4.4 Article

Identification of Corneal Neovascularization-Related Long Noncoding RNAs Through Microarray Analysis

期刊

CORNEA
卷 34, 期 5, 页码 580-587

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000389

关键词

long noncoding RNA; corneal neovascularization; microarray analysis; GO analysis; KEGG pathway analysis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81300241, 81470594, 81371055]
  2. National clinical key construction project [(2012) 649]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To reveal the role of long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) in corneal neovascularization (CN). Methods: We established a murine CN model and performed lncRNA expression profiling to identify differentially expressed lncRNAs between normal and vascularized corneas. Based on Pearson correlation analysis, an lncRNA/mRNA coexpression network was constructed. Gene ontology (GO) enrichment and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analyses of lncRNA-coexpressed mRNAs were conducted to determine the related biological modules and pathological pathways. Real-time polymerase chain reactions were carried out to detect the expression pattern of lncRNA in the clinical samples. Results: A total of 154 differentially expressed lncRNAs were identified between vascularized and normal corneas, including 60 downregulated lncRNAs and 94 upregulated lncRNAs. GO enrichment analysis of lncRNA-coexpressed mRNAs indicated that the biological modules were correlated with extracellular region, DNA binding, and immune response. KEGG pathway analysis indicated that pathways in cancer was the most enriched signaling pathway. Moreover, the human ortholog of NR_033585 and lincRNA: chr8:129102060-129109035 reverse strand was found to be differentially expressed between vascularized and avascular corneas. Conclusions: This study provides a novel insight into CN pathogenesis. The intervention of dysregulated lncRNAs may become potential targets for the prevention and treatment of ocular vascular diseases.

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

4.4
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