切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华临床实验室管理电子杂志 ›› 2015, Vol. 03 ›› Issue (02) : 105 -109. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5820.2015.02.010

实验研究

嗜酸粒细胞群落VCS参数监测抗结核药肝毒性的价值
沈甜1, 朱易华2, 顾德林1, 陈俊林3, 曹兴建2,()   
  1. 1.226011 南通市第六人民医院检验科
    2.226011 南通大学附属第二医院检验科
    3.226011 南通市第六人民医院结核科
  • 收稿日期:2015-04-24 出版日期:2015-05-28
  • 通信作者: 曹兴建
  • 基金资助:
    南通市卫生局青年基金资助课题(WQ2014064)

The value of eosinophil VCS parameters in predicting hepatotoxicity of antituberculosis drugs

Tian Shen1, Yihua Zhu2, Delin Gu1, Junlin Chen3, Xingjian Cao2,()   

  1. 1.Department of Laboratory,the Sixth People’s Hospital, Nantong 226011, China
    2.Department of Laboratory, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong 226001, China
    3.Department of Tuberculosis,the Sixth People’s Hospital, Nantong 226011, China
  • Received:2015-04-24 Published:2015-05-28
  • Corresponding author: Xingjian Cao
引用本文:

沈甜, 朱易华, 顾德林, 陈俊林, 曹兴建. 嗜酸粒细胞群落VCS参数监测抗结核药肝毒性的价值[J/OL]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2015, 03(02): 105-109.

Tian Shen, Yihua Zhu, Delin Gu, Junlin Chen, Xingjian Cao. The value of eosinophil VCS parameters in predicting hepatotoxicity of antituberculosis drugs[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Laboratory Management(Electronic Edition), 2015, 03(02): 105-109.

目的

探讨结核病患者抗结核药治疗中外周血嗜酸粒细胞群落VCS参数变化及其在监测抗结核药肝毒性中的价值。

方法

检测南通市第六人民医院确诊的初治肺结核患者633例(肺结核组)和500名健康体检者(健康对照组)的嗜酸粒细胞计数(eosinophli counts,EO#)、嗜酸粒细胞百分率(percentage of eosinophli,EO%)、嗜酸粒细胞VCS参数;同时检测两组的丙氨酸氨基转移酶(alanine aminotransferase,ALT)水平,并根据临床症状和实验室检查将肺结核患者分为病例对照组(376例,实验室指标均正常)和药物性肝损伤组[(drug induced liver injury, DILI) 50例, ALT>2×正常值上限]。监测两组用药前后的嗜酸粒细胞VCS参数和ALT变化,绘制受试者工作特征(receiver operating characteristic, ROC)曲线,评价其在监测结核病患者服用抗结核药强化期期间,诊断DILI的敏感度和特异度。

结果

病例对照组和DILI组用药前ALT、EO%、嗜酸粒细胞平均体积(mean eosinophli volume,MEV)、嗜酸粒细胞体积分布宽度 [mean eosinophli volume distribution width, MEVSD,分别为(17.28±5.82)U/L、(2.20±0.74)%、(162.54±7.05) fl、(15.66±3.67);(17.32±5.79)U/L、(2.26±0.72 )%、(163.05±7.365) fl、15.63±3.70]分别与健康对照组[(17.07±5.61)U/L、(2.07±0.71)%、(161.93±7.30)fl、(15.57±3.82)]比较,差异均无统计学意义 (t值分别为-0.830、-1.121、-0.598、-1.659;-1.908、-1.189、-1.023、-1.462,P均>0.05)。 DILI组发生肝损伤时EO%升高的发生率为36.0%(18/50例), 明显高于病例对照组[6.6% (25/376例), x2=14.45, P<0.05]。病例对照组强化期ALT、EO%、MEV、MEV-SD[ (17.50±5.86) U/L、(2.34±0.69)%、(163.11±8.21)fl、15.70±3.69]与用药前相比,均无显著变化 (t值分别为0.618、-1.178、-1.750、-0.618,P均>0.05);而DILI组ALT升高前1周的MEV、MEV-SD[(165.01±7.64) fl、15.89±3.27]均高于用药前(t值分别为-2.545、-3.021,P均<0.05],且在发生DILI前1周MEV、MEV-SD增加更为显著[(166.87±8.92) fl、(16.37±3.66), t值分别为-10.161、-9.727,P均<0.01),此时两项指标的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.894和0.815,当MEV临界值≥163.15 fl、MEV-SD 临界值≥17.11时,其诊断DILI的敏感度分别为81%、72%,特异度亦达82%、80%,均优于ALT(54%、76%)和EO%(50%、71%)。ALT+EO%+MEV+MEVSD联合检测诊断DILI的敏感度、特异度高达84%和91%。

结论

抗结核药物引起DILI时,嗜酸粒细胞体积参数MEV和MEV-SD变化较为敏感,且在ALT升高前明显增加,与ALT、EO%联合检测可提高诊断DILI的敏感度和特异度,并可用于监测抗结核药肝毒性和早期诊断DILI。

Objective

To investigate the changes of eosinophil VCS parameters and further its potential value in monitoring hepatotoxicity of anti-tuberculosis (anti-TB) drugs.

