http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Prostate Cancer, High Cortisol Levels and Complex Hormonal Interaction
Fabre, Bibiana,Grosman, Halina,Gonzalez, Diego,Machulsky, Nahuel Fernandez,Repetto, Esteban M,Mesch, Viviana,Lopez, Miguel Angel,Mazza, Osvaldo,Berg, Gabriela Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2016 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.17 No.7
Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common diseases in men. It is important to assess prognostic factors and whether high cortisol levels and complex hormonal interactions could be responsible for PCa development. We evaluated the relationship between cortisol, leptin and estrogens in 141 men, 71 with PCa and the remaining 70 constituting a low risk group (LRG). They were recruited for this study from a total of 2906 middle-aged men (ages 45-70 years) who completed an evaluation for prostatic diseases at the Urology Division, Hospital de Clínicas "$Jos{\acute{e}}$ de San $Mart{\acute{i}}n$", University of Buenos Aires, in May 2009. In this cross sectional study, cortisol, PSA, total-testosterone, free-testosterone, bioavailable testosterone, LH and estradiol were measured in serum. We observed increased cortisol levels in PCa patients as compared to LRG cases (p=0.004,). Leptin and estradiol levels were also higher in PCa patients (p=0.048; p<0.0001, respectively). Logistic regression analysis indicated that serum cortisol (OR: 1.110 (95% CI 1.016-1.213), p=0.022), estradiol (OR: 1.044 (95% CI 1.008-1.081), p=0.016) and leptin (OR: 1.248 (95% CI 1.048-1.487), p=0.013) explained 27% of the variance of dependent variables, even after adjusting for age, smoking, BMI and waist circumference. We found increased cortisol levels in PCa patients as compared to LRG, as well as an altered circulating hormonal profile.
Somoza Maria Luisa,Prieto-Moreno Pfeifer Ana,Martín-Pedraza Laura,Victorio Puche Laura,Esteban Rodríguez Angel,Blanca-López Natalia,Eva Fernández González Abel,Fernández-Caldas Enrique,Morán Morales M 대한천식알레르기학회 2021 Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research Vol.13 No.6
The most important peach fruit allergen is Pru p 3, followed by Pru p 1, Pru p 4, and Pru p 7. We aimed to assess their role in subjects with peach fruit-induced allergy (anaphylaxis and OAS) and compare skin prick tests (SPT) vs. specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) for predicting anaphylaxis. We also selected a control group. SPT included prevalent inhalant and plant food allergens plus peach peel extract. The sIgE to Pru p 1, Pru p 3, Pru p 4, and Pru p 7 were quantified. Compared with controls (n = 42), cases (n = 41) were younger (P = 0.003), more frequently female (P < 0.05) and had higher SPT positivity to peach peel (44% vs. 2.4%, P < 0.0001). There were significant differences in sensitization to several pollens: Olea europaea, Artemisia vulgaris, Prunus persica, Platanus acerifolia (all P < 0.001); and fruits: apple (P < 0.04), peanut (P < 0.002), tomato (P < 0.005), and melon (P < 0.05). Pru p 3 sIgE was detected in 61% of all cases (85% anaphylaxis and 38% OAS; P < 0.01 each) and 5% of controls (P < 0.001). Pru p 4 sIgE was present in 19% of cases and 7% of controls. The sIgE to Pru p 1 and Pru p 7 were not found. The odds ratio to predict anaphylaxis for peach peel SPT was 113 (confidence interval [CI], 20–613; P < 0.0001); for sIgE to Pru p 3, 22 (CI, 5.3–93; P < 0.0001); and for SPT positivity to selected plant food allergens, 5 (CI, 1–19; P < 0.05). In our study group, SPT with peel peach extract was a better predictor of anaphylaxis than Pru p 3 sIgE or other variables considered. The role of sIgE to Pru p 1, Pru p 4, and Pru p 7 seemed negligible.