TABLE 4.
Maternal immune biomarkers | |||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study authors | Final N | IL‐6 | TNF‐α | CRP | IL‐10 | IL‐1β | IL‐8 | MCP‐1 | IL‐4 | IL‐2 | IFN‐γ | IL‐5 | TARC | VEGF | VEGF‐D | GM‐CSF | IL‐12p70 | IL‐13 | MIP‐1β | IL‐7 | sFLT‐1 |
Bodnar et al. (2018) a | 152 | S– | S↓ | S↓ | S↓ | S– | S– | S– | S– | S↓ | S– | S– | S– | S– | S– | S– | S– | S– | S– | S– | |
Irwin et al. (2019) b | 1408 | C↓M↓L↑E↕ | C↓M↓ L↕ E↓ | C↑M↑ L↓E↓ | C↓M↑ L↓E↓ | C↑M↓ L↕E↑ | C↑M↑ L↓E↕ | C↓M↓ L↓E↓ | C↓M↓ L↕E↑ | C↑M↑L↕E↓ | C↓M↓ L↕E↓ | C↑M↑ L↑E↑ | C↑M↑ L↑E↑ | C↓M↓ L↓E↓ | |||||||
Sowell et al. (2018) c | 241 | C↕M↕ | C↕M↕ | C↑M↑ | C↑M↑ | C↕M↕ | C↑M↑ | C↕M↕ | C↑M↑ | ||||||||||||
Spann et al. (2018) | 72 | C↑ | C↑ | ||||||||||||||||||
Rasmussen et al. (2019) | 147 | C↓E– | |||||||||||||||||||
Nazzari et al. (2020) | 104 | C↓ | C↓ | ||||||||||||||||||
Yan et al. (2020) | 1186 | C↓L↓ M↓E↓ | C↓L↓ M↓E↓ | C↓L↓ M↓E↓ | C↓L↓ M↓E↓ | C↓L↓M↓E↓ | |||||||||||||||
Rudolph et al. (2018) | 84 | C↓ | |||||||||||||||||||
Freedman et al. (2019) | 162 | E↓ | |||||||||||||||||||
Gustafsson et al. (2019) b | 68 | E↓ | E↓ | E↓ | |||||||||||||||||
Gustaffson et al. (2018) b | 68 | E↓ | E↓ | E↓ | E↓ | ||||||||||||||||
Hunter et al. (2021) | 127 | E↓ | E– | E↑ | E– | ||||||||||||||||
Osborne et al. (2018) | 87 | L↓M↑E↓ | L↓M↑E↓ | L↓M↑E↓ | L–M–E– | L–M–E– | L–M–E– | L↓M↑E↓ | |||||||||||||
Monthe‐Dreze et al. (2019) | 1246 | C↓ | |||||||||||||||||||
Graham et al. (2018) | 86 | E↓ | |||||||||||||||||||
Nazzari et al. (2019) | 104 | E↓ | E↓ | ||||||||||||||||||
Sevenoaks et al. (2021) | 267 | C↓L↓M↑ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↑L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↑L↓M↑ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | C↓L↓M↓ | |||||||
Rommel et al. (2020) | 512 |
Note: Only biomarkers that were examined in two or more of the included studies are reported in this table. A complete list of all biomarkers examined across these studies is provided in the Supporting Information. Biomarkers not included in this table but measured in one of these studies are EGF, bFGF, VEGF‐C, Eotaxin, Eotaxin‐3, IL‐16, MCP‐4, TNF‐β, GMCSF, IP‐10, MDC, sICAM‐1, sVCAM‐1, IL‐1α, IL‐12, IL‐15, HNP1‐3, MIP‐1α, NGAL, MMP‐9, SAA, sAA Choline, and PGF2‐α. Rommel et al. (2020) measured one biomarker (PGF2‐α) not listed in the table above. Associations depicted in red denote at least one statistically significant association between biomarker and neurodevelopmental outcome reported by study authors. C, cognitive development; L, language/communication development; M, motor development; A, adaptive behavior; E, social–emotional development; S, neurodevelopmental outcome composed of several domains. ↓ = associated with poorer neurodevelopmental outcome. ↑ = associated with better neurodevelopmental outcome. ↕ = mixed (positive and negative) association with better outcome across specific domains of subtypes neurodevelopmental outcome (e.g., vocabulary produced, or vocabulary understood as subtypes of language/communication development), timing of the biosample (e.g., sampled at multiple points in time), or source of biosample (e.g., blood and cerebrospinal fluid). – = direction and/or significance of association with neurodevelopmental outcome not reported.
Study examined cytokine “networks” composed of specific biomarkers.
Study examined latent “inflammatory” or “anti‐inflammatory” profiles, with specific biomarkers identified as items driven by the latent construct.
Study also examined a ratio of inflammatory to anti‐inflammatory biomarkers.