Methods

The eosinophil counts(EO#), percentage of eosinophil (EO%), the VCS parameters and standard deviation (SD), of 633 TB patients and 500 healthy controls , were measured by the Coulter LH-750 analyzer.Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) was measured simultaneously. The changes of VCS and ALT parameters of 426 TB patients including 376 case controls and 50 with drug induced liver injury (DILI)[ALT>2×upper limit of normal value] before and after treatment were statistically analyzed and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were depicted, so as to assess the value of eosinophil VCS parameters in predicting the sensitivity and specificity of hepatotoxicity of antituberculosis drugs in intensive phase.

Results

The parameters ALT,EO%,MEV and MEV-SD did not show significant difference before treatment in case controls and DILI group [(17.28±5.82)U/L, (2.20±0.74)%, (162.54±7.05)fl,(15.66±3.67);(17.32±5.79)U/L, (2.26±0.72 )%, (163.05±7.365) fl, 15.63±3.70] compared to health controls[(17.07±5.61)U/L, (2.07±0.71)%, (161.93±7.30)fl, 15.57±3.82; t=-0.830, -1.121, -0.598, -1.659;-1.908, -1.189, -1.023, -1.462; P>0.05]. The incidence of increased EO% in DILI group [36.0% (18/50)]was significantly higher than case-controls [6.6% (25/376), x2=14.45, P<0.05]. There were also no statistically significances between parameters prior to treatment and after [ (17.50±5.86) U/L, (2.34±0.69)%, (163.11±8.21)fl, 15.70±3.69; t=0.618, -1.178, -1.750, -0.618; P>0.05]. The MEV, MEV-SD during the week before ALT elevated [(165.01±7.64) fl, (15.89±3.27)]were significantly larger than those prior to treatment (t=-2.545,-3.021; P<0.05). When DILI happened,the changes were more significant[(166.87±8.92) fl, (16.37±3.66); t=-10.616, -9.727; P<0.01]. The receiver operating characteristics analysis reveals the MEV and MEV-SD had the largest areas under curves ( 0.894, 0.815 prior to DILI). Using the cutoff point≥163.15 fl for MEV and ≥17.11 for MEV-SD, the sensitivities of 81% and 72% and specificities of 82% and 80%, were respectively greater than EO%(50%, 71%) and ALT (54%, 76%). In addition,the effect of combined diagnosis was better than one single.The sensitivity and specificity of ALT+EO%+MEV+MEV-SD were up to 84% and 91%.

Conclusions

The MEV and MEV-SD change significantly when liver injury is induced by anti-TB drugs and are further significantly increase before the increase of ALT. The effect of combined diagnosis with ALT and EO% could improve the sensitivity and specificity of DILI diagnosis, which may provide help for predicting hepatotoxicity of anti-TB drugs and early diagnosis of DILI.

