4.4 Article

Serum biomarkers VEGF-C and IL-6 are associated with severe human Peripheral Artery Stenosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFLAMMATION-LONDON
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12950-015-0095-y

关键词

Inflammation; VEGF-C; IL-6; Monocytes; and Peripheral artery disease

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2012CB910800]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81590764, 31070778, 31370859, 31300723]
  3. WIV One-Three-Five Strategic Programs
  4. Cancer Research Center, Xuhui Central Hospital [CCR2012005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Emerging reports propose possible biomarkers that are related to inflammation, nutrition and lipid parameters for detection of the progression of atherosclerotic plaques, peripheral artery disease (PAD) and particularly peripheral artery stenosis (PAS). However, it remains unclear which biomarkers in serum are associated with the severity of PAS. Findings: In this study, we measured serum levels of inflammatory biomarkers along with lipid and nutritional parameters in 53 patients who suffered different degrees of PAS. Serum concentrations of vascular endothelial growth factor-c (VEGF-C) and IL-6 (Interleukin 6) were significantly increased in patients showing moderate or severe PAS. Furthermore, the number of blood monocytes from PAS patients was significantly increased, which showed elevated adhesion to plate-coated fibrinogen. Compared to healthy subjects, freshly isolated or LPS (lipopolysaccharide)-stimulated blood monocytes from PAS patients could produce VEGF-C and IL-6 at higher levels. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the increased number of blood monocytes might play key roles during the development of severe PAS, which enhance adhesion at the local narrowed peripheral artery and secret high levels of VEGF-C and IL-6. We suggest that serum concentrations of VEGF-C and IL-6 might be used as biomarkers for diagnosis severe PAS in combination with clinical imaging examination.

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