4.1 Article

Fibroblast growth factor-19: Development, analytical characterization and clinical evaluation of a new ELISA test

出版社

INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.1080/00365510701854967

关键词

diabetes mellitus; ELISA; FGF-19; glucose and lipid homeostasis; metabolic syndrome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. Since fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF-19) is a potent metabolic regulator that influences glucose and lipid homeostasis, our aim was to develop an ELISA assay for measuring FGF-19 in human serum and to investigate its concentrations in healthy volunteers and patients suffering from metabolic syndrome. Material and methods. A sandwich ELISA method was developed for quantitative determination of human FGF-19 in serum samples. Blood pressure, waist circumference, FGF-21 serum levels, serum cholesterol, triacylglycerols, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, insulin, glucose, adiponectin, uric acid, creatinine, hs-CRP and calculated BMI and Quicki insulin sensitivity index were measured in 153 healthy volunteers and 66 persons with metabolic syndrome. Results . Neither sex nor age influenced FGF-19 serum concentration in the healthy volunteers. Probands with metabolic syndrome had 65 % lower FGF-19 serum values than the healthy ones (medians 158.6 versus 242.4 ng/L; p0.01). FGF-19 correlated with glucose (r=-0.35, p0.01), HDL (r=0.24, p=0.045), triacylglycerols (r=-0.19, p=0.05) and with a number of other risk facors for metabolic syndrome (r=-0.28, p=0.01). When adjusted to the concentrations of triacylglycerols, BMI and glucose, and finally to all data pertinent to FGF-19 (according to correlation analysis), our data indicate that FGF-19 is an independent marker of metabolic syndrome. Conclusions. The present study demonstrates the analytical properties of the ELISA FGF-19 assay and its usefulness when studying the metabolic syndrome. Serum concentrations of FGF-19 could be new key predictors of metabolic syndrome and thereby even a new negative risk factor of atherosclerosis.

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

4.1
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