4.6 Article

Elevated serum ApoE levels are associated with bacterial infections in pediatric patients

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER TAIWAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2013.05.010

关键词

Apolipoprotein E; Heparan sulfate proteoglycan (HSPG); LDL receptor-related protein (LRP); Low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR); Sepsis; Syndecan-1 (SDC1)

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai [08ZR1401800]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Purpose(s): We aimed to determine the variations in serum apolipoprotein E E; (ApoE) levels in pediatric patients with a variety of infectious diseases, and to investigate the potential mechanism of elevated ApoE serum levels during infection. Methods: A total of 279 pediatric patients with a variety of infections and 58 normal controls were enrolled in this study. Serum ApoE levels were detected using an immunoturbidimetric assay. A mouse sepsis model was established to evaluate the expression of ApoE and its receptors by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Western blotting. Results: Serum ApoE was markedly increased in cases with bacterial infections including sepsis, bacterial meningitis, and bacterial pneumonia, compared to healthy controls. No significantly elevated serum ApoE levels were observed in aseptic meningitis patients or mycoplasma pneumonia patients. The mice sepsis models showed a similar pattern of increased serum ApoE levels in the early stage of infections. We found reduced expression of ApoE and its receptors in the liver tissues in these mice models. Conclusion: Serum ApoE may represent a novel indicator for diagnosis of bacterial infections, especially sepsis, in pediatric patients. The decreased expression of low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR), LDL receptor-related protein (LRP), and heparin sulfate proteoglycan (HSPG) syndecan-1 (SDC1) may contribute to reduced ApoE clearance and accumulation in the blood. Copyright (C) 2013, Taiwan Society of Microbiology. Published by Elsevier Taiwan LLC. 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