytokine TNF-α, the predominant cytokine induced was the anti-inflammatory IL-10. These results indicated that cell-free GRP78/BiP did indeed occur and could have biological effects by interacting with cells. Extracellular GRP78/BiP may stimulate immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory pathways, which were only partly attributed to the production of IL-10 [
58]. GRP78/BiP was significantly upregulated in synovial sections from RA patients, in stark contrast to control sections [
58]. GRP78/BiP-specific autoantibodies were present in 63% of 400 RA patients, 7% of 200 individuals with other rheumatic diseases, and in none of the healthy subjects [
41]. Interestingly, researchers observed a distinct alteration in GRP78/BiP-specific T cell reactivity in RA patients [
41]. Unlike healthy individuals and patients with other rheumatic diseases where measurable GRP78/BiP reactive T cells were undetectable, RA patients exhibited pronounced T cell reactivity to GRP78/BiP [
41]. Notably, this reactivity could be induced by specifically blocking antigen presentation to potentially regulatory T cells. Since overexpression of GRP78/BiP has been demonstrated to reduce the sensitivity of cells to cytotoxic T cell-mediated killing, GRP78/BiP overexpression and GRP78/BiP-specific autoimmunity may be involved in the pathogenesis of RA [
41]. Consequently, the detection of GRP78/BiP-specific autoantibodies has emerged as a novel diagnostic tool, potentially serving as both a preclinical indicator [
41,
47] and an improved diagnostic biomarker [
14] for RA.
The data from the ’Duisseldorf Rheumaregister’ retrieval study included analysis of 277 RA patients and 893 patients with other rheumatic diseases to identify the presence of RF [
42]. The anti-GRP78/BiP antibody demonstrated equal sensitivity (66% vs 68%) and higher specificity (99% vs 76%) compared to the RF. It is important to note that 5% of the apparently healthy population also yield positive results for RF. The high specificity of GRP78/BiP or anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies significantly exceeded that of RF based on research findings [
42,
48,
72]. Unlike RF, which targets the Fc portion of IgG and formulates the immune complexes that exceed the process of RA as well as other rheumatoid diseases, GRP78/BiP antibodies exhibited a more focused immune response. This enhanced specificity was crucial in distinguishing between RA and other rheumatoid diseases. ACPAs have been identified as highly specific biomarkers for diagnosing RA and were believed to be closely linked to the pathogenesis of arthritis. Notably, the presence of anti-CCP antibodies could be detected several years before the onset of joint inflammation [
50]. Given the high specificity of ACPAs in RA diagnosis, their role in the pathogenesis of RA has become the focus of active investigation. Similarly, GRP78/BiP or anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies showed comparable sensitivity to ACPAs (67% vs. 67%) and slightly lower specificity (92% vs. 95%) [
72]. This resemblance may stem from their similar role in the pathogenesis of RA. With moderate sensitivity and high specificity, GRP78/BiP or anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies could serve as a valuable supplement to existing diagnostic methods. Given their distinct roles in RA pathogenesis, a combination of GRP78/BiP and anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies with RF or ACPAs could provide even more reliable and accurate results for the clinical diagnosis of RA. Their different roles in the pathogenesis of RA made them complementary to each other, enhancing the overall effectiveness of diagnostic testing. The combination of anti-GRP78/BiP antibodies and anti-CCP antibodies could obtain higher specificity than that of anti-CCP antibodies detected individually [
48]. This tandem combination approach has demonstrated good clinical value in differentiating RA from other autoimmune diseases. These findings highlighted the importance of considering multiple biomarkers and combined detection in diagnostic testing for RA, as the presence of both anti-GRP78/BiP and anti-CCP antibodies together could provide more accurate and specific results.
Research on potential clinical biomarkers in RA has been a prominent topic over the past two decades, yielding numerous significant findings [
2,
3,
14]. However, there remain several unresolved questions in this area. What exact role do these potential biomarkers play in the pathogenesis and development of RA? How do biomarkers fluctuate during different disease activity statuses and progression stages of RA? And is there any therapeutic benefit in targeting biomarker-positive RA patients under different conditions and courses of the disease?
