4.5 Article

Detection of circulating tumor cells in peripheral blood from patients with gastric cancer using piRNAs as markers

期刊

CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 44, 期 13, 页码 1050-1057

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2011.06.004

关键词

Piwi-interacting RNA; Gastric cancer; Circulating tumor cells; Gene diagnosis

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Ningbo [2010A610044]
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Research Project [2010C33112]
  3. Natural Sciences Foundation of Zhejiang [Y207240]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30872420]
  5. Scientific Research Foundation of the Graduate School of Ningbo University [G10JA026]
  6. Excellent Dissertation Fund of Ningbo University [201014]
  7. K. C. Wong Magna Fund in Ningbo University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To investigate the feasibility of detecting circulating cancer cells in peripheral blood from gastric cancer patients using Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) as markers. Design and methods: Real-time quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction was used to analyze piR-651 and piR-823 levels in the peripheral blood of 93 patients with gastric cancer and 32 healthy volunteers. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to evaluate the diagnostic values. Results: The peripheral blood levels of piR-651 and piR-823 in the patients with gastric cancer were significantly lower than those from controls (P<0.001). The piR-651 level in gastric adenocarcinoma was higher than that in gastric signet ring cell carcinoma (P=0.003). The piR-823 level was positively associated with tumor-node-metastasis stage (P=0.027) and distant metastasis (P=0.026). The areas under the ROC curve were 0.841, 0.812 and 0.860 for piR-651, piR-823 and the combination, respectively. Conclusions: piRNAs may be valuable biomarkers for detecting circulating gastric cancer cells. (C) 2011 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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