4.2 Article

Tear Luminex Analysis in Dry Eye Patients

期刊

MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR
卷 24, 期 -, 页码 7595-7602

出版社

INT SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION, INC
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.912010

关键词

Cytokines; Dry Eye Syndromes; Inflammation; Meibomian Glands; Sjogren's Syndrome

资金

  1. Technology Department of Zhejiang Province of China [2017C37079]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The purpose of this study was to analyze tear inflammatory cytokines of different subclasses of dry eye disease (DED) patients using Luminex technology. Material/Methods: Forty-five DED patients including 20 Sjogren syndrome aqueous tear deficiency (SS-ATD) patients, 20 non-Sjo- gren syndrome aqueous tear deficiency (NSS-ATD) patients, 15 meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) patients, and 15 normal participants were enrolled in this study. Concentrations of 11 inflammatory cytokines in tear samples of study participants were measured by Luminex assay; ELISA assay was further applied for validation. Results: The levels of cytokines were mostly increased (TNF-alpha, IL-1 alpha, IL-1 beta, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12P70, IL-13, IFN-gamma, and MIP-1 alpha) in DED patients compared with normal participants. And the levels of TNF-alpha, IL-6, IL-8, and IL-12P70 were significantly elevated in tears of the patient groups compared to tears of participants in the normal group (P<0.05). Statistical differences were also observed among the patient groups (SS-ATD, NSS-ATD, and MGD) for the level of IL-8 and TNF-alpha. The results of ELISA assay demonstrated the consistence with Luminex assay, confirming the practicality of Luminex technology for the analysis of multiple cytokines in DED patient tears. Conclusions: The levels of inflammatory cytokines were mostly elevated in DED patients, and statistical differences of some cytokines were also found between SS-ATD, NSS-ATD, and MGD groups, suggesting that inflammatory cytokines could be potential supplements for the diagnosis of DED subclasses and therapeutic targets for DED 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

4.2
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