The existing research on the potential clinical biomarker GRP78/Bip in RA has primarily limited to isolated examinations of either synovium [
41,
42,
43,
44,
45,
46], serum [
10,
42,
45,
46,
47,
48,
49,
50,
51,
52,
53,
54,
55,
56], or SF [
47,
49,
57,
58,
59]. However, no studies have comprehensively examined GRP78/Bip across serum, SF, and synovium collectively. Due to the insufficiency of relevant studies, current research has not conducted stratified analyses on specific subgroups such as the serum, SF, and synovium. Understanding the pathogenesis and progression of RA requires an analysis of both systemic and local immune responses, which are intricately linked. Investigating the changes and interconnections of GRP78/Bip in different intracorporeal environments, including serum, SF, and synovium, is essential for gaining a comprehensive understanding of its role as a potential biomarker in RA. By adopting a holistic approach to study GRP78/Bip, researchers may uncover valuable insights into its significance and implications for RA treatment and management. Furthermore, RA is a complex systemic disease characterized by gradual advancement and deterioration as development in the stage of disease progression and the status of disease activity [
11,
66,
84]. Despite this understanding, there has been a lack of comprehensive research into the fluctuations of GRP78/Bip levels in relation to different statuses and stages of RA. The potential role and specific regulatory effects of GRP78/Bip in different cellular environments, as well as under different statuses and stages of RA, have not been fully explored or documented. Further investigation into these factors is necessary to gain a better understanding of the role of GRP78/Bip in the pathogenesis of RA. Hence, this study delves into the differential expressions of GRP78/Bip in serum, SF, and synovium under various stages of disease progression and different statuses of disease activity in RA. The research also seeks to explore the associations between GRP78/Bip expression, disease activity and progression of RA, as well as the levels of predominant inflammatory cytokine TNF-α and anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 for the first time. This study aims to elucidate the potential interconnectedness of these factors in the context of RA.
The results of this study revealed that GRP78/Bip was consistently present in both intracellular (synovium) and extracellular (cell-free serum and SF) RA lesions, with variations in expression levels closely linked to disease activity and progression of RA. The disease activity statuses and progression stages of RA were found to align with the expressions of GRP78/Bip in serum and synovium, but differed significantly from those in SF. This study emphasized the critical role of GRP78/Bip in disease activity and progression of RA, noting that its function could vary depending on different intracorporeal environment or status and stage of RA. The findings underscore the significance of GRP78/Bip in the pathogenesis of RA, suggesting that its expression levels could serve as valuable indicators of disease activity and progression. The differing expressions of GRP78/Bip among different RA lesions implied that it may play a unique role in disease activity and progression of RA within the synovium compared to the SF and serum, aligning with previous literature on the subject [
41,
42]. To further explore the underlying causes of these substantial discrepancies, an extensive analysis was carried out, incorporating insights from previous research in the field [
10,
32,
33,
36,
38,
82,
83,
85,
86,
87,
88,
89,
90](
Figure 5).
Exploring the role of GRP78/Bip in synovium during disease activity and progression of RA was conducted. Upon the onset of RA, heightened levels of intracellular GRP78/Bip are generated in response to stress signals, aiming to counteract ERS disturbances. This process aids in re-establishing ER functionality, reducing cellular harm, and supporting cell viability. As ERS persists and disease advances, the body increasingly activates stress response mechanisms in the affected cells. This process aims to prevent irreversible damage and apoptosis of these affected cells through the expression of intracellular GRP78/Bip. Consequently, the expression of GRP78/Bip in synovium increases gradually with the severity of the disease. Specifically, in this research, the levels of intracellular GRP78/Bip expression in synovium were found to be highest at severe-stage, followed by moderate-stage, and lowest in early-stage. In the context of RA, disease activity resembles an acute exacerbation, characterized by heightened apoptosis and intensified inflammatory reactions in synovium. Specifically, in this research, elevated levels of caspase-3 expression were observed during disease activity as opposed to disease remission, with higher expression levels in severe- and moderate-stages compared to early-stage. This RA activity status also witnesses an aggravated inflammatory response and a rapid increase in the expression and synthesis of intracellular GRP78/Bip. This upregulation in intracellular GRP78/Bip serves as a protective mechanism against further disease progression of the inflammatory disease. Conversely, during the remission status of RA, the inflammatory response is alleviated, leading to a decrease in intracellular GRP78/Bip expression, but still remains relatively high compared to healthy and disease control individuals. The results of this research demonstrated that the expression levels of GRP78/Bip in synovium were consistently greater during disease activity status compared to those in remission.
