| Literature DB >> 32793278 |
Andrei Sorop1,2, Razvan Iacob1,3,4, Speranta Iacob1,3,4, Diana Constantinescu1, Leona Chitoiu5, Tudor Emanuel Fertig3,5, Anca Dinischiotu2, Mihaela Chivu-Economescu2,6, Nicolae Bacalbasa1,3, Lorand Savu1,7, Liliana Gheorghe1,3,4, Simona Dima1,4, Irinel Popescu1,4,7.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Liquid biopsy using circulating microvesicles and exosomes is emerging as a new diagnostic tool that could improve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) early diagnosis and screening protocols. Our study aimed to investigate the utility of plasma exosomal miR-21-5p and miR-92-3p for HCC diagnosis during screening protocols.Entities:
Keywords: exosomes; hepatocellular carcinoma; microRNA; screening; serum biomarkers
Year: 2020 PMID: 32793278 PMCID: PMC7391066 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2020.00712
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Genet ISSN: 1664-8021 Impact factor: 4.599
Patient’s demographic and clinical characteristics in the two study groups depicted as percentages of respective categories or mean ± standard deviation (LC and HCC).
| Age > 60 years | 36.84% | 68.75% | 0.003 |
| Male | 55.26% | 56.25% | 0.92 |
| HVC etiology | 38.89% | 52.08% | 0.23 |
| HBV etiology | 33.33% | 33.33% | 1 |
| HDV etiology | 25% | 8.33% | 0.07 |
| INR | 1.5 ± 0.49 | 1.12 ± 0.18 | <0.0001 |
| Tbil (mg/dl) | 2.99 ± 3.13 | 0.83 ± 0.58 | <0.0001 |
| Serum creatinine (mg/dl) | 0.88 ± 0.24 | 0.97 ± 0.31 | 0.29 |
| Serum albumin (g/dl) | 3.34 ± 0.79 | 3.67 ± 0.72 | 0.06 |
| MELD score | 14.02 ± 5.09 | 8.83 ± 2.83 | <0.0001 |
| Ascites | 31.11% | 6.25% | 0.001 |
| Child Pugh class A | 52.63% | 91.67% | |
| Child Pugh class B | 28.95% | 8.33% | |
| Child Pugh class C | 18.42% | 0% | 0.0001 |
| Serum AFP (ng/ml) | 10.52 ± 18.15 | 200.55 ± 380.29 | 0.001 |
| miR-21-5p relative expression | 15.17 ± 19.29 | 47.96 ± 71.31 | 0.017 |
| miR-92a-3p relative expression | 1.24 ± 1.18 | 0.61 ± 0.99 | 0.0005 |
FIGURE 1Characterization of isolated exosomes with both methods (A) UC and (B) TEIp by size distribution of their hydrodynamic diameter using Delsa Nano Analyzer (DelsaNano, Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, United States). The histograms display the intensity (weighted) size distributions, and the scale of each peak is proportional to the percentage (% amount of the total scattered intensity due to exosome particles).
FIGURE 2Gallery of negative stain digital micrographs showing cup-shaped exosomes with size ranging in between 40 and 150 nm (yellow arrows) and lipoprotein contamination (red triangles) in samples isolated from patients plasma by TEIp kit (A–C) or UC (D–F).
FIGURE 3Characterization of small extracellular vesicles by cryo-electron microscopy. Gallery of digital micrographs showing small EVs and lipoprotein contamination (red arrows) in samples isolated from LC patients plasma by exosome isolation TEIp kit (A) (top panel) and UC (B) (bottom panel).
FIGURE 4Positive detection for specific exosomal surface markers (CD 63, CD9, and CD81) and for the control-positive marker (b-actin) by immunoblotting. (A) exosomes isolated by UC and (B) TEIp kit.
FIGURE 5Bioanalyzer analysis of total exosomal RNA by Agilent RNA Pico Chip. The RNA 6000 ladder standard (A) first lane contains five RNA fragments between 0.2 and 6 kB. In bands of exosomal RNA from plasma, almost all of the samples revealed a visible band in the small RNA area. (B,C) Elecrophoregram for total exosomal RNA.
