4.6 Article

Combination of exosomes and circulating microRNAs may serve as a promising tumor marker complementary to alpha-fetoprotein for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis in rats

期刊

JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 141, 期 10, 页码 1767-1778

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00432-015-1943-0

关键词

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP); Circulating miRNAs; Exosomes; Molecular diagnosis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to unsatisfying prognosis of AFP for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), we aim to evaluate the prognostic value of combination of exosomes and miRNAs in detecting HCC. HCC was induced with diethylnitrosamine in rats and using a scoring system based on histological examination six different stages (normal liver, degeneration, fibrosis, cirrhosis, early HCC and late HCC) were identified in the development of HCC. The expression levels of AFP, exosomes and miRNAs (miRNA-10b, miRNA-21, miRNA-122 and miRNA-200a) were detected in both tissue and blood samples from those six stages. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to evaluate the power of each parameter and their different combinations in diagnosing HCC or cirrhosis. A change in the expression of both exosomes and miRNAs was observed during cirrhosis, which in contrast with AFP starts showing up until the early HCC stage. Interestingly, the expressions of exosomes and the selected four miRNAs at early HCC stage obtained more remarkably alterations than the level of AFP (P < 0.05). On correlation analysis, four selected miRNAs had a significant closer relationship with exosomes when compared with AFP. The different combinations of AFP, exosomes, serous miRNAs and exosomal miRNAs had stronger power in predicting HCC than AFP (area under the curve of ROC, 0.943 vs 0.826). To conclude, the combination of circulating miRNAs and exosomes might serve as promising biomarkers for non-virus infected HCC screening and cirrhosis discrimination.

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