4.7 Article

CD4+CD28null T lymphocyte frequency, a new marker of cardiovascular risk: relationship with polycystic ovary syndrome phenotypes

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 98, Issue 6, Pages 1609-1615

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.08.015

Keywords

Polycystic ovary syndrome; CD4(+)CD28(null); phenotypes; cardiovascular risk; Rotterdam criteria

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To study the frequency of CD4(+)CD28(null) T cells, which are aggressive T lymphocytes associated with recurrent coronary instability and type 2 diabetes mellitus, in different polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) phenotypes and in age-and body mass index-matched healthy women. Design: Retrospective cohort observational study. Setting: Unit of human reproductive pathophysiology, university hospital. Patient(s): A total of 167 PCOS patients and 102 control subjects. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): CD4(+)CD28(null) T cell frequency, high-sensitive C-reactive protein levels, and other glucose-metabolic parameters. Result(s): CD4(+)CD28(null) frequency was significantly higher in all PCOS groups than in control subjects. CD4(+)CD28(null) frequency was significantly higher in nonhyperandrogenic phenotype (5.7%, range 3.2-7.1) than in phenotypes with hyperandrogenism (H) + oligoamenorrhea (O) + polycystic ovary (PCO) (3.5%, range 1-5.8), H + O (3%, range 1.8-4.7), and H + PCO (2.63%, range 1.2-4.1). The relative risk of non-H phenotype for PCOS women in the highest quartile for CD4(+)CD28(null) frequency compared with PCOS women with the lowest quartile was 3.2 (95% confidence interval 1.9-5.8). Conclusion(s): Cardiovascular risk evaluation should be performed in all PCOS phenotypes. In particular, we demonstrated that the non-H phenotype has potentially increased cardiovascular risk in terms of CD4(+)CD28(null) frequency. (Fertil Steril (R) 2012; 98: 1609-15. (C) 2012 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available