| Literature DB >> 28592251 |
Meng Ding1,2, Xiang Wang3, Cheng Wang1,2, Xiaoshuang Liu2, Ke Zen2, Wenmei Wang4, Chen-Yu Zhang5, Chunni Zhang6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a T cell-mediated autoimmune disease. The aetiology and molecular mechanisms of OLP remain unclear. Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection is a causal factor in the development of various diseases, but the clinical relevance of HCMV in OLP has not been thoroughly investigated.Entities:
Keywords: Cytomegalovirus; Cytomegalovirus UL16-binding protein 1; MicroRNAs; Oral lichen planus; Plasma
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28592251 PMCID: PMC5463403 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-017-1222-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Demographic and clinical features of OLP patients and healthy controls in the present study
| Variable | Training set | Validation set | HCMV titers set | Exosome set | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Controls | P value | Cases | Controls | P value | Cases | Controls | P value | Cases | |
| Number | 21 | 18 | 41 | 33 | 13 | 12 | 20 | |||
| Age, yearsa | 46.48 (9.08) | 44.78 (4.18) | 0.47b | 46.59 (13.19) | 46.45 (4.97) | 0.96b | 49.3 (6.2) | 46.9 (5.5) | 0.68b | 45.6 (6.3) |
| Sex, n | 0.75c | 0.84c | 0.87c | |||||||
| Male | 6 (29%) | 6 (33%) | 13 (32%) | 12 (39%) | 5 (38%) | 5 (41%) | 7 (35%) | |||
| Female | 15 (71%) | 12 (67%) | 28 (68%) | 21 (61%) | 8 (62%) | 7 (59%) | 13 (65%) | |||
| Type of OLP, n | ||||||||||
| Reticular OLP | 10 (48%) | 21 (51%) | 7 (54%) | 10 (50%) | ||||||
| Erosive OLP | 11 (52%) | 20 (49%) | 6 (46%) | 10 (50%) | ||||||
| Anti-HCMV IgG, n | 0.27c | 0.11c | 0.29c | |||||||
| Positive | 21 (100%) | 17 (94%) | 41 (100%) | 31 (94%) | 13 (100%) | 11 (92%) | 20 (100%) | |||
| Negative | 0 (0%) | 1 (6%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (6%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (8%) | 0 (0%) | |||
| Anti-HCMV IgM, n | ||||||||||
| Positive | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |||
| Negative | 21 (100%) | 18 (100%) | 41 (100%) | 33 (100%) | 13 (100%) | 12 (100%) | 20 (100%) | |||
| HCV, n | 0.18c | 0.04c | 0.16c | |||||||
| Positive | 2 (9.5%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (12.2%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (15.4%) | 0 (0%) | 3 (15%) | |||
| Negative | 19 (90.5%) | 18 (100%) | 36 (87.8%) | 33 (100%) | 11 (74.6%) | 12 (100%) | 17 (85%) | |||
| EBV, n | 0.2c | |||||||||
| Positive | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (4.9%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (5%) | |||
| Negative | 21 (100%) | 18 (100%) | 39 (95.1%) | 33 (100%) | 13 (100%) | 12 (100%) | 19 (95%) | |||
| HIV, n | ||||||||||
| Positive | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |||
| Negative | 21 (100%) | 18 (100%) | 41 (100%) | 33 (100%) | 13 (100%) | 12 (100%) | 20 (100%) | |||
aAge data are presented as the mean ± SD
bStudent t test
cTwo-sided χ2 test
Fig. 1Overview of the experimental design
Expression profile of HCMV-encoded miRNAs in OLP patients and normal controls in the training set
| HCMV encoded miRNAs | OLP patients (n = 21) | Normal controls (n = 18) | Fold change |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SEM | Mean ± SEM | |||
| hcmv-miR-UL112-3p | 3.76 ± 0.50 | 0.52 ± 0.06 | 7.20 | 2.711 × 10−7 |
| hcmv-miR-UL112-5p | 0.29 ± 0.03 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | 1.89 | 2.532 × 10−3 |
| hcmv-miR-UL22a-3p | 0.16 ± 0.02 | 0.13 ± 0.02 | 1.23 | 0.360 |
| hcmv-miR-UL22a-5p | 1.00 ± 0.23 | 0.37 ± 0.08 | 2.67 | 0.026 |
| hcmv-miR-UL148d | 53.70 ± 11.73 | 19.94 ± 4.94 | 2.69 | 0.017 |
| hcmv-miR-UL36-5p | 9.21 ± 2.07 | 1.72 ± 0.42 | 5.36 | 0.002 |
