ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2022
Exploration of Potential Biomarkers for Type 2 Diabetes by UPLC-QTOF-MS and WGCNA of Skin Surface Lipids.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Eigenlipids for exploring lipid biology.Journal of lipid research · 2026Review
- Skin manifestations in diabetes-what is new?Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Skin Surface Sebum Analysis by ESI-MS.Biomolecules · 2024Review
- Chewing the fat: How lipidomics is changing our understanding of human health and disease in 2022.Analytical science advances · 2023Review
- No skin off your back: the sampling and extraction of sebum for metabolomics.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes has become popular and has become one of the most important global health care challenges. Patients with diabetes have a high incidence of skin diseases. Cell and animal models are often used to study the skin conditions of people with diabetes.
methodsIn this study, a volunteer questionnaire survey, skin lipomics analysis based on ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole tandem time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-QTOF-MS), and weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) were used to study the differences in skin conditions and skin lipids of participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Group D) versus healthy individuals (Group H) and the correlation between these groups. The questionnaire was used to investigate personal basic, diabetes, and facial skin status information of 77 female volunteers aged 55-65 years old from the Peking University Shougang Hospital. The facial skin lipids of all volunteers were analysed by UPLC-QTOF-MS technique; the differential lipids between groups D and H were analysed by partial least-squared discriminant and univariate analysis.
resultsIn total, 23 kinds of differential lipids were identified, all of which belonged to sphingolipids. The use of WGCNA combined clinical information with lipid analysis to study the relationship between glycosylated haemoglobin, skin pigmentation/non-pigmentation, and skin lipids. Two types of lipids were identified to distinguish between hub lipids of high and low glycosylated haemoglobin; 12 types of lipids were identified that could distinguish between the hub lipids of pigmented and non-pigmented participants (PLS-DA).
conclusionThe experimental results not only provide a reference for the diagnosis and classification of diabetes via analysing the skin lipids of patients, but also provides a theoretical basis for further study on the effects of diabetes on the skin of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.