|
|
Changes and clinical significance of serum sFlt-1, E-cadherin and IFN-γ in patients with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion |
LI Huan, ZHANG Kun |
Gynaecology and obstetrics, Xi 'an People's Hospital/Xi'an Fourth Hospital, Xi'an 710016, China |
|
|
Abstract Objective To explore the changes and clinical significance of serum soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 (sFlt-1) , E-cadherin and interferon γ (IFN-γ) in patients with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion (URSA). Methods A total of 146 patients with URSA and 80 normal pregnant women who underwent prenatal examination were enrolled as abortion group and control group between January 2021 and January 2023, respectively. The clinical data and changes of serum sFlt-1, E-cadherin and IFN-γ in the two groups were compared. The influencing factors of URSA were analyzed by multivariate Logistic regression analysis, and the predictive value of sFlt-1, E-cadherin and IFN-γ for URSA was analyzed. Results The levels of serum sFlt-1 and IFN-γ in abortion group were higher than those in control group, while E-cadherin level was lower than that in control group (t=8.520; t=4.254; t=6.643, P<0.05) . Pearson correlation analysis showed that serum sFlt-1 level in URSA patients was negatively correlated with E-cadherin, while positively correlated with IFN-γ (r=-0.286; r=0.392, P<0.05) . Serum E-cadherin in URSA was negatively correlated with IFN-γ (r=-0.272, P<0.05) . Binary Logistic regression analysis showed that age, sFlt-1, E-cadherin and IFN-γ were independent risk factors of URSA. ROC curves analysis showed that AUC of serum sFlt-1 combined with E-cadherin and IFN-γ for predicting URSA was 0.909, greater than that of single index (0.864, 0.666, 0.764, Z=2.892; Z=6.562; Z=4.089, P<0.05) . Conclusion The levels of serum sFlt-1 and IFN-γ are increased, while E-cadherin level is decreased in URSA patients, and all the three indexes have certain value in the prediction and diagnosis of URSA.
|
Received: 18 March 2024
|
|
|
|
[1] 自然流产诊治中国专家共识编写组, 赵爱民. 自然流产诊治中国专家共识 (2020年版)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2020, 36(11): 1082-1090. [2] 中国人体健康科技促进会生殖免疫专业委员会复发性流产病因检查专家共识编写组, 陈建明, 牟方祥, 等. 复发性流产病因检查专家共识[J]. 中国计划生育和妇产科, 2022, 14(2): 3-9. [3] DIMOVA I, RIZOV M, GIRAGOSYAN S, et al.Molecular pathogenesis of spontaneous abortions-Whole genome copy number analysis and expression of angiogenic factors[J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 59(1): 99-104. [4] ANDREESCU M, FRÎNCU F, PLOTOGEA M, et al. Recurrent Abortion and the Involvement of Killer-Cell Immunoglobulin-like Receptor (KIR) Genes, Activated T Cells, NK Abnormalities, and Cytokine Profiles[J]. J Clin Med, 2023, 12(4): 1355. [5] Takci Ş, TOYGAR AK, YİĞİT Ş, et al. The effects of maternal anticoagulant therapy on cord blood levels of VEGF-A and soluble Flt-1 in women with recurrent miscarriage[J]. J Exp Clin Med, 2022, 39(4): 1008-1012. [6] 关英霞, 蒋蕾, 尹洁, 等. CA125与E-cadherin在复发性流产患者血清与组织中的表达及关系研究[J]. 河北医药, 2021, 43(23): 3560-3564. [7] PENG Y, YIN S, WANG M.Significance of the ratio interferon‐γ/interleukin‐4 in early diagnosis and immune mechanism of unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2021, 154(1): 39-43. [8] 谢幸, 苟文丽. 