2011
DOI: 10.1038/jhh.2011.90
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Angiogenic balance and diagnosis of pre-eclampsia: selecting the right VEGF receptor

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) was among the most predictive proteins. Reduced levels of VEGF-A have previously been described in preeclamptic pregnancies due to increased levels of placental soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFLT-1) which validate our study [25][26][27] . Observed changes in several other proteins such as LEP, SELL, SELE, and ROR-1, were in agreement with existing literature 21,[28][29][30] .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) was among the most predictive proteins. Reduced levels of VEGF-A have previously been described in preeclamptic pregnancies due to increased levels of placental soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFLT-1) which validate our study [25][26][27] . Observed changes in several other proteins such as LEP, SELL, SELE, and ROR-1, were in agreement with existing literature 21,[28][29][30] .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Reduced levels of VEGFA have previously been described in preeclamptic pregnancies, owing to increased levels of placental soluble FMS-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFLT-1), which validate our study. 15 , 41 , 42 Among the other known biomarkers of preeclampsia—sFLT-1, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PIGF), and endoglin (ENG)—PIGF and PAPP-A were indeed significantly different between normotensive and preeclamptic women ( Figure S15 ). The fact that ENG and sFLT-1 were not significant may be in part due to the small size of our cohort.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%