4.2 Article

Serum lipid levels are associated with the prevalence but not with the disease progression of multiple system atrophy in a Chinese population

期刊

NEUROLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 150-156

出版社

MANEY PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1179/1743132813Y.0000000277

关键词

Multiple system atrophy; Serum lipid; Prevalence; Disease progression

资金

  1. Funding of West China Hospital of Sichuan University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Alpha-synuclein is involved in the pathogenesis of multiple system atrophy (MSA) and can be regulated by lipids. This study aims to validate the correlation between lipid levels and the prevalence of MSA as well as its progression. Methods: A total of 234 patients with probable MSA and 240 age-and gender-matched healthy controls were included in this study. Lipid contents, including total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglyceride (TG), were evaluated. The unified MSA rating scale (UMSARS) was used to assess the severity of MSA. Results: Lipid levels in MSA patients were significantly lower than those in healthy controls. Patients with MSA-C were significantly younger, had higher body mass indices (BMIs), higher UMSARS scores, and lower HDL-C contents compared with MSA-P patients. Subjects with the lowest quartiles and the second quartiles of total cholesterol, LDL-C, and HDL-C had high prevalence of MSA compared with subjects with the highest quartiles. No correlation was found between the mean rate of annualized changes and serum levels of lipids as well as other independent factors, such as age, BMI, gender, subtypes (C-type or P-type), and disease duration at the initial visit, in 107 followed-up MSA patients. Discussion: Low levels of total cholesterol, LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG increased the prevalence of MSA in a Chinese population. Patients with MSA-C showed significantly lower levels of HDL-C than MSA-P patients. However, lipids did not deteriorate or improve the progression of MSA.

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

4.2
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