Relationship of TNF-alpha, sTNFRI levels in cerebrospinal fluid and blood serum with TNFRSF2, TNFR1 polymorphisms and the course of multiple sclerosis

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. 74-78
Author(s):  
I. V. Smagina ◽  
◽  
A. S. Palashenko ◽  
S. A. Elchaninova ◽  
E. A. Nazarchuk ◽  
...  
2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gavin Giovannoni

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is the body fluid closest to the pathology of multiple sclerosis (MS). For many candidate biomarkers CSF is the only fluid that can be investigated. Several factors need to be standardized when sampling CSF for biomarker research: time/volume of CSF collection, sample processing/storage, and the temporal relationship of sampling to clinical or MRI markers of disease activity. Assays used for biomarker detection must be validated so as to optimize the power of the studies. A formal method for establishing whether or not a particular biomarker can be used as a surrogate end-point needs to be adopted. This process is similar to that used in clinical trials, where the reporting of studies has to be done in a standardized way with sufficient detail to permit a critical review of the study and to enable others to reproduce the study design. A commitment must be made to report negative studies so as to prevent publication bias. Pre-defined consensus criteria need to be developed for MS-related prognostic biomarkers. Currently no candidate biomarker is suitable as a surrogate end-point. Bulk biomarkers of the neurodegenerative process such as glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and neurofilaments (NF) have advantages over intermittent inflammatory markers.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Baranowska-Bik ◽  
Dorota Uchman ◽  
Lidia Martynska ◽  
Malgorzata Kalisz ◽  
Anna Litwiniuk ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen F. Mosleth ◽  
Christian Alexander Vedeler ◽  
Kristian Hovde Liland ◽  
Anette McLeod ◽  
Gerd Haga Bringeland ◽  
...  

AbstractDespite intensive research, the aetiology of multiple sclerosis (MS) remains unknown. Cerebrospinal fluid proteomics has the potential to reveal mechanisms of MS pathogenesis, but analyses must account for disease heterogeneity. We previously reported explorative multivariate analysis by hierarchical clustering of proteomics data of MS patients and controls, which resulted in two groups of individuals. Grouping reflected increased levels of intrathecal inflammatory response proteins and decreased levels of proteins involved in neural development in one group relative to the other group. MS patients and controls were present in both groups. Here we reanalysed these data and we also reanalysed data from an independent cohort of patients diagnosed with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), who have symptoms of MS without evidence of dissemination in space and/or time. Some, but not all, CIS patients had intrathecal inflammation. The analyses reported here identified a common protein signature of MS/CIS that was not linked to elevated intrathecal inflammation. The signature included low levels of complement proteins, semaphorin-7A, reelin, neural cell adhesion molecules, inter-alpha-trypsin inhibitor heavy chain H2, transforming growth factor beta 1, follistatin-related protein 1, malate dehydrogenase 1 cytoplasmic, plasma retinol-binding protein, biotinidase, and transferrin, all known to play roles in neural development. Low levels of these proteins suggest that MS/CIS patients suffer from abnormally low oxidative capacity that results in disrupted neural development from an early stage of the disease.


2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (9) ◽  
pp. 1059-1067 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah-Jane Martin ◽  
Sarah McGlasson ◽  
David Hunt ◽  
James Overell

ObjectiveNeurofilament is a biomarker of axonal injury proposed as a useful adjunct in the monitoring of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of case–control studies that have measured neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of people with MS (pwMS), in order to determine whether, and to what degree, CSF NfL levels differentiate MS from controls, or the subtypes or stages of MS from each other.MethodsGuidelines on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses were followed. Electronic databases were searched for published and ‘grey’ literature, with 151 hits. Of 51 full articles screened, 20 were included in qualitative analysis, and 14 in meta-analysis.ResultsCSF NfL was higher in 746 pwMS than 435 (healthy and disease) controls, with a moderate effect size of 0.61 (p < 0.00001). Mean CSF NfL levels were significantly higher in 176 pwMS with relapsing disease than 92 with progressive disease (2124.8 ng/L, SD 3348.9 vs 1121.4 ng/L, SD 947.7, p = 0.0108). CSF NfL in 138 pwMS in relapse (irrespective of MS subtype) was double that seen in 268 pwMS in remission (3080.6 ng/L, SD 4715.9 vs 1541.7 ng/L, SD 2406.5, p < 0.0001).ConclusionsCSF NfL correlates with MS activity throughout the course of MS, reflecting the axonal damage in pwMS. Relapse is more strongly associated with elevated CSF NfL levels than the development of progression, and NfL may be most useful as a marker of disease ‘activity’ rather than as a marker of disability or disease stage.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document