4.7 Article

Circulating microRNAs correlated with the level of coronary artery calcification in symptomatic patients

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep16099

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China Project [31325012, 31271225, 31300698, 81470429, 81100228]
  2. State Key Lab of Space Medicine Fundamentals and Application Grant [SYFD130051833, SYFD140041803]
  3. Beijing Municipal High-Level Talent Foundation of Health System [2011-1-5]
  4. Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding Support [ZYLX201303]
  5. National Key Clinical specialty Construction Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to find the circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) co-related with the severity of coronary artery calcification (CAC), and testify whether the selected miRNAs could reflect the obstructive coronary artery disease in symptomatic patients. Patients with chest pain and moderated risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) were characterized with coronary artery calcium score (CACS) from cardiac computed tomography (CT). We analyzed plasma miRNA levels of clinical matched 11 CAC (CACS > 100) and 6 non-CAC (CACS = 0) subjects by microarray profile. Microarray analysis identified 34 differentially expressed miRNAs between CAC and non CAC groups. Eight miRNAs (miR-223, miR-3135b, miR-133a-3p, miR-2861, miR-134, miR-191-3p, miR-3679-5p, miR-1229 in CAC patients) were significantly increased in CAC plasma in an independent clinical matched cohort. Four miRNAs (miR-2861, 134, 1229 and 3135b) were correlated with the degree of CAC. Validation test in angiographic cohort showed that miR-134, miR-3135b and miR-2861 were significantly changed in patients with obstructive CAD. We identified three significantly upregulated circulating miRNAs (miR-134, miR-3135b and 2861) correlated with CAC while detected obstructive coronary disease in symptomatic patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据