4.4 Article

Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor and somatostatin levels in cerebrospinal fluid of patients affected by chronic migraine and fibromyalgia

期刊

CEPHALALGIA
卷 26, 期 4, 页码 409-415

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2005.01048.x

关键词

analgesic abuse; cerebrospinal fluid; chronic migraine; fibromyalgia; glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor; somatostatin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present study was to verify cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) and somatostatin, both measured by sensitive immunoassay, in: 16 chronic migraine (CM) patients, 15 patients with an antecedent history of migraine without aura diagnosed as having probable chronic migraine (PCM) and probable analgesic-abuse headache (PAAH), 20 patients affected by primary fibromyalgia syndrome (PFMS), and 20 control subjects. Significantly lower levels of GDNF and somatostatin were found in the CSF of both CM and PCM + PAAH patients compared with controls (GDNF =P < 0.001, P < 0.002; somatostatin = P < 0.002, P < 0.0003), without significant difference between the two groups. PFMS patients, with and without analgesic abuse, also had significantly lower levels of both somatostatin and GDNF (P < 0.0002, P < 0.001), which did not differ from those of CM and PCM + PAAH patients. A significant positive correlation emerged between CSF values of GDNF and those of somatostatin in CM (r = 0.70, P < 0.02), PCM + PAAH (r = 0.78, P < 0.004), and PFMS patients (r = 0.68, P < 0.008). Based on experimental findings, it can be postulated that reduced CSF levels of GDNF and somatostatin in both CM and PCM + PAAH patients can contribute to sustained central sensitization underlying chronic head pain. The abuse of simple or combination analgesics does not seem to influence the biochemical changes investigated, which appear to be more strictly related to the chronic pain state, as demonstrated also for fibromyalgia.

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