4.8 Article

Long Noncoding RNA Associated With Microvascular Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Promotes Angiogenesis and Serves as a Predictor for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients' Poor Recurrence-Free Survival After Hepatectomy

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 56, 期 6, 页码 2231-2241

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hep.25895

关键词

-

资金

  1. Chinese Key Project for Infectious Diseases [2008ZX10002-018, 2008ZX10002-025]
  2. Science Fund for Creative Research Groups, National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [30921006]
  3. NSFC [81071680, 30671920]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains poor, which is largely attributed to active angiogenesis. However, the mechanisms underlying angiogenesis in HCC remain to be discovered. In this study, we found that long noncoding RNA associated with microvascular invasion in HCC (lncRNA MVIH) (lncRNA associated with microvascular invasion in HCC) was generally overexpressed in HCC. In a cohort of 215 HCC patients, the overexpression of MVIH was associated with frequent microvascular invasion (P = 0.016) and a higher tumor node metastasis stage (P = 0.009) as well as decreased recurrence-free survival (RFS) (P < 0.001) and overall survival (P = 0.007). Moreover, the up-regulation of MVIH served as an independent risk factor to predict poor RFS. We also found that MVIH could promote tumor growth and intrahepatic metastasis by activating angiogenesis in mouse models. Subsequent investigations indicated that MVIH could activate tumor-inducing angiogenesis by inhibiting the secretion of phosphoglycerate kinase 1 (PGK1). Additionally, in 65 HCC samples, MVIH expression was inversely correlated with the serum level of PGK1 and positively correlated with the microvessel density. Conclusion: Deregulation of lncRNA MVIH is a predictor for poor RFS of HCC patients after hepatectomy and could be utilized as a potential target for new adjuvant therapies against active angiogenesis. (HEPATOLOGY 2012;56:2231-2241)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据