4.6 Article

Circulating miR-185-5p as a Potential Biomarker for Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

期刊

CELLS
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells10102578

关键词

arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy; MicroRNAs; circulating microRNAs; heart failure; biomarkers; genetics

资金

  1. Netherlands CardioVascular Research Initiative: the Dutch Heart Foundation
  2. Dutch Federation of University Medical Centers
  3. ZonMW
  4. Royal Netherlands Academy of Sciences (DCVA2017-2018ARENA-PRIME)
  5. European Research Council (ERC) [311549]
  6. Dutch Research Council (NWO) [918-156-47]
  7. European Union [813716]
  8. Dutch Heart Foundation [2019SB002]
  9. TRANSAC Strategic Research Grant, University of Padua, Italy [CPDA133979/13]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identified miR-185-5p as significantly upregulated in ARVC patients compared to healthy controls, with a confirmed link to ARVC pathophysiology based on receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is a genetic cardiac disease characterized by progressive myocardial fibro-fatty replacement, arrhythmias and risk of sudden death. Its diagnosis is challenging and often it is achieved after disease onset or postmortem. In this study, we sought to identify circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) differentially expressed in ARVC patients compared to healthy controls. In the pilot study, we screened the expression of 754 miRNAs from 21 ARVC patients and 20 healthy controls. After filtering the miRNAs considering a log fold-change cut-off of & PLUSMN;1, p-value < 0.05, we selected five candidate miRNAs for a subsequent validation study in which we used TaqMan-based real-time PCR to analyse samples from 37 ARVC patients and 30 healthy controls. We found miR-185-5p significantly upregulated in ARVC patients. Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated an area under the curve of 0.854, corroborating the link of this miRNA and ARVC pathophysiology.

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

4.6
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