4.3 Article

Identification of Potential Biomarkers in Peripheral Blood Supernatants of South African Patients with Syphilitic and Herpetic Uveitis

期刊

OCULAR IMMUNOLOGY AND INFLAMMATION
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 299-307

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/09273948.2019.1674341

关键词

Biomarkers; herpes; South Africa; syphilis; Uveitis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to identify potential diagnostic biomarkers for herpetic and syphilitic uveitis. Results showed three proteins in blood samples that differed between syphilitic and other causes, as well as a three-marker biosignature that separated syphilitic cases with high accuracy. Another biosignature differentiated herpetic cases from other causes with promising results. These findings suggest the potential for these biomarkers in distinguishing different etiologies of uveitis and warrant further investigation in larger studies.
Purpose: To identify potential diagnostic biomarkers for herpetic and syphilitic uveitis. Methods: Blood samples were collected from 92 uveitis patients. Concentrations of 47 biomarkers were evaluated in unstimulated Quantiferon supernatants using the Luminex platform. Results: Results showed 11 patients (12%) had herpetic uveitis, 11 (12%) syphilis, 40 (43.5%) other infectious causes, 16 (17.4%) established noninfectious causes and 14 (15.2%) were idiopathic. Biomarker analysis revealed three proteins (Apo-A1, Apo-CIII, CRP) that differed between syphilis and other causes. A three-marker biosignature (CCL4/MIP-1 beta, Apo-CIII and CRP) separated syphilis from other groups with AUC = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.68-0.98). Apo-CIII and CRP differed between herpetic cases and other groups (p < .05). A three-analyte biosignature (Apo-A1, SAP and CRP) separated the herpetic group from other groups with AUC = 0.79 (95% CI: 0.65-0.93). Conclusion: We have identified candidate biomarkers with potential to differentiate between herpetic, syphilitic and other causes of uveitis. These results warrant further investigation in larger future studies.

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

4.3
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