表1 病例对照组和DILI组用抗结核药物前后各VCS参数水平比较 (x±s)
图1 DILI前1周ALT、EO%、MEV及MEV-SD的ROC曲线
表2 ALT、EO%、MEV和MEV-SD诊断DILI的相关参数
表3 ALT、EO%、MEV及MEV-SD单独或联合检测50例DILI患者的诊断效能比较
图2 患者发生DILI前1周MEV与ALT的相关性
1
陈灏珠,钟南山,陆再英,等.内科学[M].8版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2013:61-418.
2
王继美,张松贞.2942 例药物性肝损害文献分析[J].药物流行病学杂志, 2009,12(2):101-104.
3
Chih LH, Angela WF, Huang YS.Correlation of antituberculosis drug-related liver injury and liver function monitoring: A 12-year experience of the Taiwan Drug Relief Foundation[J].J FDA,2014,22(3):356-362.
4
叶应妩,王毓三,申子喻,等.全国临床操作规程[M].3版.北京:中华人民共和国卫生部医政司,2006:137-143.
5
安慧茹,吴雪琼. 抗结核药物引起药物性肝损害的临床特点分析[J].四川医学, 2011,32(5):633-636.
6
陈成伟,马洪年,傅青春,等.药物与中毒性肝病[M].2版.上海:上海科学技术出版社,2013:309-646.
7
邵世峰,李丽.抗结核药物性肝损害的临床分析[J].天津医学杂志,2007,35(9): 716-717.
8
Proctor WR,Chakraborty M,Chea LS,et al.Eosinophils mediate the pathogenesis of halothane-induced liver injury in mice[J].Hepatology,2013,57(5):2026-2036.
9
Proctor WR,Chakraborty M, Fullerton AM,et al.Thymic stromal lymphopoietin and interleukin-4 mediate the pathogenesis of halothane-induced liver injury in mice[J].Hepatology,2014,60(5):1741-1752.
10
陈文彬,潘祥林.诊断学[M].6版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2006:273-403.
11
Aoyama T,Matsumoto T,Uchiyama A,et al.Recurrent severe acute hepatitis caused by hypereosinophilic syndrome associated with elevated serum immunoglobulin G4 levels[J].Clin J Gastroenterol,2014,7(22):516-522.
12
Zhu Y, Cao X, Zhang K, et al.Delta mean neutrophil volume(△MNV) is comparable to procalcitonin for predicting postsurgical bacterial infection[J].Clin J Lab Analy,2014,28(4):301-305.
13
Bagdasaryan R, Zhou ZR, Tierno B, et al.Neutrophil VCS parameters are superior indicators for acute infection[J].Lab Hematol,2007,13(1):12-16.
14
乐家新,王芳,王成彬,等.急性细菌感染时中性粒细胞体积、传导率和光散射参数的变化与临床意义[J].Chin J Nosocomiol,2010,20(5):614-617.
15
Ozer JS,Chetty R,Kenna G, et al. Enhancing the utility of alanine aminotransferase as a reference standard biomarker for drug-induced liver injury [J].Regul Toxicol Pharmaco,2010,56(3):237-246.
[1] 金小琳, 杨智彬, 詹淑华, 朱丹, 何海英, 殷水泽, 马世武. 1 501例初治住院结核病患者肝功能异常的影响因素[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(05): 394-400.
[2] 沈甜, 施军卫, 顾德林, 张海云, 喻禹, 朱易华, 陶国华, 蔡慧慧, 曹兴建. 单核细胞群落VCS参数诊断活动性肺结核的价值[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(05): 478-482.
[3] 沈甜, 朱易华, 顾德林, 陈俊林, 曹兴建. 白细胞群落参数在监测抗结核药物致粒细胞下降中的临床价值[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(01): 60-64.
[4] 丁超峰, 高晟, 郑树森. 药物性急性肝衰竭行肝移植治疗的预后因素探讨[J/OL]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(04): 268-271.
[5] 陈凤, 唐怡敏, 黎倩卉, 刘映霞, 王菲. 抗结核药物肝损伤ALDH2基因多态性分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(01): 103-105.
[6] 卢喜, 俞婷婷, 韩志刚. "CYP2D6"基因多态性和NSCLC靶向治疗后肝损伤、皮疹及腹泻的相关性[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(06): 781-784.
[7] 李佐霖, 洪旭初. 嗜酸粒细胞增多表型慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者的临床特征[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2017, 10(03): 377-378.
[8] 王笑笑, 胡景卉, 刘金韵, 陈俊飞, 黄京城, 罗先富. 钆塞酸二钠增强磁共振成像肝胆期对比剂摄取相关参数评估药物性肝损伤的价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2022, 12(04): 204-209.
[9] 任继媛, 刘志敏, 李春星, 徐雪纯, 韩若凌. ARFI定量成像技术评估不同类型肝损伤治疗效果的价值研究[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(03): 264-267.
[10] 李文文, 曹可, 赵倩楠, 康妍萌, 张才擎. benralizumab在重症嗜酸粒细胞型哮喘治疗中的价值[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(05): 306-309.
[11] 曾心睿, 梁嘉敏, 王怡洁, 陈韵, 罗嘉莹, 王峰, 孙宝清. 嗜酸性粒细胞计数在变应性鼻炎患儿中的临床意义[J/OL]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2021, 09(03): 138-142.
[12] 关计添, 尤克增, 耿义群, 孙树宜, 赖凌峰, 沈智威, 张晓磊, 周腾, 黄淮栋, 杨琳, 程焱, 吴烁华, 赵芝泓, 庄彩玉, 吴仁华. 质子磁共振波谱对急性肝损伤兔肝脏脂质与葡萄糖代谢评估价值的研究[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 160-165.
[13] 刘艳, 唐神结. 肠道菌群与抗结核药及其所致肝损伤的相关性研究进展[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 82-86.
[14] 马西顺, 杜丽珍, 类婷婷, 刘刚, 王梓涵, 韩彤亮. 颈部木村病与Castleman病超声及病理学诊断特征分析[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2020, 08(01): 28-31.
[15] 王少珍, 廖联明. 黄药子中毒导致肝损伤的机制研究[J/OL]. 中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2018, 04(01): 33-44.
阅读次数
全文


摘要