2019
DOI: 10.1039/c9mo00061e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reduced sialyl-Lewisxon salivary MUC7 from patients with burning mouth syndrome

Abstract: We analyse and compare MUC7 O-glycosylation and inflammatory biomarkers in saliva from female patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS) and gender/age-matched controls.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(43 reference statements)
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The majority of the inflammatory proteins, 67 out of 92, were detected in serum and in unstimulated and stimulated saliva samples, which is the highest detection rate of the Olink inflammation panel in saliva to date. 23 , 24 This result supports the hypothesis that salivary proteins may be analogous to circulatory biomarkers, since approximately 40% of previously suggested disease markers in plasma are detected in saliva as well. 25 Yet distinct differences in protein expression patterns were observed between serum and saliva, and the correlation of protein expression between saliva and serum was scarce.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The majority of the inflammatory proteins, 67 out of 92, were detected in serum and in unstimulated and stimulated saliva samples, which is the highest detection rate of the Olink inflammation panel in saliva to date. 23 , 24 This result supports the hypothesis that salivary proteins may be analogous to circulatory biomarkers, since approximately 40% of previously suggested disease markers in plasma are detected in saliva as well. 25 Yet distinct differences in protein expression patterns were observed between serum and saliva, and the correlation of protein expression between saliva and serum was scarce.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…This resulted in 33 possible references. After reading the full‐text articles, 16 references were discarded for the following reasons: one for not having a CG (Kang et al, 2017), one for not analyzing biomarkers (Castillo‐Felipe et al, 2021), two for being letters to the editor (Boras et al, 2006; López‐Jornet et al, 2009), four for evaluating genetic polymorphisms (Campello et al, 2020; Guimarães et al, 2006; Kim et al, 2017; Vucićević‐Boras et al, 2003), five for not clarifying the diagnostic criteria used for BMS (Hershkovich & Nagler, 2004; Loeb et al, 2008; Simcić et al, 2006; Srinivasan et al, 2008; Suh et al, 2009), and three for not presenting numerical values for biomarker levels (Acharya et al, 2019; Ji et al, 2017; Kho et al, 2013; these values were requested from the authors, and no response was obtained). Finally, 17 studies were included in this systematic review (Figure 1).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The International Classification of Orofacial Pain (ICOP) defines burning mouth syndrome (BMS) as “an intraoral burning or dysaesthetic sensation, recurring daily for more than 2 h/day for more than 3 months, without evident causative lesions on clinical examination and investigation” (ICOP, 2020). BMS affects 4% of the general population and 18%–33% of all postmenopausal women (Acharya et al, 2019; Ji et al, 2017; Lopez‐Jornet et al, 2020; Pekiner et al, 2009). BMS patients suffer bilateral intraoral pain or burning sensation that can vary in intensity without obvious clinical changes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The same group of researchers also analyzed the salivary samples of BMS patients and controls and demonstrated a complex pattern of inflammatory biomarkers, including Cystatin-5, (CST-5), Interleukin-7 (IL-7), Fibroblast Growth Factor-19 (FGF- 19), and C-C Motif Chemokine 19 . Both higher and lower levels of biomarkers were found in the BMS patients compared with the controls, indicating that BMS patients represent a diverse group when considering their levels of inflammatory biomarkers [27]. Although this study provided valuable insights, the concept of extraoral dryness, potential reasons, consequences for patients, and potential strategies to prevent or treat it remain uninvestigated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%