| Title |
Application of plasma circulating microRNA-448, 506, 4316, and 4478 analysis for non-invasive diagnosis of lung cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-3971-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tomasz Powrózek, Paweł Krawczyk, Dariusz M. Kowalski, Barbara Kuźnar-Kamińska, Kinga Winiarczyk, Marta Olszyna-Serementa, Halina Batura-Gabryel, Janusz Milanowski |
| Abstract |
Aberrant expression of microRNAs (miRNAs) in cancer patients compared to healthy people as well as possibility of detection of these molecules in blood samples make them potential biomarkers of various cancers. In the present study, we investigated the potential role of four miRNAs as lung cancer (LC) biomarkers: miRNA-448, 506, 4316, and 4478. Using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) technique, we assessed expression of studied miRNAs in plasma samples of 90 lung cancer patients and 85 healthy individuals. Receiver operating curves (ROC) with area under the curve (AUC) were used to assess accuracy of studied miRNAs for distinguishing LC patients from healthy individuals. The miRNA-448 and 4478 were significantly overexpressed in lung cancer patients compared to healthy people and these two molecules were qualified for further analysis. Combination ROC analysis of both biomarkers reached 90 % of sensitivity and 76.3 % of specificity (AUC = 0.896) for distinguishing operable (stage IA-IIB) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients from healthy subjects. Our results suggest that the examination of miRNAs could be considered as potential lung cancer, non-invasive biomarkers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 24% |
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,290,425
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,834
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,273
of 267,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#138
of 211 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 211 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.