Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 26;10(10):2409. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10102409

Table 6.

Examples of clinical studies comparing circulating tumor necrosis factor or interleukin serum concentrations in AAA and control participants.

Ref Number of AAA vs. Control Cases Age of AAA vs. Control Cases (p Value), Years Male Gender % (AAA vs. Control Cases) Aortic Diameter in AAA (mm) Method of Assessment Cytokine Concentration in AAA Cases Cytokine Concentration in Control Cases p Value
Tumor Necrosis Factor-α
[59] 50 vs. 42 58.6 ± 6.6 vs. 58.1 ± 6.3 * 80 vs. 44.7 48 (33–66) mm Solid phase radioimmunoassay 2.1 ± 0.7 pmol/L ^ 1.5 ± 0.3 pmol/L ^ <0.05
[57] 20 vs. 20 74 ± 6 vs. 72 ± 5 100 vs. 100 <45 mm ELISA 41.4 ± 17.3 pg/mL 13.1 ± 5.2 pg/mL <0.05
[58] 130 vs. 219 z 75 ± 8 vs. 68 (53–80) 82.6 vs. 90 >55 mm ELISA 3.6 ± 10.2 pg/mL 1.23 ± 1.93 pg/mL <0.01
Interleukin-1β
[59] 50 vs. 42 58.6 ± 6.6 vs. 58.05 ± 6.3 * 80 vs. 44.7 48 (33–66) mm Solid phase radioimmunoassay 19.3 pmol/L 2.1 pmol/L <0.01
Interleukin-6
[59] 50 vs. 42 58.6 ± 6.6 vs. 58.05 ± 6.3 * 80 vs. 44.7 48 (33–66) mm Solid phase radioimmunoassay 10.0 ± 5.3 pmol/L ^ 4.8 ± 3.2 pmol/L ^ <0.05
[75] 38 vs. 41 70(66–76) vs. 72(67–79) x 71 vs. 80.5 4.0 (3.5–4.3) cm ELISA 3.6 ± 0.51 pg/mL x 3.0 ± 1.03 pg/mL x NS
[65] 27 vs. 15 73 (58–91) vs. 50 (32–74) (p < 0.01) x 100 vs. 20 64 (51–100) mm ELISA 4.9 ± 0.4 pg/mL 2.6 ± 0.5 pg/mL <0.05
[66] 89 vs. 98 73.5 ± 0.5 vs. 73.5 ± 0.5 71.9 vs. 71.4 4.5 (3.9 to 5.1) cm ELISA 2.9 ± 0.4 pg/mL x 1.9 ± 0.2 pg/mL x <0.05
[73] 74 vs. 30 70.7 (56–82) vs. NR 80 vs. NR 5 (5–8), vs. NR cm ELISA 64.2 ± 15.7 pg/mL 6.7 ± 5.1 pg/mL <0.05
[64] 214 vs. 343 74 ± 8 vs. 68 ± 2 (p < 0.01) 79 vs. 46.3 (p < 0.01) 62.8 ± 14.6 mm ELISA 9.4 ± 32.2 pg/mL 2.1 ± 2.9 pg/mL <0.01
[67] 108 vs. 42 72 ± 4 vs. 69 ± 8 100 vs. 100 6.3 ± 0.8 cm Immunoassay 5.5 ± 2.4 pg/mL 4.2 ± 1.6 pg/mL 0.04
[72] 41 vs. 18 72.0 (63.4–77.8) vs. 59.6 (51.4–69.4) 92.7 vs. 55.6 61.6 (40–112) mm ELISA 3.7 ± 0.6 pg/mL x 3.1 ± 0.9 pg/mL x NS
[58] 130 vs. 219 z 75 ± 8 vs. 68 (53–80) x 82.6 vs. 90 >55 mm ELISA 11.3 ± 33.8 pg/mL 2.1 ± 2.9 pg/mL <0.01
[85] 23 vs. 20 72 (54–83) vs. 72 (66–79) 100 vs. 80 60 (43–75) x mm ELISA 940 x ng/mL 793 x ng/mL <0.01
[69] 10 vs. 10 72 (62–75) vs. 72 (62–75) 80 vs. 20 NR ELISA 12.4 ± 11.2 pg/mL 3.4 ± 3.1 pg/mL 0.02
[70] 78 vs. 36 71 (66–78) vs. 72 (67–78) 79.5 vs. 83.3 49 (40–61) x mm ELISA 3.1 ± 0.6 ng/mL 2.3 ± 0.4 ng/mL <0.01
[71] 75 vs. 90 72 ± 7 vs. 72 ± 6 100 vs. 100 41 (35–46) mm ELISA 3.1 ±0.2 x ng/mL 3.1 ± 0.2 x ng/mL 0.98
[76] 7 vs. 113 65 ± 9 (both groups combined) 52.5 vs. 67.5 2.1 ± 0.6 cm/m2 ELISA 3.2 ± 0.9 pg/mL 2.3 ± 1.2 pg/mL 0.04
[74] 50 vs. 22 72.0 (54–85) vs. 59.6 (44–78) 90 vs. 54.5 61.6 (40–112) mm ELISA 4 ± 0.6 x pg/mL 2.7 ± 0.5 x pg/mL <0.01
[68] 10 vs. 10 76.5 (65–85) vs. 70.5 (59–81) 80 vs. 80 56.1 (48–83) mm ELISA 22.6 ± 13.7 x pg/mL 9.8 ± 5.6 x pg/mL <0.05
Interleukin-17
[79] 153 vs. 121 68.9 ± 4.9 vs. 69.4 ± 6.4 96.7 vs. 99.2 49.4 mm ^ ELISA 27.7 ± 42.1 pg/mL 11.7 ± 25.1 pg/mL <0.01
[78] 476 vs. 200 69.9± 2.8 vs. 69.6 ± 2.8 100 vs. 100 50 mm ELISA 36.5 ± 5.9 pg/mL 68.4 ± 13.3 pg/mL 0.02

All data presented as mean ± SD. Mean was calculated from the graphical data using ImageJ [45]; if median data were provided, data was calculated using a validated method [46]. * Mean age was calculated using data provided for both male and female genders separately. ^ Standard deviation not reported. x Median value provided in the original paper. z AAA data were reported separately as small <45 mm (n = 122), medium 45–55 mm (n = 108) and large >55 mm (n = 130). Large aneurysm (>55 mm) group was selected for pooled analysis. AAA—abdominal aortic aneurysm, cm—centimetre, ELISA—enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, L—litre, mL—millilitre, mm—millimetre, NR—not reported, NS—not significant, ND—not detectable, pmol—picomole, pg—picogram.