4.7 Article

Plasma metastin levels are negatively correlated with insulin resistance and free androgens in women with polycystic ovary syndrome

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 85, 期 6, 页码 1778-1783

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.11.044

关键词

metastin; kisspeptin; PCOS; obesity; insulin resistance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This study was designed to: [1] measure, for the first time, metastin (kisspeptin) levels in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), a condition associated with hypersecretion of LH and hyperandrogenemia; and [2] investigate the possible correlations between metastin and PCOS-related reproductive and metabolic disturbances. Design: Clinical study. Setting: University hospital. Patient(s): Twenty-eight obese and overweight (body mass index [BMI] > 25 kg/m(2)) women with the syndrome, and 13 obese and overnight controls (ovulatory women without clinical or biochemical hyperandrogenemia) were selected. Intervention(s): Blood samples were collected between day 3 and day 6 of a sponataneous bleeding episode in the PCOS groups and a menstrual cycle of the controls, at 9:00 AM, after an overnight fast. Main Outcome Measure(s): Circulating levels of LH, FSH, PRL, T, Delta(4)-androstenedione (A), DHEAS, 17 alpha OH-P, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), insulin, glucose, and metastin were measured. Result(s): Both normal weight women with PCOS and obese controls were less insulin resistant and had significantly higher metastin levels, compared to obese and overweight women with the syndrome. Plasma kisspeptin levels were negatively correlated with BMI, free androgen index, and indices of insulin resistance. Conclusion(s): These results indicate that metastin is negatively associated with free androgen levels. The PCOS-associated insulin resistance and consequent hyperinsulinemia probably contribute to this effect by [1] stimulating androgen synthesis by the polycystic ovary (PCO) and [2] suppressing SHBG production in the liver.

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

4.7
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