4.6 Article

GRP78 as a marker of pre-eclampsia: an exploratory study

Journal

MOLECULAR HUMAN REPRODUCTION
Volume 15, Issue 9, Pages 569-574

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gap037

Keywords

GRP78; C-terminal fragment; marker; pre-eclampsia

Funding

  1. SNF
  2. Hopital Universitaire de Geneve'

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although the exact mechanisms that lead to shallow invasion or defective trophoblastic differentiation in pre-eclampsia are still unknown, it is widely admitted that the etiology of pre-eclampsia is a defect in trophoblast invasion of the uterine spiral arteries. We have previously observed that the status of a chaperone protein, glucose regulated protein 78 (GRP78) is associated with the invasive properties of cytotrophoblastic cells; we therefore hypothesized that circulating GRP78 could serve as a diagnostic tool in pre-eclampsia. In a prospective case-control study, we quantified GRP78 autoantibodies, complexes of GRP78 with autoantibodies and GRP78 (C-term fragment, N-term fragment and full-length GRP78) by ELISA. Plasma from women diagnosed with pre-eclampsia (n = 16), from women during the first trimester of pregnancy who subsequently developed pre-eclampsia (n = 10) and from healthy pregnant women (controls, n = 58 at term, n = 26 at first trimester) were analysed and compared. We observed no significant difference between pre-eclamptic and healthy pregnant women for autoantibodies-GRP78 complexes or total GRP78 at both first trimester and at delivery. In contrast, the ratio of C-terminal GRP78 over full length GRP78 was significantly different in plasma of pre-eclamptic patients as compared with controls both during first trimester (P < 0.004) and at term (P < 0.0001). Our findings suggest that circulating C-terminal GRP78 reflect the invasive properties of cells, and could be used as a predictive marker for pre-eclampsia early in pregnancy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available