Matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) cleaves a broad spectrum of substrates including extracellular matrix components (responsible for normal tissue remodeling) and cytokines (modulators of the inflammatory response to physiological insults such as tissue damage). MMP-2 expression is elevated in many pathologies (e.g., myocardial infarction, hypertensive heart disease, inflammation) where tissue remodeling and inflammatory responses are perturbed. Thus, it has generally been assumed that blockade of MMP-2 activity will yield therapeutic effects. Here, we provide a counter-argument to this dogma based on: a) Preclinical studies on Mmp2 null (Mmp2) mice subjected to myocardial infarction, hypertensive heart disease or inflammatory conditions. b) Clinical studies on patients with congenital cardiac and bone physiology abnormalities due to inactivating MMP2 gene mutations. Furthermore, we put forward the hypothesis that when MMP-2 activity falls below baseline the bioavailability of pro-inflammatory cytokines normally cleaved and inactivated by MMP-2 increases leading to production of cytokines and cardiac secretion of phospholipase A2 activity into circulation which stimulate systemic inflammation that perturbs lipid metabolism in target organs. Finally, we suggest that insufficient understanding of the consequences of MMP-2 deficiency remains a major factor in the failure of MMP-2 inhibitor-based therapeutic approaches. This paucity of knowledge precludes our ability to effectively intervene in cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular pathologies at the level of MMP-2.

Background: Acute stroke treatment is a time-critical process in which every minute counts. Laboratory biomarkers are needed to aid clinical decisions in the diagnosis. Although imaging is critical for this process, these biomarkers may provide additional information to distinguish actual stroke from its mimics and monitor patient condition and the effect of potential neuroprotective strategies. For such biomarkers to be effectively scalable to public health in any economic setting, these must be cost-effective and non-invasive. We hypothesized that blood-based combinations (panels) of proteins might be the key to this approach and explored this possibility through a systematic review.Methods: We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines for systematic review. Initially, the broader search for biomarkers for early stroke diagnosis yielded 704 hits, and five were added manually. We then narrowed the search to combinations (panels) of the protein markers obtained from the blood.Results: Twelve articles dealing with blood-based panels of protein biomarkers for stroke were included in the systematic review. We observed that NR2 peptide (antibody against the NR2 fragment) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are brain-specific markers related to stroke. Von Willebrand factor (vWF), matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9), and S100β have been widely used as biomarkers, whereas others such as the ischemia-modified albumin (IMA) index, antithrombin III (AT-III), and fibrinogen have not been evaluated in combination. We herein propose the following new combination of biomarkers for future validation: panel 1 (NR2 + GFAP + MMP-9 + vWF + S100β), panel 2 (NR2 + GFAP + MMP-9 + vWF + IMA index), and panel 3 (NR2 + GFAP + AT-III + fibrinogen).Conclusions: More research is needed to validate, identify, and introduce these panels of biomarkers into medical practice for stroke recurrence and diagnosis in a scalable manner. The evidence indicates that the most promising approach is to combine different blood-based proteins to provide diagnostic precision for health interventions. Through our systematic review, we suggest three novel biomarker panels based on the results in the literature and an interpretation based on stroke pathophysiology.

BackgroundBecause of high prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is an urgent need for inexpensive and minimally invasive diagnostic tests to detect biomarkers in the earliest and asymptomatic stages of the disease. Blood-based biomarkers are predicted to have the most impact for use as a screening tool and predict the onset of AD, especially in LMICs. Furthermore, it has been suggested that panels of markers may perform better than single protein candidates.MethodsMedline/Pubmed was searched to identify current relevant studies published from January 2016 to December 2020. We included all full-text articles examining blood-based biomarkers as a set of protein markers or panels to aid in AD’s early diagnosis, prognosis, and characterization.ResultsSeventy-six articles met the inclusion criteria for systematic review. Majority of the studies reported plasma and serum as the main source for biomarker determination in blood. Protein-based biomarker panels were reported to aid in AD diagnosis and prognosis with better accuracy than individual biomarkers. Conventional (amyloid-beta and tau) and neuroinflammatory biomarkers, such as amyloid beta-42, amyloid beta-40, total tau, phosphorylated tau-181, and other tau isoforms, were the most represented. We found the combination of amyloid beta-42/amyloid beta-40 ratio and APOEε4 status to be most represented with high accuracy for predicting amyloid beta-positron emission tomography status.ConclusionAssessment of Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers in blood as a non-invasive and cost-effective alternative will potentially contribute to early diagnosis and improvement of therapeutic interventions. Given the heterogeneous nature of AD, combination of markers seems to perform better in the diagnosis and prognosis of the disease than individual biomarkers.