Despite significant research efforts aimed at understanding the neurobiological underpinnings of psychiatric disorders, the diagnosis and the evaluation of treatment of these disorders are still based solely on relatively subjective assessment of symptoms. Therefore, biological markers which could improve the current classification of psychiatry disorders, and in perspective stratify patients on a biological basis into more homogeneous clinically distinct subgroups, are highly needed. In order to identify novel candidate biological markers for major depression and schizophrenia, we have applied a focused proteomic approach using plasma samples from a large case-control collection. Patients were diagnosed according to DSM criteria using structured interviews and a number of additional clinical variables and demographic information were assessed. Plasma samples from 245 depressed patients, 229 schizophrenic patients and 254 controls were submitted to multi analyte profiling allowing the evaluation of up to 79 proteins, including a series of cytokines, chemokines and neurotrophins previously suggested to be involved in the pathophysiology of depression and schizophrenia. Univariate data analysis showed more significant p-values than would be expected by chance and highlighted several proteins belonging to pathways or mechanisms previously suspected to be involved in the pathophysiology of major depression or schizophrenia, such as insulin and MMP-9 for depression, and BDNF, EGF and a number of chemokines for schizophrenia. Multivariate analysis was carried out to improve the differentiation of cases from controls and identify the most informative panel of markers. The results illustrate the potential of plasma biomarker profiling for psychiatric disorders, when conducted in large collections. The study highlighted a set of analytes as candidate biomarker signatures for depression and schizophrenia, warranting further investigation in independent collections.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,728,209
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#29,272
of 224,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,949
of 236,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#138
of 877 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 236,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 877 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
