4.6 Article

Identification of a risk dependent microRNA expression signature in myelodysplastic syndromes

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
Volume 153, Issue 1, Pages 24-32

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2011.08581.x

Keywords

microRNA; myelodysplastic syndromes; International Prognostic Scoring System; gene expression; haematopoiesis

Categories

Funding

  1. Aplastic Anemia & MDS International Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>The myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) display both haematological and biological heterogeneity with variable leukaemia potential. MicroRNAs play an important role in tumour suppression and the regulation of self-renewal and differentiation of haematopoietic progenitors. Using a microarray platform, we evaluated microRNA expression from 44 patients with MDS and 17 normal controls. We identified a thirteen microRNA signature with statistically significant differential expression between normal and MDS specimens (P < 0 center dot 01), including down-regulation of members of the leukaemia-associated MIRLET7 family. A unique signature consisting of 10 microRNAs was closely associated with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk category permitting discrimination between lower (Low/Intermediate-1) and higher risk (Intermediate-2/High) disease (P < 0 center dot 01). Selective overexpression of MIR181 family members was detected in higher risk MDS, indicating pathogenetic overlap with acute myeloid leukaemia. Survival analysis of an independent cohort of 22 IPSS lower risk MDS patients revealed a median survival of 3 center dot 5 years in patients with high expression of MIR181 family compared to 9 center dot 3 years in patients with low MIR181 expression (P = 0 center dot 002). Our pilot study suggested that analysis of microRNA expression profile offers diagnostic utility, and provide pathogenetic and prognostic discrimination in MDS.

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