MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4411014697 · doi:10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100533

Prospective determination of heat shock protein serum levels in Saskatchewan women during pregnancy

2025· article· en· W4411014697 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Ewa Miśkiewicz, Jocelyne Martel, Daniel J. MacPhee

Notice bibliographique

RevueAJOG Global Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueHeat shock proteins research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Saskatchewan
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPregnancyShock (circulatory)Heat shock proteinProspective cohort studyObstetricsMedicineAndrologyChemistryInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background The stress proteins Heat shock protein (HSP) 27, HSP70, and αB-crystallin have all been detected in human serum under normal and disease conditions. HSP70 serum levels are known to increase in women with advancing gestation, but HSP27, HSP70, and αB-crystallin have never been assessed prospectively over pregnancy and at labour. Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the serum levels of HSP27, HSP70, and αB-crystallin in pregnant women over pregnancy to assess whether the levels increase significantly over time and particularly at term and/or labour. Study Design We conducted a prospective cohort pilot study of serum levels of HSP27, HSP70, and αB-crystallin in Saskatoon-area women with singleton pregnancies using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). Serum samples were collected from each patient at three periods: <14 weeks, 22-33 weeks at glucose screening, and at term non-labour/active labour. ELISA data were subjected to D’Agostino and Pearson tests for normality. If data were not normally distributed, Friedman tests followed by Dunn’s multiple comparisons tests were conducted. If data were normally distributed, they were subjected to repeated measures one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests. A Spearman correlation analysis of HSP levels with increasing gestational age was also conducted. All data were assessed and graphed using GraphPad Prism software. Results HSP27 levels were significantly elevated at term/labour compared to the two earlier timepoints assessed (Dunn’s p<0.0001 vs <14 weeks and p=0.0014 vs 22-33 weeks). HSP70 serum levels were also significantly elevated at term/labour compared to earlier timepoints (Dunn’s p=0.0005 vs <14 weeks and p=0.0179 vs 22-33 weeks). In contrast, αB-crystallin levels were not significantly different over gestation. When the serum levels of the HSPs over pregnancy were separately examined in the prospective cohorts who were sampled at term or at active spontaneous or induced labour, HSP27 levels were still significantly elevated at term (Tukey’s p=0.003 vs <14 weeks and p=0.031 vs 22-33 weeks) or at labour (Tukey’s p<0.0001 vs <14 weeks and 22-33 weeks). Of note, HSP27 levels at term were significantly elevated over levels at labour (3.949 ± 0.622 vs 2.139 ± 0.241, respectively; Welch’s p=0.0211). HSP70 levels were only significantly elevated at term (Dunn’s p=0.029) or at labour (Tukey’s p=0.015) compared to <14 weeks. αB-crystallin levels were not significantly different over gestation in these two cohorts. Overall, there was a significant positive correlation between gestational age and HSP27 or HSP70 serum concentrations regardless of whether we examined term/labour as a group or in separate cohorts of patients who were sampled at term or labour. Conclusion Serum levels of HSP27 and HSP70 in pregnant women at term and/or labour were significantly elevated relative to earlier periods of pregnancy and they positively correlated with gestational age. However, HSP27 levels were also significantly elevated at term compared to labour thereby identifying this small HSP as a candidate biomarker of impending labour. Such a biomarker could be valuable for screening term pregnant women in rural settings who are distant from urban delivery centres to minimize travel, economic costs, and maternal stress.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,065
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,650

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,287
Écart entre enseignants0,280 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAJOG Global ReportsMême sujetHeat shock proteins researchTravaux en français237 207