4.7 Article

Differences in number and activity of peripheral natural killer cells in primary versus secondary recurrent miscarriage

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 80, Issue 2, Pages 368-375

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00611-3

Keywords

NK; recurrent pregnancy loss; habitual abortion

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA73056] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare peripheral natural-killer (NK) cell numbers and activity in women with primary recurrent miscarriage, secondary recurrent miscarriage and controls. Design: Observational study. Setting: Academic medical center. Patient(s): Thirty-eight women with primary recurrent miscarriage, 29 women with secondary recurrent miscarriage, and 25 control women. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): [1] The proportion of NK cells in the total lymphocyte population, [2] the concentration of NK cells per microliter of blood, and [3] NK activity (NKA), using both standard and whole-blood assays. Result(s): Primary aborters had the highest proportion and concentration of NK cells and had the highest activity using the standard assay. Secondary aborters had an intermediate level of these NK cell indices, whereas the control patients had the lowest levels. Using the whole-blood NKA assay, the differences between primary and secondary aborters were most apparent: primary aborters had significantly higher NKA than did either secondary aborters or control women (72, 40, and 35 lytic units, respectively). Approximately 50% of the variability in NKA could be attributed to differences in concentrations of NK cell per microliter of blood. Conclusion(s): The higher NKA evident in primary recurrent miscarriage and the reported higher efficacy of immunotherapy in primary aborters support the involvement of NK cells in the etiology of primary recurrent miscarriage. (C) 2003 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available