| Literature DB >> 32611374 |
Kalle Savolainen1,2, Mauro Scaravilli3,4,5, Antti Ilvesmäki6, Synnöve Staff6,3,5, Teemu Tolonen3,7, Johanna U Mäenpää6,3,5, Tapio Visakorpi3,5, Annika Auranen6,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Plasma, but also urine sample could represent a simple liquid biopsy for ovarian cancer biomarker detection. The miRNA-200 family has been shown to be dysregulated in ovarian cancer. The aim of this study was to isolate three members of miR-200 family from tumor tissue, plasma and urine of high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients in comparison with samples from patients with benign ovarian tumors. This is a methodological pilot study of a prospective ovarian cancer patient cohort investigating the potential of liquid biopsies and the role of miRNAs in ovarian cancer treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Biomarker; HGSOC; Liquid biopsy; Ovarian cancer; microRNA
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32611374 PMCID: PMC7329467 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-020-05155-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Patients’ data
| ID | Tumor | Agea | BMI | Ca12–5 | HE4 | Stage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26 | HGSOC | 50′s–60′s | 18.7 | 979 | 999 | IIIA1 (i) |
| 09 | HGSOC | 40′s–50′s | 22.3 | 541 | 485 | IIIB |
| 34 | HGSOC | 50′s–60′s | 25.0 | 1616 | 196 | IIIB |
| 28 | HGSOC | 50′s–60′s | 33.0 | 1389 | 388 | IIIC |
| 30 | HGSOC | 50′s–60′s | 25.4 | 867 | 979 | IVB |
| 46 | HGSOC | 50′s–60′s | 32.6 | 807 | 220 | IVB |
| 65 | HGSOC | 60′s–70′s | 36.4 | 1551 | 832 | IVB |
| 23 | HGSOC | 70′s–80′s | 27.3 | 416 | 1500 | ≥ IIICb |
| 39 | HGSOC | 70′s–80′s | 18.1 | 680 | 766 | IVB |
md 58 av 59 | md 25.4 av 27.0 | md 867 av 983 | md 766 av 707 | |||
| 55 | Cystadenoma | 50′s–60′s | 24.7 | 76 | 53 | |
| 17 | Cystadenoma | 40′s–50′s | 23.9 | 24 | 164 | |
| 61 | Cystadenoma | 40′s–50′s | 26.6 | 35 | 34 | |
| 32 | Tecoma | 70′s–80′s | 25.1 | 173 | NA | |
| 35 | Fibroma | 50′s–60′s | 37.2 | 69 | NA | |
| 63 | Fibroma | 80′s–90′s | 26.6 | 126 | 56 | |
| 36 | Teratoma | 40′s–50′s | NA | 152 | 46 | |
md 53 av 56 | md 25.8 av 27.3 | md 65 av 70 | md 53 av 68 |
The data of the patients gathered at the stage of diagnosis and after the surgery
aThe age of the participants is presented as a range in order to protect their anonymity, BMI, body mass index, Ca12-5, plasma Ca12-5 antigen value; HE4, plasma human epididymal antigen 4 value; Stage, stage of the ovarian cancer according to FIGO 2016 guidelines, HGSOC, high-grade serous ovarian cancer; b Inoperable patient, no thorough staging operation. md, median; av, average; NA, Not available
Fig. 1Expression of miR-200a, miR-200b and miR-200c in clinical samples. Relative expression levels of miR-200a, miR-200b and miR-200c in plasma, urine and tumor tissue of the HGSOC patients and patients with benign ovarian tumors (the graphs show mean and SD). HGSOC patients marked with asterisk (*) had no extensive peritoneal carcinosis in addition to ovarian tumors as did rest of the cancer patients. Except patient 30 they had lower stage of the disease (IIIA or IIIB) compared to rest of the HGSOC patients (IIIC or IVB). Patient 30 had liver metastasis of 6 cm, which raised the stage into IVB. The expression levels in tissue samples are normalized against RNU6B. The expression levels in plasma and urine samples are normalized against spiked-in cel-miR-39. The liquid samples from patient 63 were not available
Fig. 2a Relative levels of miR-200a, miR-200b and miR-200c between malignant and benign samples. b Correlation of expression levels between plasma, urine and tumor tissue samples. a Relative expression of miR-200a, miR-200b and miR-200c in plasma and tissue are significantly higher in malignant samples compared to benign. The difference is not significant in urine samples (** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001). b Combined scatter plots showing correlations of relative expression for all three miRNAs (miR-200a (black dots), miR-200b (red dots) and miR-200c (green dots)) between plasma, urine and tumor tissue samples of HGSOC patients (Pearson’s rank correlation coefficient). For plasma and urine two replicates per sample were available, but for tissue variable numbers of replicates were available. Thus, the correlation plot for urine vs plasma was done replicate by replicate, but the correlation plots Tissue vs Plasma and Tissue vs Urine were done on average values one-to-one, explaining fewer dots in these plots. Pearson’s ranks for small sample size of individual miR-200a, miR-200b, or miR-200c did not reach significance (data not shown)