4.1 Article

Plasma proteomics of differential outcome to long-term therapy in children with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension

Journal

PROTEOMICS CLINICAL APPLICATIONS
Volume 6, Issue 5-6, Pages 257-267

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/prca.201100078

Keywords

Inflammation; Pulmonary hypertension; Vasodilators

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Specialized Centers of Clinically Oriented Research (SCCOR) [HL-084923-02]
  2. NIH [HL-014985-35]
  3. Jayden DeLuca Foundation
  4. General Clinical Research Center National Center for Research Resources National Institutes of Health [M01-RR00069]
  5. Leah Bult Pulmonary Hypertension Research Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The prognosis for children with IPAH unresponsive to therapy is poor. We investigated the plasma proteome for a molecular basis of good versus poor outcome to long-term vasodilator therapy. Experimental design Plasma was collected at baseline or shortly after therapy initiation and following chronic vasodilator therapy, then divided into those with good outcome (n = 8), and those with a poor outcome (n = 7). To identify proteins unique to either outcome, we used differential gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry. Results were confirmed by commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results Before and after therapy, SAA-4 was 4-fold lower in those with good outcome compared to those with poor outcome, while serum paraoxonase/arylesterase-1 was increased 2-fold in those with good outcome versus poor outcome. After therapy, haptoglobin and hemopexin were 1.45- and 1.8-fold lower, respectively, in those with a good versus poor outcome. Among those with a good outcome, SAP was 1.3-fold lower prior to therapy. Conclusions and clinical relevance SAP and SAA-4 regulate circulating mononuclear phagocytes. As such, they may contribute to the differential response to chronic vasodilator therapy in the context of inflammation in IPAH.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available