4.5 Article

Clinical significance of circulating miR-126 quantification in malignant mesothelioma patients

Journal

CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 45, Issue 7-8, Pages 575-581

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.02.009

Keywords

Circulating miR-126; Clinic validation; Malignant mesothelioma; Non-small-cell lung cancer; Relative qRT-PCR; Absolute qRT-PCR

Funding

  1. National Institute against Occupational Injury Insurance (INAIL)
  2. Australian Research Council
  3. Grant Agency of the Czech Republic [204/08/0811]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and precision of the detection of individual miRNA as clinical biomarkers in the serum. Design and methods: miRNA-126 was quantified in serum using endogenous and exogenous controls for normalization and the accuracy and precision of the method evaluated. The diagnostic value of serum miRNA-126 was evaluated in malignant mesothelioma (MM) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients using both relative and absolute qRT-PCR methods. Results: The use of endogenous invariant and exogenous synthetic controls as well sample dilution markedly improves the accuracy and precision of the assay. The inter- and intra-assay analyses revealed that relative qRT-PCR is a more reliable method. Circulating miR-126 detected in the serum by relative qRT-PCRs was found low-expressed in both malignancies, significantly differentiated MM patients from healthy controls and NSCLC from MM, but do not discriminate NSCLC patients from control subjects. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that low level of circulating miR-126 in MM patients was strongly associated with worse prognosis. Conclusions: We propose that this approach can be adopted for accurate analysis of other suitable circulating miRNA markers of different types of cancer. (C) 2012 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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