A panel of microRNA signature in serum for colorectal cancer diagnosis

Zhu, Mingxia; Huang, Zebo; Zhu, Dan-Xia; Zhou, Xin; Shan, Xia; Qi, Lian‐Wen; Wu, Lirong; Cheng, Wenfang; Zhu, Jun; Zhang, Lan; Zhang, Huo; Chen, Yan; Zhu, Wei; Wang, Tongshan; Liu, Ping

doi:10.18632/oncotarget.15059

Cited by 114 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…of patientsBloodCRC versus controlCompared to CEA/CA19-9 (sens/spec)Early CRC versus controlTissueAUCSensitivitySpecificityZhu et al (2017) [44]Prospective-19a-3p, miR-21-5p, -425-5p196 CRC138 controlsSerum0.830NDNDNoNoYesVychytilova-Faltejskova et al (2016) [45]Prospective-23a-3p-27a-3p-142-5p-376c-3p103 CRC100 controlsSerum0.9228981Yes (CEA 47% sens, CA19-9 sens 27%)Yes (I/II: AUC 0.877sens 81spec 81)YesFang et al (2015) [46]Retrospective-24, -320a, -423-5p111 CRC59 adenomas, 24 polyps29 IBD130 healthyPlasma0.89992.79%70.77%Yes (CEA sens 20.37%, spec 95%, CA19-9 sens 20.37%, spec 93.08%)I/II: AUC 0.99 sens 90.79%, spec 70.77%NoWang et al (2014) [47]Retrospective-21, Let-7 g, -31, -92a, -181b, -20383 CRC, 59 controlsSerum0.923NDNDY (CA19-9 AUC 0.598, CEA, AUC 0.649)NoNoZhang et al (2013) [48]Retrospective-200c, -18a78 CRC, 86 normalPlasma0.83984.6%75.6%Y (-18a: sens 73.1%, spec 79.1%, -200c: sens 64.1%, spec 73.3%)NoYesLuo et al (2013) [49]Prospe...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of blood diagnostic markers in colorectal cancer

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the diagnostic ability of blood markers for colorectal cancer (CRC). A systematic review of the literature for diagnostic blood markers for primary human colorectal cancer over the last 5 years was performed. The primary outcome was to assess the diagnostic ability of these markers in diagnosing colorectal cancer. The secondary outcome was to see whether the marker was compared to other markers. The tertiary outcome was to assess diagnostic ability in early versus late CRC, including stage IV disease. We identified 51 studies (29 prospective, 14 retrospective, and 8 meta-analyses). The markers were divided in broadly four groups: nucleic acids (RNA/DNA/messenger RNA/microRNAs), cytokines, antibodies, and proteins. The most promising circulating markers identified among the nucleid acids were NEAT_v2 non-coding RNA, SDC2 methylated DNA, and SEPT9 methylated DNA. The most promising cytokine to detect CRC was interleukin 8, and the most promising circulating proteins were CA11-19 glycoprotein and DC-SIGN/DC-SIGNR. Sensitivities of these markers for detecting primary colorectal carcinoma ranged from 70 to 98% and specificities from 84 to 98.7%. The best studied blood marker was SEPT9 methylated DNA, which showed great variability with sensitivities ranging from 48.2 to 95.6% and specificities from 80 to 98.9%, making its clinical applicability challenging. If combined with fecal immunochemical test (FIT), the sensitivity improved from 78 to 94% in detecting CRC. Methylated SEPT9, methylated SDC2, and -SIGN/DC-SIGNR protein had better sensitivity and specificity than CEA or CA 19-9. With the exception of SEPT9 which is currently being implemented as a screening test for CRC all other markers lacked reproducibility and standardization and were studied in relatively small population samples.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of blood diagnostic markers in colorectal cancer

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 Early disease detection and differentiation of GI cancer from other GI diseases could have a tremendous impact on both treatment strategies and prognosis. In people, plasma microRNA (miRNA) profiles have been investigated in colorectal cancer, both as diagnostic 3,4 and prognostic biomarkers 4,5 with encouraging results. Recently, noninvasive fecal miRNA profiles have been investigated in human patients with colorectal cancer showing promising results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of microRNA stability in feces from healthy dogs

Cirera

Willumsen

Johansen

et al. 2018

Veterinary Clinical Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overall, miRNAs are present in dog feces at measurable levels. Some miRNAs seem to be subject to a higher degree of degradation in samples stored at room temperature for 24 hours compared with samples frozen after collection at -20°C. The investigated miRNAs were stably expressed over time. This study provides the basis for further research on miRNA expression profiles as biomarkers for gastrointestinal cancer in dogs.

show abstract

“… claimed that miR‐21‐5p mediated cellular proliferation, invasion, migration, and apoptosis by targeting PTEN, RECK, and Bcl‐2 in LSCC. At present, a robust association of miR‐21‐5p expression in tumors with diagnostic effect was also observed in numerous solid tumors, such as colorectal cancer , gastric cancer , breast cancer , pancreatic cancer , and so on. Moreover, overexpression of miR‐21‐5p was correlated with poor survival of the patients with pancreatic cancer and gastric cancer .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Identification of four plasma microRNAs as potential biomarkers in the diagnosis of male lung squamous cell carcinoma patients in China

Shan

Zhang

et al. 2018

Cancer Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dysregulated microRNAs (miRNAs) in the plasma of patients with lung squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) might serve as biomarkers for LSCC diagnosis. The expression of miRNAs was performed using quantitative reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (qRT‐PCR) on the basis of Exiqon panels in the initial screening phase including three male LSCC pool samples and one normal control (NC) pool sample (per 10 samples were pooled as one pool sample). After the training (32 LSCC vs. 31 NCs), the testing (55 LSCC vs. 55 NCs), and the external validation (15 LSCC vs. 15 NCs) stages via qRT‐PCR, a four‐miRNA signature (miR‐181a‐5p, miR‐21‐5p, miR‐106a‐5p, and miR‐93‐5p) was identified for LSCC detection. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of the four‐miRNA panel for the training, the testing, and the external validation phases were 0.795, 0.827, and 0.914, respectively. Then, the four miRNAs were explored in LSCC tissue samples (23 LSCC vs. 23 NCs), and their expression was significantly up‐regulated. However, none of the four miRNAs found significantly up‐regulated in plasma exosomes expect miR‐93‐5p with borderline significance (16 LSCC vs. 16 NCs). In summary, our study established a four‐miRNA peripheral plasma signature, which contributed to diagnosing male LSCC patients in China to a certain degree.

show abstract

A panel of microRNA signature in serum for colorectal cancer diagnosis

Cited by 114 publications

References 59 publications

Systematic review of blood diagnostic markers in colorectal cancer

Systematic review of blood diagnostic markers in colorectal cancer

Evaluation of microRNA stability in feces from healthy dogs

Identification of four plasma microRNAs as potential biomarkers in the diagnosis of male lung squamous cell carcinoma patients in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About