4.7 Article

Elevated plasma homocysteine levels in patients with multiple sclerosis are associated with male gender

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
卷 259, 期 10, 页码 2105-2110

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-012-6464-z

关键词

Multiple sclerosis; Homocysteine; Neurodegeneration; Gender

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Elevated homocysteine (Hcy) levels exert several neurotoxic actions and vascular dysfunctions that may be involved in pathogenesis and progression of multiple sclerosis (MS). The effective role of Hcy in MS however remains to be determined. The aim of this work was to compare plasma Hcy levels in MS patients and neurological disease controls (NDC) and to evaluate their relationships with clinical and demographic variables. In this cross-sectional study, we examined plasma Hcy levels in 217 patients with MS [53 clinically isolated syndromes (CIS) suggestive of MS, 134 relapsing remitting (RR), 23 secondary progressive (SP) and seven primary progressive (PP) MS], recruited among patients attending a tertiary clinical center in southern Italy and in 219 age/sex-matched controls. Median Hcy levels were slightly higher in MS patients compared to NDC (9.1 mu mol/l; range, 3.4-35.9 vs. 8.6, range 3.5-27.4; p = 0.02). Median Hcy concentrations were increased in males more than in females in the MS population (10.4 vs. 8.4; p < 0.0001), whereas no differences across genders were found in NDC (9.1 vs. 8.5). Hcy levels were higher in male MS patients compared to the male NDC patients (p = 0.001). Patients with CIS had lower Hcy (7.5 mu mol/l; p = 0.004) compared to patients with RR (9.5 mu mol/l), SP (10.1 mu mol/l) and PP (9.9 mu mol/l). Median Hcy concentration was higher in patients with disease duration longer than 22 months (9.7 vs. 8.6 mu mol/l; p = 0.02). Plasma Hcy levels are increased in patients with definite MS. Higher Hcy levels are associated with male sex, suggesting a role of Hcy in neurodegenerative processes of MS, which are prominent in male patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据