4.6 Article

Anti-TNF-α therapy reduces retinol-binding protein 4 serum levels in non-diabetic patients with psoriasis: a 6-month prospective study

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.13005

关键词

-

资金

  1. Abbvie Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Retinol-binding protein-4 (RBP4), an adipokine considered as an emerging cardiometabolic risk factor, is increased in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Objective In this study, we aimed to establish the effect of anti-TNF-alpha therapy on RBP4 levels in patients with moderate- to-severe psoriasis. We also assessed if RBP4 levels correlate with metabolic syndrome features and disease severity in these patients. Methods Prospective study on a series of consecutive non-diabetic patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who completed 6 months of therapy with adalimumab. Patients with kidney disease, hypertension or body mass index >= 35 kg/m(2) were excluded. Metabolic and clinical evaluation was performed at the onset of treatment (time 0) and at month 6. Results Twenty-nine patients were assessed. Statistically significant reduction (P = 0.0001) of RBP4 levels was observed after 6 months of therapy (RBP4 at time 0: 55.7 +/- 21.4 mu g/mL, vs. 35.6 +/- 29.9 mu g/mL at month 6). No significant correlation between basal RBP4 levels and metabolic syndrome features or disease severity was found. Nevertheless, although RBP4 levels did not correlate with insulin resistance, a negative and significant correlation between RBP4 levels obtained after 6 months of adalimumab therapy and other metabolic syndrome features such as abdominal perimeter and body mass index were observed. At that time, a negative and significant correlation between RBP4 levels and disease activity scores and ultrasensitive CRP levels was also disclosed. Conclusion Our results support an influence of the anti-TNF-alpha blockade on RBP4 serum levels. This finding is of potential relevance due to increased risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with psoriasis.

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

4.6
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