4.6 Article

Extracellular Vesicles from Uterine Aspirates Represent a Promising Source for Screening Markers of Gynecologic Cancers

期刊

CELLS
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells11071064

关键词

miRNA; ovarian cancer; uterine aspirates; extracellular vesicles; exosomes; small RNA sequencing

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [22-15-00373]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are key factors of intercellular communication and play a significant role in cancer diagnosis. Studies on uterine aspirates have shown that EVs can serve as diagnostic markers for gynecological cancers.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes, are key factors of intercellular communication, performing both local and distant transfers of bioactive molecules. The increasingly obvious role of EVs in carcinogenesis, similarity of molecular signatures with parental cells, precise selection and high stability of cargo molecules make exosomes a promising source of liquid biopsy markers for cancer diagnosis. The uterine cavity fluid, unlike blood, urine and other body fluids commonly used to study EVs, is of local origin and therefore enriched in EVs secreted by cells of the female reproductive tract. Here, we show that EVs, including those corresponding to exosomes, could be isolated from individual samples of uterine aspirates (UA) obtained from epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients and healthy donors using the ultracentrifugation technique. First, the conducted profiling of small RNAs (small RNA-seq) from UA-derived EVs demonstrated the presence of non-coding RNA molecules belonging to various classes. The analysis of the miRNA content in EVs from UA performed on a pilot sample revealed significant differences in the expression levels of a number of miRNAs in EVs obtained from EOC patients compared to healthy individuals. The results open up prospects for using UA-derived EVs as a source of markers for the diagnostics of gynecological cancers, including EOC.

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