Serologic markers of autoimmunity in women with polycystic ovary syndrome

Serological markers of autoimmunity ‎in women with polycystic ovary ‎syndrome

“…The result of this study showed that DsDNA was signi icantly higher in PCOS compared to control (54.2 ± 20.3 vs. 24.0 ± 15.0 IU/ml) and that 28.0% of PCOS had elevated DsDNA compared to 2.0% in control, which is agreement with Makled et al (MAK-LED et al, 2015) (56.3 ± 25.7 vs. 26.0 ± 10.8 IU/ml for PCOS and control respectively) and in agreement with He ler-Frischmuth et al (HEFLER-FRISCHMUTH et al, 2010) with both studies showing that DsDNA in signi icantly higher in PCOS compare to matched normal control, which in agreement with the result of the current study in which DsDNA had higher prediction of PCOS compared to ANA (AUC in ROC test was higher in DSDNA vs. ANA 0.901 vs. 0.809) indicating it consistency in elevation in PCOS and ANA had more variable elevation (MAKLED et al, 2015) (HEFLER-FRISCHMUTH et al, 2010.…”

“…In the current study, two of the most common immunological markers were examined (antinuclear antibodies and double-stranded DNA) both represent the basic markers used in the diagnosis of autoimmune diseases. In this study serum ANA was signi icantly higher in PCOS group compared to control (8.0 ± 2.7 vs. 5.1 ± 2.6 IU/ml respectively), these indings were in agreement with Reimand et al (REIMAND et al, 2001) in their casecontrol study which includes 108 female cases with various reproductive diseases from this group 20 women had PCOS 6 women had elevated ANA (6/20, 30%) compared to 14 out of 392 (3.6%) of normal age matched control women and this was statistically signi icant, additionaly the currnet study agreed with a recent study in Egypt published in 2015 in which Makled et al (MAKLED et al, 2015) performed a case control study on 50 PCOS and 50 age-matched control women and found that PCOS women had signi icantly higher ANA titer compared to control (9.0 ± 6.1 vs. 5.4 ± 2.3 U/ml) with 36.0% of PCOS had elevated ANA vs. 6.0% in the control group, on the other hand, the results of this study concerning ANA was in disagreement with He ler-Frischmuth et al (He ler-Frischmuth et al, 2010), they performed case control study with 109 PCOS against 109 matched control in Austria 2010; which they reported no differences in ANA levels between the groups this is the single study that reported no difference in ANA between PCOS compared to control which can be attributed to differences in selection criteria of the patients.…”

“…The indings of this study in conjugation with previously reported studies (REIMAND et al, 2001) (MAKLED et al, 2015) (HEFLER-FRISCHMUTH et al, 2010 indicate a signi icant link between autoimmunity and PCOS, Glintborg et al (GLINTBORG and ANDERSEN, 2010) reported an increased in lammatory response with overexpression in the immune mediator in PCOS patients, Fulghesuet at al (FULGHESU et al, 2011) show an association between monocytes in patients with insulin -resistance PCOS, and with interleukin 6 (which is in lammatory cytokine), other postulated the low levels of progesterone as a reason for immune overstimulation (PETRIKOVA et al, 2010) so these indings can indicate the elevation in ANA and DsDNA levels possibly caused by immune overstimulation and in lammation, Dehaghani et al (DEHAGHANI et al, 2013) in their study of ovarian electrocauterization (to destroy parts of ovary that affected by PCOS) their observation of increase ANA levels after the procedure imply that manipulation in ovary tissues in women with PCOS provoke in lammatory response or increase release of in lammatory mediators (that either directly elevate ANA or DsDNA or precipitate their elevation) leading to autoimmunity, since one of the accepted theory of autoimmunity is tissue destruction (MACKAY et al, 2008). No clear antibodies were found in previous studies directed to ovarian tissue but a status of an overall increased immune activation without speci ic antibody, which can be caused by different mechanisms that need to be clari ied (REIMAND et al, 2001).…”

“…In this study serum ANA signi icantly correlated with FSH (r=0.341, p=0.016), with LH (r=0.351, p=0.012), and with TSH (r=0.398, p = 0.004); Makled et al (MAKLED et al, 2015) agree with our indings only in cases TSH correlation with ANA which they found to be signi icant, while ANA correlation with FSH and LH appear to be not signi icant, He ler-Frischmuth et al (HEFLER-FRISCHMUTH et al, 2010) also found a signi icant correlation between TSH and ANA (p=0.03), in their study only TSH correlation with ANA which is more commonly elevated in immunological conditions while LH and FSH had lower immunogenicity compared to TSH.…”

“…In this study serum DsDNA also signi icantly correlated with FSH (r=0.331, p=0.019) with TSH (r=0.667, p <0.001) and not signi icantly with LH (r=0.252, p=0.077), Makled et al (MAKLED et al, 2015) disagree with our indings concerning the correlation between DsDNA with endocrine markers in which they found no such correlation to be found in (FSH, LH and TSH) while He ler-Frischmuth et al (HEFLER-FRISCHMUTH et al, 2010) agree with our indings except they also reported a signi icant correlation between DsDNA with LH in addition to signi icant correlation with FSH and TSH, since Ds-DNA is highly correlated with PCOS so it will be expected to highly correlated with the hormonal component of PCOS (TSH and FSH), other than that no clear mechanism can explain such observation.…”