In addition to central hyperexcitability and impaired top–down modulation, chronic inflammation probably plays a role in the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia (FM). Indeed, on the basis of both animal experiments and human studies involving the analysis of cytokines and other inflammation-related proteins in different body fluids, neuroinflammatory mechanisms are considered to be central to the pathophysiology of many chronic pain conditions. However, concerning FM, previous human plasma/serum and/or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cytokine studies have looked only at a few predetermined cytokine candidates. Instead of analyzing only a few substances at a time, we used a new multiplex protein panel enabling simultaneous analysis of 92 inflammation-related proteins. Hence, we investigated the CSF and plasma inflammatory profiles of 40 FM patients compared with CSF from healthy controls (n=10) and plasma from blood donor controls (n=46). Using multivariate data analysis by projection, we found evidence of both neuroinflammation (as assessed in CSF) and chronic systemic inflammation (as assessed in plasma). Two groups of proteins (one for CSF and one for plasma) highly discriminating between patients and controls are presented. Notably, we found high levels of CSF chemokine CX3CL1 (also known as fractalkine). In addition, previous findings concerning IL-8 in FM were replicated, in both CSF and plasma. This is the first time that such an extensive inflammatory profile has been described for FM patients. Hence, FM seems to be characterized by objective biochemical alterations, and the lingering characterization of its mechanisms as essentially idiopathic or even psychogenic should be seen as definitively outdated.

Objective  Reference values are usually defined based on blood samples from healthy men or nonpregnant women. This is not optimal as many biological markers changes during pregnancy and adequate reference values are of importance for correct clinical decisions. There are only few studies on the variations of laboratory tests during normal pregnancies, especially during the first two trimesters. It is thus a need to establish such reference values.Design  Longitudinal study of laboratory markers in normal pregnancies.Setting  Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden.Population  Healthy pregnant females.Methods  We have studied 25 frequently used laboratory tests during 52 normal pregnancies. Each woman was sampled up to nine times and the samples were divided according to collection time into the following groups: gestational week 7–17; week 17–24; week 24– 28; week 28–31; week 31–34; week 34–38; predelivery (0–2 weeks before delivery) and postpartum (>6 weeks after delivery). The 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles for these markers were calculated according to the recommendations of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry on the statistical treatment of reference values.Results  Reference intervals are reported for plasma alanine aminotransferase, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, pancreas amylase, apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B, aspartate aminotransferase, bilirubin, calcium, chloride, creatinine, cystatin C, ferritin, γ‐glutamyltransferase, iron, lactate dehydrogenase, magnesium, phosphate, potassium, sodium, transferrin, triglycerides, thyroid‐stimulating hormone, urate and urea during these pregnancy periods.Conclusions  Most of the analytes change during normal pregnancy. It is thus of importance to use special reference values during pregnancy.

Introduction: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is common and a major cause of mortality. Studies on cardiovascular morbidity are abundant, whereas mortality studies focusing on cardiovascular outcomes are scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate causes of death and baseline predictors of overall (OM), non-vascular (N-VM), and specifically cardiovascular (CVM) mortality in SLE, and to evaluate systematic coronary risk evaluation (SCORE). Methods: 208 SLE patients were included 1995-1999 and followed up after 12 years. Clinical evaluation, CVD risk factors, and biomarkers were recorded at inclusion. Death certificates and autopsy protocols were collected. Causes of death were divided into CVM (ischemic vascular and general atherosclerotic diseases), N-VM and death due to pulmonary hypertension. Predictors of mortality were investigated using multivariable Cox regression. SCORE and standardized mortality ratio (SMR) were calculated. Results: During follow-up 42 patients died at mean age of 62 years. SMR 2.4 (CI 1.7-3.0). 48% of deaths were caused by CVM. SCORE underestimated CVM but not to a significant level. Age, high cystatin C levels and established arterial disease were the strongest predictors for all- cause mortality. After adjusting for these in multivariable analyses, only smoking among traditional risk factors, and high soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), anti-beta2 glycoprotein-1 (abeta2GP1) and any antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) among biomarkers, remained predictive of CVM. Conclusion: With the exception of smoking, traditional risk factors do not capture the main underlying risk factors for CVM in SLE. Rather, cystatin C levels, inflammatory and endothelial markers, and antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) differentiate patients with favorable versus severe cardiovascular prognosis. Our results suggest that these new biomarkers are useful in evaluating the future risk of cardiovascular mortality in SLE patients.

Point-of-care testing (POCT) refers to any diagnostic test administered outside the central laboratory at or near the location of the patient. By performing the sample collection and data analysis steps in the same location POCT cuts down on transport and processing delays, resulting in the rapid feedback of test results to medical decision-makers. Over the past decades the availability and use of POCT have steadily increased in Europe and throughout the international community. However, concerns about overall utility and the reliability of benefits to patient care have impeded the growth of POCT in some areas. While there is no agreed-upon standard for how success should be judged, the increases in speed and mobility provided by POCT can lead to substantial advantages over traditional laboratory testing. When properly utilized, POCT has been shown to yield measurable improvements in patient care, workflow efficiency, and even provide significant financial benefits. However, important organizational and quality assurance challenges must be addressed with the implementation of POCT in any health care environment. To ensure maximal benefits it may be necessary to evaluate critically and restructure existing clinical pathways to capitalize better on the rapid test turnaround times provided by POCT.