4.7 Article

Assessing diagnostic value of microRNAs from peripheral blood mononuclear cells and extracellular vesicles in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-58506-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. ME Association (MEA) Ramsay Research Fund, UK
  2. Fundacion Universidad Catolica de Valencia San Vicente Martir, Valencia (Spain) [2018-270-001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is a debilitating multisystemic disease of unknown etiology, affecting thousands of individuals worldwide. Its diagnosis still relies on ruling out medical problems leading to unexplained fatigue due to a complete lack of disease-specific biomarkers. Our group and others have explored the potential value of microRNA profiles (miRNomes) as diagnostic tools for this disease. However, heterogeneity of participants, low numbers, the variety of samples assayed, and other pre-analytical variables, have hampered the identification of disease-associated miRNomes. In this study, our team has evaluated, for the first time, ME/CFS miRNomes in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and extracellular vesicles (EVs) from severely ill patients recruited at the monographic UK ME biobank to assess, using standard operating procedures (SOPs), blood fractions with optimal diagnostic power for a rapid translation of a miR-based diagnostic method into the clinic. Our results show that routine creatine kinase (CK) blood values, plasma EVs physical characteristics (including counts, size and zeta-potential), and a limited number of differentially expressed PBMC and EV miRNAs appear significantly associated with severe ME/CFS (p < 0.05). Gene enrichment analysis points to epigenetic and neuroimmune dysregulated pathways, in agreement with previous reports. Population validation by a cost-effective approach limited to these few potentially discriminating variables is granted.

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

4.7
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