妇产科学 (第八版)[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2013: 557-559. [9] 葛育文, 张宁. Th17/Treg失衡在不明原因复发性自然流产中的作用[J]. 医学综述, 2021, 27(16): 3167-3172. [10] 薛文瑶, 汤磊, 陈聪, 等. 复发性流产的免疫机制和药物治疗进展[J]. 药物生物技术, 2020, 27(1): 78-81. [11] 王明蕊, 李玉婷, 张娜, 等. Nrf2-Keap1-ARE信号通路在复发性流产绒毛组织中的表达及其与氧化应激和炎症反应关系研究[J]. 中国性科学, 2023, 32(7): 58-63. [12] 曾静, 王璟, 付琼. 复发性流产者绒毛组织中miR-150, miR-155表达及与血管生成因子关系[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志, 2021, 29 (11): 2282-2287+2487. [13] GALAZIOU A, FILIDOU E, SPATHAKIS M, et al.Imbalance of growth factors mRNA expression associated with oxidative stress in the early pregnancy loss[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2022, 35(25): 6150-6156. [14] 李建敏, 李娜, 郭娟, 等. 胎心监护, 脐动脉血流联合血清低氧诱导因子-1α 水平在胎儿窘迫诊断中的价值及其与新生儿结局的相关性分析[J]. 中国妇幼保健, 2018, 33(23): 5638-5640. [15] 李云和, 张媛, 章小琴, 等. 早孕复发性流产患者低氧诱导因子-1α, β-hCG, 孕酮表达及预测价值[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志, 2021, 29(6): 1197-1200. [16] 王瑞, 乔媛, 刘娟弟. 子痫前期患者血清sFlt-1, activin A水平与氧化应激和新生儿结局的相关性[J]. 海南医学, 2022, 33(5): 567-569. [17] 罗芸, 陈晶, 夏乐莎, 等. 巨细胞病毒感染性流产IL-1, TLR4, E-cadherin基因的表达及意义[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2021, 31(7): 1071-1075. [18] MOON A, TANGADA A, ANDIKYAN V.Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in Gynecologic Surgery-a review[J]. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep, 2018, 7(1): 1-11. [19] LOH CY, CHAI JY, TANG TF, et al.The E-cadherin and N-cadherin switch in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition: signaling, therapeutic implications, and challenges[J]. Cells, 2019, 8(10): 1118. [20] NA TY, SCHECTERSON L, MENDONSA AM, et al.The functional activity of E-cadherin controls tumor cell metastasis at multiple steps[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2020, 117(11): 5931-5937. [21] PENG Y, YIN S, WANG M.Significance of the ratio interferon‐γ/interleukin‐4 in early diagnosis and immune mechanism of unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2021, 154(1): 39-43. [22] 韩健, 陈韶慧, 王海青, 等. 孕早期子宫动脉血流参数联合外周血Th1/Th2对不明原因复发性流产的预测价值研究[J]. 新疆医科大学学报, 2022, 45(7): 738-742. [23] HERKILOGLU D, GOKCE S, CEVIK O.Relationship of interferon regulator factor 5 and interferon-γ with missed abortion[J]. Exp Ther Med, 2022, 23(5): 1-7. [24] 祝丽琼, 陈慧, 刘梅兰, 等. 不明原因复发性流产患者外周血Treg细胞及细胞因子TGF-β、IL-10的表达及临床意义[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2019, 35 (01): 107-110+114. [25] CHAO HH, LI L, GAO X, et al.CXCL12 expression in aborted mouse uteri induced by IFN-γ: Potential anti-inflammatory effect involves in endometrial restoration after abortion in mice[J]. Gene, 2019, 700(1): 38-46. [26] 潘惠娟, 张春芳, 杨凤娜, 等. 不明原因复发性流产再次妊娠早孕期患者MCV, HCG, IFN-γ/IL-10比值与妊娠结局的关系研究[J]. 现代生物医学进展, 2023, 23(5): 898-903. [27] BOUKHEDOUNI N, MARTINS C, DARRIGADE AS, et al.Type-1 cytokines regulate MMP-9 production and E-cadherin disruption to promote melanocyte loss in vitiligo[J]. JCI insight, 2020, 5(11): e133772. [28] 明妮, 刘智, 吴海卉, 等. 血清干扰素-γ, 淀粉样蛋白A及可溶性血管内皮生长因子受体-1在原因不明复发性流产患者中的表达及意义[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2022, 26 (9): 25-28+34. [29] MITRANOVICI M I, CHIOREAN D M, MORARU R, et al.Understanding the Pathophysiology of Preeclampsia: Exploring the Role of Antiphospholipid Antibodies and Future Directions[J]. J Clin Med, 2024, 13(9): 2668. |
|
|
|