4.5 Review

A systematic review on the role of MSC-derived exosomal miRNAs in the treatment of heart failure

Journal

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY REPORTS
Volume 49, Issue 9, Pages 8953-8973

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11033-022-07385-2

Keywords

Systematic review; Heart failure; Heart diseases; Biomarkers; miRNAs; MSCs; Exosomal

Funding

  1. Children Hospital of Mexico Federico Gomez [HIM/2016/045 SSA 1276]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This systematic review summarizes studies on microRNA expression in pre-diabetes or type 2 diabetes. Several microRNAs were found to be more frequently reported in diabetics, such as miR-122-5p, 144-3p, 210, 375, and miR-126b, while miR-144-3p, -192, 29a, and -30d were more commonly reported in pre-diabetes. Circulating microRNAs could potentially be used as biomarkers for type 2 diabetes, but further validation in prospective and multi-center studies is needed.
Background This systematic review summarizes results of studies that evaluated the expression of microRNAs (miRs) in pre-diabetes or type 2 diabetes. Methods The information was obtained in PubMed, EMBL-EBI, Wanfang, Trip Database, Lilacs, CINAHL and Google. A qualitative synthesis of the results was performed and miRs frequency was graphically. From 1880 we identified studies, only 53 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The 53 studies analyzed miRs in T2D; and of them, thirteen also described data in pre-diabetes. Results In diabetics, 122 miRs were reported and 35 miRs for pre-diabetics. However, we identified that 5 miRs (-122-5p, 144-3p, 210, 375, -126b) were reported more often in diabetics, and 4 (144-3p, -192, 29a and -30d) in pre-diabetics. Conclusions Circulating miRs could be used as biomarkers of type 2 diabetes. However, it is necessary to validate these microRNAs in prospective and multi-center studies, where different population subgroups, considering the age, gender, and risk factors.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available