...
首页> 外文期刊>Hepato-gastroenterology. >No prognostic significance of antimitochondrial antibody profile testing in primary biliary cirrhosis.
【24h】

No prognostic significance of antimitochondrial antibody profile testing in primary biliary cirrhosis.

机译:抗线粒体抗体谱检测在原发性胆汁性肝硬化中没有预后意义。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The rate of disease progression varies considerably between individuals with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC). On the basis of serological subtyping 4 antimitochondrial antibody (AMA) profiles (A, B, C and D) can be defined. The finding of previous studies that profile C/D is associated with a progressive course, in contrast to profile A/B, is a question of debate. The aim of the study was to investigate whether AMA profiles predicted the course for a cohort of Dutch PBC patients. METHODOLOGY: Patients with an established diagnosis of AMA-positive PBC, AMA-negative PBC patients, non-PBC decompensated cirrhotics and healthy volunteers. Serum samples from 38 AMA-positive progressive patients, 31 AMA-positive patients without evidence of progression for at least 6 years, 5 AMA-negative PBC patients, 5 non-PBC decompensated cirrhotics and 5 healthy volunteers were assessed. AMA profiles were determined without knowledge of the clinical data. RESULTS: In the progressive AMA-positive group, 13% had profile A/B and 84% had profile C/D. In the non-progressive group, 13% had profile A/B, 77% profile C/D; 10% had no profile. During follow-up, a change from profile A/B to profile C/D or vice versa was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that not only PBC patients with AMA profile C/D but also patients with profile A/B may run a progressive course and therefore does not support the suggestion that AMA profiles can be used as independent prognostic indicator. The divergent results of this and previous studies may be explained by the selection of different patient populations.
机译:背景/目的:原发性胆汁性肝硬化(PBC)患者之间疾病进展的速度差异很大。根据血清学亚型,可以定义4种抗线粒体抗体(AMA)谱(A,B,C和D)。先前的研究发现,与A / B档案相反,C / D档案与循序渐进的课程相关,这是一个有争议的问题。该研究的目的是调查AMA资料是否可以预测一组荷兰PBC患者的病程。方法:确诊为AMA阳性PBC的患者,AMA阴性PBC患者,非PBC代偿性肝硬化患者和健康志愿者。评估了38例AMA阳性进行性患者,31例至少6年无进展证据的AMA阳性患者,5例AMA阴性PBC患者,5例非PBC代偿性肝硬化患者和5例健康志愿者的血清样本。在不了解临床数据的情况下确定了AMA配置文件。结果:在进行性AMA阳性组中,有13%的人具有A / B轮廓,有84%的人具有C / D轮廓。在非进行性组中,有13%的人具有A / B档案,有77%的人具有C / D档案; 10%没有个人资料。在随访期间,未观察到从配置文件A / B更改为配置文件C / D,反之亦然。结论:这项研究发现,不仅具有AMA轮廓C / D的PBC患者,而且具有A / B轮廓的PBC患者都可以进行性病程,因此不支持AMA轮廓可以用作独立的预后指标的建议。这项研究与以前的研究结果不同,可以通过选择不同的患者人群来解释。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号