4.6 Review

Measurement of microparticle tissue factor activity in clinical samples: A summary of two tissue factor-dependent FXa generation assays

期刊

THROMBOSIS RESEARCH
卷 139, 期 -, 页码 90-97

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2016.01.011

关键词

Cancer; Microparticles; Thrombosis, tissue factor

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [R01 HL095096] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thrombosis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Detection of a prothrombotic state using biomarkers would be of great benefit to identify patients at risk of thrombosis that would benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Tissue factor (TF) is a highly procoagulant protein that under normal conditions is not present in the blood. However, increased levels of TF in the blood in the form of microparticles (MPs) (also called extracellular vesicles) are observed under various pathological conditions. In this review, we will discuss studies that have measured MP-TF activity in a variety of diseases using two similar FXa generation assay. One of the most robust signals for MP-TF activity (16-26 fold higher than healthy controls) is observed in pancreatic cancer patients with venous thromboembolism. In this case, the TF + MPs appear to be derived from the cancer cells. Surprisingly, cirrhosis and acute liver injury are associated with 17-fold and 38-fold increases in MP-TF activity, respectively. Based on mouse models, we speculate that the TF + MPs are derived from hepatocytes. More modest increases are observed in patients with urinary tract infections (6-fold) and in a human endotoxemia model (9-fold) where monocytes are the likely source of the TF + MPs. Finally, there is no increase in MP-TF activity in the majority of cardiovascular disease patients. These studies indicate that MP-TF activity may be a useful biomarker to identify patients with particular diseases that have an increased risk of thrombosis. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.6
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