FIGURE 6(A) Serum AFP level in LC and HCC. (B) Exosomal miR-21-5p relative expression in LC and HCC. (C) Exosomal miR-92a-3p relative expression in LC and HCC.
Relative gene expression (fold change in gene expression) of miR-21-5p and miR-92a-3p according to different patient’s clinical and tumoral characteristics.
| Age > 60 years | 1.06 ± 1.37 | 37.12 ± 68.17 | ||
| Age < 60 years | 0.69 ± 0.67 | 0.4 | 29.07 ± 39.86 | 0.71 |
| Male | 0.85 ± 1.07 | 23.36 ± 34.92 | ||
| Female | 0.93 ± 1.19 | 0.74 | 46.25 ± 74.82 | 0.64 |
| VHC etiology | 0.89 ± 1.32 | 29.53 ± 52.51 | ||
| Non-HCV etiology | 0.88 ± 0.91 | 0.96 | 36.11 ± 61.66 | 0.33 |
| HBV etiology | 0.69 ± 0.75 | 38.04 ± 69.54 | ||
| Non-HBV etiology | 0.98 ± 1.26 | 0.5 | 30.56 ± 50.7 | 0.36 |
| HDV etiology | 0.86 ± 0.83 | 28.6 ± 38.91 | ||
| Non-HDV etiology | 0.89 ± 1.16 | 0.34 | 33.87 ± 60.30 | 0.68 |
| Abnormal INR (>1.27) | 1.15 ± 1.1 | 20.56 ± 32.47 | ||
| Normal INR | 0.75 ± 1.11 | 0.11 | 40.39 ± 65.69 | 0.18 |
| Low albumin (<3.5 g/dl) | 0.92 ± 0.95 | 29.29 ± 40.46 | ||
| Normal albumin | 0.86 ± 1.25 | 0.12 | 37.28 ± 68.87 | 0.86 |
| Abnormal Tbil (>1.2 mg/dl) | 1.07 ± 1.1 | 24.38 ± 59.67 | ||
| Normal Tbil | 0.79 ± 1.12 | 0.13 | 38.34 ± 55.35 | 0.16 |
| High creatinine (>1.3 mg/dl) | 0.65 ± 0.88 | 30.14 ± 30.79 | ||
| Normal creatinine | 0.91 ± 1.14 | 0.43 | 33.77 ± 58.81 | 0.98 |
| MELD > 15 | 1.02 ± 0.93 | 11.47 ± 14.37 | ||
| MELD < 15 | 0.86 ± 1.15 | 0.13 | 37.75 ± 61.07 | 0.11 |
| Ascites – Yes | 0.82 ± 1.02 | 25.96 ± 39.79 | ||
| Ascites – No | 0.91 ± 1.16 | 0.95 | 35.73 ± 62.79 | 0.87 |
| Single nodule | 0.70 ± 1.15 | 45.35 ± 71.81 | ||
| Multiple nodules | 0.42 ± 0.30 | 0.89 | 57.44 ± 74.30 | 0.94 |
| Diameter >5 cm | 0.63 ± 0.75 | 45.09 ± 65.48 | ||
| Diameter <5 cm | 0.62 ± 11.1 | 0.77 | 50.55 ± 75.97 | 1 |
| Outside Milan criteria | 0.62 ± 0.74 | 39.98 ± 63.74 | ||
| Within Milan criteria | 0.62 ± 1.13 | 0.77 | 53.63 ± 76.73 | 0.47 |
| AFP > 20 ng/ml | 0.71 ± 1.26 | 52.51 ± 85.51 | ||
| AFP < 20 ng/ml | 0.52 ± 0.65 | 0.45 | 43.77 ± 56.73 | 0.53 |
| AFP > 100 ng/ml | 0.92 ± 1.59 | 34.36 ± 58.05 | ||
| AFP < 100 ng/ml | 0.49 ± 0.58 | 0.2 | 53.56 ± 76.18 | 0.3 |
FIGURE 7ROC curve for HCC diagnosis for Exosomal miR HCC Score in comparison to Serum AFP. Exosomal miR HCC score (AUROC 0.85) is calculated based on a logistic regression equation including exosomal relative expression of miR-21-5p, miR-92a-3p, and serum AFP level and is significantly better for HCC diagnosis in comparison to AFP alone (AUROC 0.72).