4.5 Article

MicroRNA deregulation in symptomatic carotid plaque

期刊

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY
卷 62, 期 5, 页码 1245-+

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.06.136

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Embolization of carotid stenotic plaques is the direct cause of stroke in nearly 20% of cases. Genetic mechanisms and especially the roles played by microRNAs in the regulation of plaque destabilization and rupture are mostly unknown. The aim of this pilot study was to compare the expression of seven microRNAs allegedly involved in plaque growth and instability (miR-100, 125a, 127, 133a, 145, 155, and 221), between symptomatic and asymptomatic human carotid plaques. Methods: Thirty patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy in our department were prospectively included. Carotid plaques were subdivided into symptomatic (n = 15) and asymptomatic (n = 15) according to the presence or absence of stroke. After isolation of total RNA from atherosclerotic plaques, microRNAs were quantified by real-time polymerase chain reaction. Results: The two groups of patients were comparable in terms of age, gender, risk factors for cerebral ischemia, medication, and stenosis severity. All seven microRNAs were quantified in extracted carotid plaques. miR-100, miR-125a, miR-127, miR-133a, miR-145, and miR-221 were significantly overexpressed in symptomatic vs asymptomatic plaques. miR-125a expression was significantly inversely correlated with the circulating level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the symptomatic group. Conclusions: This pilot study evaluated the expression of seven selected miRNAs in human carotid plaques from a small group of patients and suggested a potential regulatory role for these miRNAs in evolution of the plaque towards growth, instability and rupture. Studies based on larger sample sizes are required to determine the potential use of miR-100, miR-125a, miR-127, miR-133a, miR-145, and miR-221 as biomarkers or therapeutic targets for stroke.

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