| hcmv-miR-UL36-3p | 0.33 ± 0.06 | 0.22 ± 0.04 | 1.50 | 0.131 |
| hcmv-miR-UL59 | 3.98 ± 0.61 | 1.89 ± 0.25 | 2.11 | 2.034 × 10−4 |
| hcmv-miR-UL69 | 0.02 ± 0.20 × 10−2 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.76 | 0.308 |
| hcmv-miR-UL70-5 | 1.29 ± 0.12 | 1.54 ± 0.17 | 0.84 | 0.244 |
| hcmv-miR-US22-3p | 0.53 ± 0.06 | 0.41 ± 0.07 | 1.28 | 0.192 |
| hcmv-miR-US22-5p | 8.01 ± 1.35 | 6.07 ± 0.72 | 1.32 | 0.225 |
| hcmv-miR-US25-1 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.01 | 1.52 | 0.074 |
| hcmv-miR-US25-2-3p | 71.94 ± 67.34 | 2.57 ± 0.40 | 28.01 | 0.369 |
| hcmv-miR-US25-2-5p | 1.83 ± 0.27 | 1.23 ± 0.12 | 1.49 | 0.051 |
| hcmv-miR-US29-3p | 0.05 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.63 | 0.055 |
| hcmv-miR-US33-3p | 0.23 ± 0.02 | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 1.17 | 0.307 |
| hcmv-miR-US33-5p | 0.72 ± 0.08 | 0.78 ± 0.29 | 0.92 | 0.800 |
| hcmv-miR-US4-3p | 54.00 ± 46.89 | 1.11 ± 0.20 | 48.53 | 0.304 |
| hcmv-miR-US4-5p | 0.21 ± 0.03 | 0.31 ± 0.04 | 0.68 | 0.111 |
| hcmv-miR-US5-1 | 2.03 ± 0.30 | 1.77 ± 0.40 | 1.15 | 0.495 |
| hcmv-miR-US5-2-3p | 0.04 ± 0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.72 | 0.040 |
| hcmv-miR-US5-2-5p | 3.60 ± 0.56 | 3.56 ± 0.38 | 1.01 | 0.800 |
Data are presented as the mean ± SEM
aStudent t test
Fig. 2Plasma levels of 5 upregulated HCMV-encoded miRNAs in OLP patients in validation set. a–e In validation set, the relative expression levels of 5 HCMV-encoded miRNAs were measured in 40 OLP patients and 33 healthy controls using a RT-qPCR assay. The relative expression level of miRNAs was normalized to U6 expression. The relative content of miRNA was calculated using the 2−∆Cq method. Each P value was derived from a 2-sided Student’s t test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01
Fig. 3Plasma levels of the 5 upregulated miRNAs in different types of OLP. a–e In training set and validation set, the relative expression levels of 5 HCMV-encoded miRNAs were measured in 61 OLP patients and 51 healthy controls using a RT-qPCR assay, each P-value was derived from a 2-sided Student’s t test; f–j The relative expression levels of 5 upregulated HCMV-encoded miRNAs in 30 erosive OLP patients and 31 reticular OLP patients and 51 healthy controls were measured using RT-qPCR, each P value was derived from ANOVA analysis. The relative content of miRNA was calculated using the 2−∆Cq method. The relative expression of miRNAs was normalized to U6 expression. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01
Fig. 4Detection of HCMV and its relationship with HCMV-encoded miRNAs. a The HCMV DNA titers were calculated in PBLs of OLP patients and compared with healthy controls; b Comparison of the concentrations of anti-HCMV IgG in the OLP group (n = 61) versus the control group (n = 51). *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01
Fig. 5Direct target and the distribution of HCMV-miR-UL59 in exosomes. a The predicted binding site for hcmv-miR-UL59 in the 3′UTR of ULBP1 mRNA; b Western blotting analysis showed that the protein level of ULBP1 was downregulated in HEK293 cells transfected with hcmv-miR-UL59 mimics; c Real-time qPCR analysis showed ULBP1 mRNA level in HEK293 cells was not affected by hcmv-miR-UL59 overexpression; d Hcmv-miR-UL59 downregulated luciferase activity in HEK293 cells transfected with a pMIR-report plasmid that contained the 3′UTR of ULBP1 including HCMV-miR-UL59 binding site, whereas luciferase activity was not altered in cells transfected with MUT-ULBP1-3′UTR; e Absolute concentration of hcmv-miR-UL59 in plasma and exosome portions from 20 OLP patients using RT-qPCR analysis. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001