| Literature DB >> 33978071 |
Yunfei Zhang1, Fengchang Huang1, Ning Xu1, Jin Wang2, Dan Li3, Liang Yin1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Extracellular vesicle microRNAs (EV-miRNAs) have been demonstrated to be reliable candidate biomarkers for clinical applications. However, the clinical application potential of serum EV-miR-215-5p for gastric cancer (GC) remains poorly understood. The goal of our study was to determine the efficacy of serum EV-miR-215-5p in predicting the prognosis of GC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33978071 PMCID: PMC8075109 DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2021/e2081
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) ISSN: 1807-5932 Impact factor: 2.365
Association between serum EV-miR-215-5p levels and clinical parameters of GC.
| Parameters | N=118 | Serum extracellular vesicle miR-215-5p |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | |||
| Sex | 0.1338 | |||
| Male | 70 | 39 | 31 | |
| Female | 48 | 20 | 28 | |
| Age (years) | 0.1648 | |||
| <60 | 81 | 44 | 37 | |
| ≥60 | 37 | 15 | 22 | |
| Histological type | 0.1951 | |||
| Intestinal | 53 | 30 | 23 | |
| Diffuse | 65 | 29 | 36 | |
| Distant metastasis | 0.0586 | |||
| No | 96 | 52 | 44 | |
| Yes | 22 | 7 | 15 | |
| Invasive depth | 0.0032 | |||
| T1/T2 | 58 | 37 | 21 | |
| T3/T4 | 60 | 22 | 38 | |
| Lymph node metastasis | 0.0008 | |||
| No | 52 | 35 | 17 | |
| Yes | 66 | 24 | 42 | |
| TNM stage | <0.0001 | |||
| I/II | 55 | 41 | 14 | |
| III/IV | 63 | 18 | 45 | |
Figure 1Serum EV-miR-215-5p level was higher in GC patients. (A) The isolated extracellular vesicles were positive for TSG-101 and CD9. (B) Serum extracellular vesicle miR-215-5p levels were markedly higher in GC patients than those in BGD patients and healthy subjects. (C) Serum extracellular vesicle miR-215-5p levels were higher in patients with ETR than in those without ETR.
Figure 2The diagnostic performance of serum EV-miR-215-5p. (A) The diagnostic performance of serum EV-miR-215-5p for distinguishing GC patients from healthy donors. (B) The diagnostic performance of serum EV-miR-215-5p for distinguishing GC patients from BGD patients. (C) The diagnostic performance of serum EV-miR-215-5p for identifying GC patients with ETR from those without ETR.
Figure 3The serum EV-miR-215-5p level was sensitive to treatments. (A) Serum EV-miR-215-5p level was significantly decreased in GC patients without ETR after gastrectomy. (B) The serum EV-miR-215-5p level was decreased in GC patients with ETR after gastrectomy but increased at the point of ETR.
Figure 4Correlation between serum EV-miR-215-5p level and OS and DFS. (A) GC patients with high serum EV-miR-215-5p levels had shorter OS. (B) GC patients with higher serum EV-miR-215-5p levels had worse DFS.
Univariate and multivariate analysis to identify an association between clinical parameters and OS of GC patients.
| Parameters | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI |
| HR | 95% CI |
| |
| Sex | 1.06 | 0.71-1.94 | 0.506 | - | - | - |
| Age | 1.14 | 0.46-2.12 | 0.722 | - | - | - |
| Histological type | 0.69 | 0.43-1.37 | 0.348 | - | - | - |
| Distant metastasis | 1.42 | 0.87-2.20 | 0.271 | - | - | - |
| Invasive depth | 2.65 | 1.12-4.35 | 0.036 | - | - | - |
| Lymph node metastasis | 3.12 | 1.48-6.09 | 0.008 | 2.71 | 1.36-5.32 | 0.012 |
| TNM stage | 3.98 | 1.87-8.97 | <0.001 | 3.67 | 1.61-7.58 | 0.003 |
| Serum EV-miR-215-5p | 2.95 | 1.31-5.68 | 0.013 | 2.28 | 1.23-4.36 | 0.028 |