4.7 Article

Potential miRNA biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of esophageal cancer detected by a novel absolute quantitative RT-qPCR method

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-77119-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81401971]
  2. Fujian Provincial Health and Family Planning Commission, Fujian, China [2016J01626]
  3. Youth Foundation Project of Fujian Provincial Health Department [2014-2-69]
  4. Scientific Research Program of Xiamen [3502Z2015052]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

miRNAs are expected to become potential biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of Esophageal cancer (EC). Through a series of screening, miR-34a-5p, miR-148a-3p and miR-181a-5p were selected as EC-associated miRNAs. Based on AllGlo probe, a novel absolute quantitative RT-qPCR method with high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy was established for detecting miRNAs. Then the clinical significance of these 3 miRNAs was explored with 213 patients (166 cases with EC and 47 cases with benign diseases) and 170 normal controls. Compared with normal controls, the level of miR-34a-5p increased while miR-148a-3p and miR-181a-5p decreased in EC and benign patients (P<0.001), and the level of miR-181a-5p in early EC patients was significantly lower (P<0.001). According to logistic regression analysis, combined detection of miR-34a-5p, miR-148a-3p and Cyfra21-1 provided the highest diagnosis efficiency of 85.07% with sensitivity and specificity reaching 85.45% and 84.71%. Compared with preoperative samples, the level of miR-34a-5p decreased while miR-148a-3p and miR-181a-5p increased in postoperative samples (P<0.001). Collectively, this first developed, novel absolute quantitative RT-qPCR method exhibits high application value in detecting miRNAs, miR-34a-5p, miR-148a-3p and miR-181a-5p may serve as potential biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of EC, and miR-181a-5p probably could serve as a new biomarker for early EC.

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