Investigation was additionally focused on the role of GRP78/Bip in SF with respect to disease activity and progression of RA. In the context of RA onset, GRP78/Bip experiences a shift in location and function within the cell. Normally residing in ER, GRP78/Bip can avoid ER "reattachment" by binding to unfolded proteins. However, during the development of RA, GRP78/Bip can translocate to the cytoplasm and cell membrane along with these unfolded proteins. As ERS disrupts ER structure, GRP78/Bip is released into the extracellular space. This results in the loss of its anti-apoptotic effect within the cell but leads to its involvement in the immune response and anti-inflammatory response outside the cell as extracellular GRP78/Bip and autoantigens. As the disease progresses and worsens, some intracellular GRP78/Bip have already depleted due to apoptosis before metastasizing to the extracellular space, further decreasing the extracellular expression. However, the disruption of homeostatic function and the increase of apoptosis in stressed cells will in turn exacerbate protein misfolding and accumulation and further increase the intensity of ERS response, thus leading to a vicious cycle and accelerating cell dysfunction and lesion progression. As ERS persists and disease advances, the ability to maintain homeostasis diminishes, resulting in an increased demand for intracellular GRP78/Bip. Consequently, there is a reduced release of intracellular GRP78/Bip into the extracellular space. When ER stress-induced apoptosis exceeds its protective capabilities and causes irreversible damage, apoptotic signals are activated to remove stressed cells if normal function cannot be restored. This helps maintain a delicate balance between cell survival and apoptosis. In such situations, some intracellular GRP78/Bip may have been lost due to apoptosis prior to metastasizing to the extracellular space, further reducing its expression outside the cell. This disruption of homeostatic function, coupled with an increase in apoptosis in stressed cells, will exacerbate protein misfolding and accumulation, intensify ER stress response, creating a harmful cycle that accelerates cell dysfunction and disease progression. Therefore, the aforementioned scenario presents a negative correlation between extracellular GRP78/Bip levels and severity of RA progression. This study further confirmed the presence of extracellular GRP78/Bip in SF of patients with RA at different disease progression stages, with levels decreasing from early- to moderate- and then to severe-stages. On the other hand, during active RA, intracellular GRP78/Bip was presented to be significantly elevated, resulting in a relatively lower extracellular GRP78/Bip level in SF. Specifically, in this research, the extracellular levels of GRP78/Bip in SF followed the pattern of disease remission being greater than disease activity in RA patients.
GRP78/Bip serves as a reactive protective mechanism in cells, emphasizing its essential role in maintaining cellular function and viability. The presence of both intracellular and extracellular GRP78/Bip has been shown to work together to exhibit synergistic effects, further highlighting the significance of this protein in cellular homeostasis. As RA develops, there is a gradual increase in the body’s requirement for GRP78/Bip to cope with the ongoing inflammatory processes. In response to this heightened demand, the immune system is activated to increase the production of GRP78/Bip at the affected area. This results in elevated levels of GRP78/Bip in the bloodstream, reflecting the body’s efforts to counteract the inflammatory response associated with RA. However, achieving remission in RA is contingent upon striking a delicate balance between intracellular and extracellular GRP78/Bip expression at the affected site. This equilibrium is essential for resolving inflammation and restoring normal cellular function. Ultimately, the body’s demand for circulating GRP78/Bip must be maintained at a relatively balanced state to facilitate recovery from RA and promote overall well-being. Consequently, the findings of this research revealed distinct patterns in GRP78/Bip expression in RA serum: disease activity surpassed disease remission status, severe- surpassed moderate-stage and moderate- surpassed early-stage.
