4.0 Article

Reduced levels of antiinflammatory cytokines in patients with chronic widespread pain

期刊

ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM
卷 54, 期 8, 页码 2656-2664

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/art.22026

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. The term chronic widespread pain refers to a group of painful diseases of poorly understood pathophysiology. One major subgroup is fibromyalgia (FM), as defined by the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Among other hypotheses, a potential pathophysiologic role of cytokines in chronic widespread pain has been proposed. We undertook this study to investigate whether cytokine profiles differ in patients with chronic widespread pain and controls. Methods. We analyzed cytokine expression patterns in 40 patients with chronic widespread pain (26 of whom had FM), 40 age- and sex-matched healthy controls, and an additional 15 patients with chronic widespread pain who were recruited from a different center. Expression of messenger RNA (mRNA) for interleukin-2 (IL-2), IL-4, IL-8, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF alpha), and transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF beta 1) in peripheral blood was analyzed using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Serum protein levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results. We found significantly lower relative gene expression (P < 0.0001 for IL-4; P = 0.03 for IL-10) and lower levels of serum protein concentrations (P < 0.0001 for IL-4; P = 0.04 for IL-10) of the Th2 cytokines IL-4 and IL-10 in patients with chronic widespread pain than in the control group. This finding was corroborated in an additional group of 15 patients with chronic widespread pain. There were no significant differences between the groups in levels of mRNA for IL-2, IL-8, TNF alpha, or TGF beta 1. Protein data paralleled the real-time PCR results. Conclusion. Chronic widespread pain is associated with a lack of antiinflammatory and analgesic Th2 cytokine activity, which may contribute to its pathogenesis.

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

4.0
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