4.6 Article

Gene expression in peripheral blood differs after cardioembolic compared with large-vessel atherosclerotic stroke: biomarkers for the etiology of ischemic stroke

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages 1320-1328

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2008.22

Keywords

atherosclerosis; blood; embolic stroke; etiology; gene expression profiling; ischemic stroke

Funding

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [NS056302, P50 NS44283, NS043252, NS044283, NS028167, NS042774] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are no biomarkers that differentiate cardioembolic from large-vessel atherosclerotic stroke, although the treatments differ for each and similar to 30% of strokes and transient ischemic attacks have undetermined etiologies using current clinical criteria. We aimed to define gene expression profiles in blood that differentiate cardioembolic from large-vessel atherosclerotic stroke. Peripheral blood samples were obtained from healthy controls and acute ischemic stroke patients (< 3, 5, and 24 h). RNA was purified, labeled, and applied to Affymetrix Human U133 Plus 2.0 Arrays. Expression profiles in the blood of cardioembolic stroke patients are distinctive from those of large-vessel atherosclerotic stroke patients. Seventy-seven genes differ at least 1.5-fold between them, and a minimum number of 23 genes differentiate the two types of stroke with at least 95.2% specificity and 95.2% sensitivity for each. Genes regulated in large-vessel atherosclerotic stroke are expressed in platelets and monocytes and modulate hemostasis. Genes regulated in cardioembolic stroke are expressed in neutrophils and modulate immune responses to infectious stimuli. This new method can be used to predict whether a stroke of unknown etiology was because of cardioembolism or large-vessel atherosclerosis that would lead to different therapy. These results have wide ranging implications for similar disorders.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available