Cross-sectional analysis reveals no difference in oxidative stress markers in active and inactive Behçet's, suggesting saliva's potential as a diagnostic tool.
Background and Aims Behçet's disease (BD) is a systemic inflammatory vasculitis characterized by recurrent oral and genital ulcers; ocular and skin lesions; and vascular, gastrointestinal, and neurological involvement. The absence of specific laboratory markers for disease activity poses a significant challenge in managing BD. This study aimed to evaluate oxidative stress levels in the saliva of patients with active and inactive BD and explore their associations with disease activity. Methods This cross‐sectional study included 64 patients who were diagnosed with BD on the basis of the International Criteria for Behçet's Disease (ICBD). Patients were divided into active and inactive groups on the basis of their clinical manifestations. Unstimulated whole saliva samples were collected, and oxidative stress markers, including total oxidant status (TOS), total antioxidant status (TAS), and the oxidative stress index (OSI), were measured. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the oxidative stress levels between the two groups and assess their correlation with disease activity. Results The results revealed no significant difference in the levels of oxidative stress markers between patients with active and inactive BD. However, regression analysis indicated that disease activity was the strongest predictor of TAS, whereas smoking was the strongest predictor of TOS. Conclusion Despite the absence of significant differences in salivary oxidative stress markers, this study highlights the potential of saliva as a noninvasive diagnostic tool for assessing oxidative stress in BD patients. Further research with larger sample sizes and additional biomarkers is recommended to better understand the role of oxidative stress in BD activity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alikhani et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: