4.2 Article

Serum Preptin and Amylin Levels with Respect to Body Mass Index in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Patients

Journal

MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR
Volume 24, Issue -, Pages 7517-7523

Publisher

INT SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE, INC
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.912957

Keywords

Body Mass Index; Islet Amyloid Polypeptide; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Preptin and amylin are pancreatic hormones which participate in glucose homeostasis. This study aimed to evaluate how serum preptin and amylin levels are altered in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients and healthy women based on BMI groups (<25 kg/m(2) and >= 25 kg/m(2)). Material/Methods: This was a prospective randomized control study of 40 PCOS patients and 40 healthy women who were matched with respect to BMI (<25 kg/m(2) and >= 25 kg/m(2)). Results: When compared to the healthy women, PCOS patients had significantly higher ovarian volumes, Ferriman-Gallwey scores, and free and total testosterone levels, but significantly lower amylin concentrations (p=0.001, p=0.001, p=0.049, p=0.021, and p<0.001, respectively). Both the normal-weight and overweight PCOS patients had significantly lower amylin levels than the normal-weight and overweight controls (p<0.001, p=0.009, p=0.001, and p=0.001, respectively). Amylin levels were negatively and significantly correlated with the Ferriman-Gallwey scores (r=-0.272, p=0.001) and ovarian volume (r=-0.206, p=0.007). Serum preptin levels were not elevated in either group. Conclusions: Serum preptin levels are statistically similar in PCOS patients and BMI-matched healthy controls. Serum amylin levels are significantly higher in healthy controls than PCOS patients whether they are slim or overweight. These findings suggest the presence of mechanisms that can prevent the elevation in serum amylin concentrations that can occur in response to the impaired glucose metabolism in PCOS patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available