Blood reviews · 2026
Biomarkers of joint and bone diseases, and their associations to haemophilic arthropathy in people with haemophilia: A first systematic review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Piccand M, Schmidt A, Stephan H, Wehmeier U F, Tomschi F, Hilberg T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite therapeutic progress, haemophilic arthropathy persists due to recurrent haemarthrosis. With joint preservation as a central objective, sensitive and standardised biomarkers are needed.
OBJECTIVES: To review molecular biomarkers of inflammation, joint and bone diseases in people with haemophilia (PwH) compared with healthy controls and assess associations with arthropathy.
METHODS: Systematic searches (PubMed, Web of Science) and PICOS-based selection of cross-sectional/case-control studies.
RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included; Compared with controls, PwH showed higher inflammatory activity as well as altered cartilage and bone turnover. Associations with imaging and clinical scores were present but heterogeneous, influenced by factors such as bleed timing, age, treatment exposure, comorbidities, and assay variability.
CONCLUSIONS: Current biomarkers distinguish PwH from healthy controls but lack standardisation, specificity and validated prognostic value. Priorities include harmonisation and longitudinal validation of multi-biomarker panels integrated with imaging and patient-reported outcomes to monitor subclinical disease and guide personalised therapy.
OBJECTIVES: To review molecular biomarkers of inflammation, joint and bone diseases in people with haemophilia (PwH) compared with healthy controls and assess associations with arthropathy.
METHODS: Systematic searches (PubMed, Web of Science) and PICOS-based selection of cross-sectional/case-control studies.
RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included; Compared with controls, PwH showed higher inflammatory activity as well as altered cartilage and bone turnover. Associations with imaging and clinical scores were present but heterogeneous, influenced by factors such as bleed timing, age, treatment exposure, comorbidities, and assay variability.
CONCLUSIONS: Current biomarkers distinguish PwH from healthy controls but lack standardisation, specificity and validated prognostic value. Priorities include harmonisation and longitudinal validation of multi-biomarker panels integrated with imaging and patient-reported outcomes to monitor subclinical disease and guide personalised therapy.