4.4 Article

Peripheral immuno-inflammatory abnormalities in ultra-high risk of developing psychosis

期刊

SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH
卷 176, 期 2-3, 页码 191-195

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2016.06.031

关键词

Ultra-high risk; Prodromal; Inflammation; Cytokines; Schizophrenia; Psychosis

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq, Brasilia, Brazil)
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP, Sao Paulo, Brazil)
  3. L'oreal/UNESCO/Brazilian Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Immuno-inflammatory imbalances have been documented in schizophrenia, but very little is known about the immunological changes prior to the onset of disease. Objective: Thiswork aimed to compare serumlevels of pro-and anti-inflammatory cytokines in young subjects at ultra-high risk (UHR) of developing psychosis with age-and sex-matched healthy controls. Methods: A total of 12 UHR and 16 age-and sex-matched healthy controls (HC) subjects were enrolled in this study. Clinical profile was assessed using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS), Semi-Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis-I (SCID-I) or Kiddie-SADS-Present and Lifetime Version (KSADS-PL), and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale. Seruminterleukin (IL)-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, IFN-gamma, and IL-17 were measured by flow cytometry using the Th1/Th2/Th17 cytometric bead array. Results: Compared with the healthy control group, patients in UHR showed increased IL-6 levels (Z=-2.370, p = 0.018) and decreased IL-17 levels in serum (Z = -1.959, p = 0.050). Levels of IL-17 positively correlated to the values in GAF symptoms (rho= 0.632, p = 0.028). Conclusion: Our results suggest that immunological imbalances could be present in the early stages of psychosis, including in at-risk stages. Future studies should replicate and expand these results. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.4
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