School of Physical & Chemical Sciences.
School of Psychology, Speech & Hearing, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Lab Med. 2024 May 2;55(3):334-340. doi: 10.1093/labmed/lmad086.
For over 60 years there has been conjecture about the identity of an Ehrlich's test positive pyrrole (Mauve Factor) reputed to be a biomarker for psychological disorders, including anxiety. We reviewed studies that attempt to identify Mauve Factor and subjected authentic standards of the 2 main candidates, kryptopyrrole and hydroxypyrrole, to the Ehrlich's reaction.
Modified Ehrlich's test for kryptopyrrole and hydroxypyrrole were applied to urine samples from 10 volunteers, anxious and nonanxious.
Based on the mechanistic chemistry of Ehrlich's reaction and reactions of the 2 compounds, Mauve Factor cannot be hydroxypyrrole. Analyses of urine samples from volunteers, identified by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder - 7 item scale (GAD-7 ≥10; n = 5) and control urine samples (GAD-7 <10; n = 5) using a kryptopyrrole calibration graph, show that concentrations are similar in both groups.
Kryptopyrrole may be the elusive Mauve Factor. Its possible origin from stercobilin via gut microbiome-mediated metabolism, its link to gut-mediated neurological effects via γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors, and its predicted interaction with Zn2+ and consequent impact on zinc homeostasis are discussed. The GAD-7 scale does not differentiate between state and trait anxiety and as such, the minimal difference in pyrrole levels between volunteer groups requires further study.
60 多年来,人们一直在猜测 Ehrlich 测试阳性吡咯(紫红色因子)的身份,据称它是心理障碍(包括焦虑症)的生物标志物。我们回顾了试图确定紫红色因子的研究,并对 2 种主要候选物(隐色吡咯和羟色吡咯)的真实标准品进行了 Ehrlich 反应。
对 10 名志愿者(焦虑和非焦虑)的尿液样本应用改良的隐色吡咯和羟色吡咯 Ehrlich 测试。
根据 Ehrlich 反应和 2 种化合物的反应的机制化学,紫红色因子不可能是羟色吡咯。使用隐色吡咯校准曲线对通过一般焦虑症量表 7 项(GAD-7≥10;n=5)和对照尿液样本(GAD-7<10;n=5)确定的志愿者尿液样本进行分析,结果表明两组的浓度相似。
隐色吡咯可能是难以捉摸的紫红色因子。它可能来自胆素,通过肠道微生物群介导的代谢,通过γ-氨基丁酸(GABA)受体与肠道介导的神经效应相关,以及与 Zn2+的预期相互作用及其对锌稳态的影响,均进行了讨论。GAD-7 量表不能区分状态焦虑和特质焦虑,因此志愿者组之间吡咯水平的微小差异需要进一步研究。