Additionally, a study was performed to evaluate the fluctuations in both inflammatory and anti-inflammatory factors present within serum, SF, and synovium. The results indicated that the levels of inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines in individuals with RA varied depending on their disease activity statues and progression stages. As ERS persists and RA lesions aggravate gradually, the inflammatory response intensifies both locally and systemically. This escalation results in elevated expression of both inflammatory and anti-inflammatory factors in various areas such as serum, SF, and synovium. Specifically, the levels of TNF-α and IL-10 in these areas followed a pattern of increasing expression with disease progression, with the highest levels observed in severe-stage of RA, followed by moderate-stage, and then early-stage. This suggests that as RA develops, the inflammatory response becomes more pronounced at different levels within the body. During activity status of RA, the disease reaches a phase of acute exacerbation. In this condition, both local and systemic inflammatory responses become significantly more severe compared to the remission status. This heightened inflammatory activity leads to a significant increase in the secretion of inflammatory factors by the body. In the scope of this research, the TNF-α levels in serum, SF, and synovium were notably higher during disease activity as opposed to remission status. In the acute exacerbation state of disease activity, the local inflammatory response is notably more intense than the anti-inflammatory response. To counteract this, the body mobilizes both local and systemic cellular immune systems to alleviate the inflammation. This process results in the secretion of numerous anti-inflammatory factors from synovium and blood, which are rich in cellular components. It was observed that the level of anti-inflammatory factor IL-10 in synovium and blood was higher during disease activity when compared to the remission status. However, the production of IL-10 in SF, which contains fewer cells, was limited. During disease remission status, the body maintains a dynamic balance between local and systemic inflammatory and immune responses. Although the local inflammatory response remains high, there is a relatively balanced interplay between inflammatory and anti-inflammatory factors. This equilibrium is achieved by enhancing local immune responses, leading to increased production of anti-inflammatory factors. For example, in this research, it was observed that the levels of IL-10 in SF were elevated during periods of disease remission when contrasted with disease activity status.
This research indicated that patients with RA experience a shift in the balance between inflammatory and anti-inflammatory factors under different environmental conditions. Specifically, TNF-α was recognized as the primary factor present in SF, and was found at higher levels in the bloodstream compared to IL-10. Nonetheless, there were comparatively minor discrepancies in the levels of TNF-α and IL-10 when present in synovium. Simultaneously, this research demonstrated that alterations in caspase-3 levels corresponded with the changes observed in GRP78/Bip within the affected synovium. Additionally, alterations in IL-10 levels in serum, SF, and affected synovium closely mirrored the patterns noted in GRP78/Bip, supporting the anti-inflammatory properties of extracellular GRP78/Bip. These findings implied that GRP78/Bip might play a role in modulating immune reaction, apoptotic processes, and the decrease of inflammation in both local and systemic environments.
Several limitations were present in this study, with the most significant being the small sample size and monocentric design. Participants were recruited exclusively from a single hospital within Chinese racial groups, which may have restricted their representativeness and the generalizability of the results to a broader population. Future research should incorporate a larger sample size to introduce more significant findings, and examine subjects from diverse racial and geographical backgrounds. Another significant limitation pertains to the absence of investigation into the presence of GRP78/Bip in serum, SF, and synovium of healthy individuals due to ethical constraints, thus weakening the ability to establish a clear relationship between GRP78/Bip and the activity and progression of RA. Future research should aim to address these limitations by ensuring comprehensive data collection from both healthy individuals and RA patients to provide a more robust understanding of the role of GRP78/Bip in the disease process. Additionally, this was a cross-sectional study, thus the causalities between GRP78/Bip and RA remains unverified. Further validation is needed through more extensive prospective studies, such as longitudinal or cohort studies. Furthermore, the normal levels of GRP78/Bip in serum, SF, and synovium have not been definitively established, nor have we fully understood the significance of these levels. Various factors including age, sex, diet, ethnicity, physical activity, medication use, the method of estimating GRP78/Bip, and sample storage conditions all have the potential to influence GRP78/Bip levels. Further research is needed to establish a baseline for normal GRP78/Bip levels, understand its implications, and account for potential confounding variables that could affect measurements. By addressing these gaps in knowledge, we can improve our comprehension of the role of GRP78/Bip in different physiological processes and diseases. Last, exploring how interventions specifically targeted at intracellular or extracellular GRP78/Bip impact the activity and progression of RA in animal models or cell-based research was not within the scope of this study. It is recognized that further research is needed to assess the potential impact of interventions specifically aimed at intracellular or extracellular GRP78/BIP on the activity and progression of RA. This may involve exploring the mechanisms through which targeting GRP78/Bip can influence the pathogenesis of the disease and identifying potential therapeutic approaches that can modulate its expression or function. Overall, while this study did not directly investigate the effects of interventions targeting GRP78/Bip on RA, it highlights the need for future research in this area to better understand the role of GRP78/Bip in the pathophysiology of RA and to potentially identify novel treatment strategies for the disease.