Background: Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) encompass a diverse group of disorders affecting the lung interstitium, leading to inflammation, fibrosis, and impaired respiratory function. Currently, the identification of new diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for ILDs turns out to be necessary. Several studies show the role of KL-6 in various types of interstitial lung disease and suggest that serum KL-6 levels can be used as a prognostic marker of disease. The aim of this study was to analyze KL-6 expression either in serum or bronchoalveolar lavage samples in order to: (i) make a serum vs. BAL comparison; (ii) better understand the local behavior of fibrosis vs. the systemic one; and (iii) evaluate any differences in patients with progressive fibrosis (PPF) versus patients with non-progressive fibrosis (nPPF). Methods: We used qRT-PCR to detect KL-6 expression both in serum and BAL samples. Mann-Whitney's U test was used to compare the differential expression between groups. Results: In serum, KL-6 is more highly expressed in PPF than in non-progressive fibrosis (p = 0.0295). This difference is even more significant in BAL (p < 0.001). Therefore, it is clear that KL-6 values are related to disease progression. Significant differences were found by making a comparison between BAL and serum. KL-6 was markedly higher in serum than BAL (p = 0.0146). Conclusions: This study identifies KL-6 as a promising biomarker for the severity of the fibrosing process and disease progression in ILDs, with significantly higher levels observed in PPF compared to nPPF. Moreover, the marked difference in KL-6 levels between serum and BAL emphasizes its potential diagnostic and prognostic relevance, providing enlightening insights into both the local and systemic aspects of ILDs.

Role of BAL and Serum Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) in Patients with Pulmonary Fibrosis

Soccio, Piera
;
Moriondo, Giorgia;d'Alessandro, Miriana;Scioscia, Giulia;Tondo, Pasquale;Foschino Barbaro, Maria Pia;Lacedonia, Donato
2024-01-01

Abstract

Background: Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) encompass a diverse group of disorders affecting the lung interstitium, leading to inflammation, fibrosis, and impaired respiratory function. Currently, the identification of new diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for ILDs turns out to be necessary. Several studies show the role of KL-6 in various types of interstitial lung disease and suggest that serum KL-6 levels can be used as a prognostic marker of disease. The aim of this study was to analyze KL-6 expression either in serum or bronchoalveolar lavage samples in order to: (i) make a serum vs. BAL comparison; (ii) better understand the local behavior of fibrosis vs. the systemic one; and (iii) evaluate any differences in patients with progressive fibrosis (PPF) versus patients with non-progressive fibrosis (nPPF). Methods: We used qRT-PCR to detect KL-6 expression both in serum and BAL samples. Mann-Whitney's U test was used to compare the differential expression between groups. Results: In serum, KL-6 is more highly expressed in PPF than in non-progressive fibrosis (p = 0.0295). This difference is even more significant in BAL (p < 0.001). Therefore, it is clear that KL-6 values are related to disease progression. Significant differences were found by making a comparison between BAL and serum. KL-6 was markedly higher in serum than BAL (p = 0.0146). Conclusions: This study identifies KL-6 as a promising biomarker for the severity of the fibrosing process and disease progression in ILDs, with significantly higher levels observed in PPF compared to nPPF. Moreover, the marked difference in KL-6 levels between serum and BAL emphasizes its potential diagnostic and prognostic relevance, providing enlightening insights into both the local and systemic aspects of ILDs.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11369/461921
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact