4.6 Article

A tumor-specific microRNA signature predicts survival in clear cell renal cell carcinoma

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00432-015-1927-0

关键词

microRNA; Biomarker; Clear cell renal cell carcinoma; Prognosis

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81070597, 81370853]
  2. Science and Education Development Program of the Jiangsu Province Health Board [LJ201107]
  3. Six Talent Peaks of the Jiangsu Province Health Bureau [2011-WS-093]
  4. Research and Innovation Program for Graduates of Jiangsu Province [CXZZ13_0583]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common subtype of kidney cancers in adults, and microRNAs (miRNAs) differentially expressed in ccRCC tumors have been identified and proposed to predict prognosis. In the present study, we comprehensively analyzed the genome-wide miRNA expression profiles in ccRCC, with the aim to generate a tumor-specific miRNA signature of prognostic values. The miRNA profiles in tumor and the adjacent normal tissue were analyzed, and the association of the differentially expressed miRNAs with patient survival was examined with univariate Cox regression analysis. Finally, a tumor-specific miRNA signature was generated and examined with Kaplan-Meier survival, univariate, and multivariate Cox regression analyses. A total of 147 miRNAs were found differentially expressed between tumor and matched non-tumor tissues from 58 ccRCC patients. The prognostic values of these differentially expressed miRNAs were subsequently analyzed in the 411 ccRCC patients, and 22 miRNAs were found significantly correlated with patient survival. Finally, a tumor-specific miRNA signature of 22 miRNAs was generated and validated as an independent prognostic parameter. A tumor-specific miRNA signature consisting of 22 miRNAs was identified and validated as an independent prognostic factor, which could serve as a novel biomarker for ccRCC prognostication and help in predicting treatment outcome.

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