4.5 Article

Identification of novel candidate protein biomarkers for the post-polio syndrome - implications for diagnosis, neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS
卷 71, 期 6, 页码 670-681

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2008.11.014

关键词

Post-polio syndrome; Pathophysiology; CSF; Proteomics; Biomarkers; Diagnosis

资金

  1. Gustaf V foundation
  2. Swedish medical research council
  3. Swedish research council
  4. Gustav V foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Survivors of poliomyelitis often develop increased or new symptoms decades after the acute infection, a condition known as post-polio syndrome (PPS). The condition affects 20-60% of previous polio patients, making it one of the most common causes of neurological deficits worldwide. The underlying pathogenesis is not fully understood and accurate diagnosis is not feasible. Herein we investigated whether it was possible to identify proteomic profile aberrations in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of PPS patients. CSF from 15 patients with well-defined PPS were analyzed for protein expression profiles. The results were compared to data obtained from nine healthy controls and 34 patients with other non-inflammatory diseases which served as negative controls. In addition, 17 samples from persons with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) were added as relevant age-matched references for the PPS samples. The CSF of persons with PPS displayed a disease-specific and highly predictive (P=0.0017) differential expression of five distinct proteins: gelsolin, hemopexin, peptidylglycine alpha-amidating monooxygenase, glutathione synthetase and kallikrein 6, respectively, in comparison with the control groups. An independent ELISA confirmed the increase of kallikrein 6. We suggest that these five proteins should be further evaluated as candidate biomarkers for the diagnosis and development of new therapies for PPS patients. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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