4.2 Article

Levels of Circulating Microparticles in Lung Cancer Patients and Possible Prognostic Value

期刊

DISEASE MARKERS
卷 2013, 期 -, 页码 301-310

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2013/715472

关键词

-

资金

  1. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [CMRPG8B0011, CMRPG880071]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Endothelial-derived microparticles (EDMPs) and platelet-derived microparticles (PDMPs) have been reported to be increasing in various diseases including malignant diseases. Here, we investigated whether these MPs may be useful biomarkers for predicting lung cancer (LC) disease status, cell type, or metastasis. Methods and Results. One hundred and thirty LC patients were prospectively enrolled into the study between April 2011 and February 2012. Flow cytometric analysis demonstrated that the circulating levels of platelet-derived activated MPs (PDAc-MPs), platelet-derived apoptotic MPs (PDAp-MPs), endothelial-derived activated MPs (EDAc-MPs), and endothelial-derived apoptoticMPs (EDAp-MPs) were significantly higher in LCpatients than in 30 age-andgender-matchednormal control subjects (all P < 0.05). Additionally, circulating level of PDAc-MPs was significantly lower (P = 0.031), whereas the circulating levels of the other three biomarkers did not differ (all P > 0.1) in early stage versus late stage LC patients. Furthermore, the circulating levels of the four types of MPs did not differ among patients with different disease statuses (i.e., disease controlled, disease progression, and disease without treatment, i.e., fresh case) (all P > 0.2) or between patients with or without LCmetastasis (all P > 0.5). Moreover, only the circulating level of EDAp-MPs was significantly associated with the different cell types (i.e., squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and small cell carcinoma) of LC (P = 0.045). Conclusion. Circulating MP levels are significantly increased in LC patients as compared with normal subjects. Among the MPs, only an increased level of EDAp-MPs was significantly associated with different LC cell types.

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

4.2
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