Study record
Circulating PGC-1α and MOTS-c Peptide as Potential Mitochondrial Biomarkers in Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement
Sánchez-Quintero MJ, Iboleón A, Martín Chaves L et al. · Biologics · 2025
Human obs.Endogenous MOTS-c measuredEvidence tier B
What this study reported
Measured plasma MOTS-c and PGC-1α by ELISA and found significantly lower levels of both in adults with aortic valve disease than in healthy controls. Reported that the difference was independent of sex and age in this cohort.
Limitations
Very small cross-sectional sample with no early-stage patients and no follow-up; single-timepoint ELISA measurements cannot establish temporal order.
Study record
| Study model | Human observational |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | Endogenous MOTS-c measuredNaturally occurring MOTS-c was measured; nothing was given. |
| Species | human |
| System studied | Patients with aortic valve disease scheduled for valve replacement and healthy controls |
| Population | Adults diagnosed with aortic valve disease awaiting aortic valve replacement, and healthy controls |
| Design | Cross-sectional case-control study |
| Sample size as reported | 39 participants (17 patients with aortic valve disease, 22 healthy controls) |
| Control group | 22 healthy controls |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | plasma MOTS-c; plasma PGC-1α |
| Pathways measured | SIRT1 / PGC-1α / biogenesis |
| Research areas | Cardiovascular · Mitochondrial biology |
| Evidence tier | B — Other human study |
| Publication types | Journal Article |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Human
- Sample size
- Small
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Exploratory
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.