Publication:
Lack of association between serum prolactin and lead exposure among battery workers

dc.contributor.authorAbusoglu S., Tutkun E., Yilmaz O.H., Gunduzoz M., Bacaksiz A., Giynas N., Aydin E.G., Park E.K., Unlu A.
dc.contributor.authorAbusoglu, S, Tutkun, E, Yilmaz, OH, Gunduzoz, M, Bacaksiz, A, Giynas, N, Aydin, EG, Park, EK, Unlu, A
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-09T20:41:08Z
dc.date.available2023-05-09T20:41:08Z
dc.date.issued2015-01-01
dc.date.issued2015.01.01
dc.description.abstractObjective: Serum prolactin (S-PRL) has been reported as a biomarker of early neurotoxic effect related to lead exposure. Raised S-PRL levels are generally considered to provide indirect evidence of reduced dopaminergic tuberoinfundibular (TIDA) activity. Elevated serum prolactin levels were reported due to lead-exposure. Our aim was to determine the relation between serum prolactin levels and lead-exposure. Material: Serum and whole blood samples were collected from 72 non-exposed and 35 lead-exposed male workers. Method: Blood lead was analyzed by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometer. Serum prolactin levels were analyzed by immunological method. Serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and whole blood count were analyzed by using commercial kits. Results: Although serum prolactin levels were higher in control group compared to lead-exposed group (12.7 ± 7.5 vs. 11.8 ± 77), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.432). Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC) was significantly higher in control group than lead-exposed group (p < 0.001) and reticulocyte distribution width (RDW) was significantly lower in control group than lead-exposed group (p = 0.031). Serum ALP levels were significantly higher in lead-exposed group than control group (197 ± 51 vs. 133 ± 65) (p = 0.000). According to Spearman correlation analysis, there was a significantly negative correlation between blood lead levels and MCHC (r = -0.373, p ≤ 0.001). Also, serum ALP levels were positively correlated with blood lead levels (r = 0.436, p ≤ 0.001). The correlation between blood lead levels and RDW was statistically weak (r = 0.225, p = 0.030). Conclusions: Serum prolactin level is not a diagnostic marker for determining the effect of lead-exposure.
dc.identifier.doi10.5414/TEX01367
dc.identifier.endpage85
dc.identifier.issn0946-2104
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84925294787
dc.identifier.startpage81
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12597/15329
dc.identifier.volume32
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000352123900006
dc.relation.ispartofTrace Elements and Electrolytes
dc.relation.ispartofTRACE ELEMENTS AND ELECTROLYTES
dc.rightsfalse
dc.subjectBiomarker | Health | Hormone | Industry | Toxicity
dc.titleLack of association between serum prolactin and lead exposure among battery workers
dc.titleLack of association between serum prolactin and lead exposure among battery workers
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.issue2
oaire.citation.volume32
relation.isScopusOfPublication91b73238-fa60-4169-84bb-4f26c0861709
relation.isScopusOfPublication.latestForDiscovery91b73238-fa60-4169-84bb-4f26c0861709
relation.isWosOfPublication37945cf4-88f4-49c3-a0d9-511ca433d02b
relation.isWosOfPublication.latestForDiscovery37945cf4-88f4-49c3-a0d9-511ca433d02b

Files

Collections