Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21914171›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2011

Persistent upregulation of U6:SNORD44 small RNA ratio in the serum of breast cancer patients.

Hitesh N Appaiah, Chirayu P Goswami, Lida A Mina, Sunil Badve, George W Sledge, Yunlong Liu, Harikrishna Nakshatri

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Midsize noncoding RNAs in cancers: a new division that clarifies the world of noncoding RNA or an unnecessary chaos?Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Breast Cancer and the Other Non-Coding RNAs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hitesh N AppaiahDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, West Walnut Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA. hnakshat@iupui.edu
Chirayu P Goswami
Lida A Mina
Sunil Badve
George W Sledge
Yunlong Liu
Harikrishna Nakshatri
Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USIndiana University School of Medicine

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSerum microRNAs have the potential to be valuable biomarkers of cancer. This investigation addresses two issues that impact their utility: a) appropriate normalization controls and b) whether their altered levels persist in patients who are clinically free of the disease.

methodsSera from 40 age-matched healthy women and 39 breast cancer patients without clinical disease at the time of serum collection were analyzed for microRNAs let-7f, miR-16, miR-21 and miR-155 using quantitative real-time PCR. U6 and 5S, which are transcribed by RNA polymerase III (RNAP-III) and the small nucleolar RNU44 (SNORD44), were also analyzed for normalization. Significant results from the initial study were verified using a second set of sera from 15 healthy patients, 15 breast cancer patients without clinical disease and 15 with metastatic disease, and a third set of 12 healthy and 18 patients with metastatic disease. U6 was further verified in the extended second cohort of 75 healthy and 68 breast cancer patients without clinical disease.

resultsU6:SNORD44 ratio was consistently higher in breast cancer patients with or without active disease (fold change range 1.5-6.6, p value range 0.0003 to 0.05). This increase in U6:SNORD44 ratio was observed in the sera of both estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) and ER-negative breast cancer patients. MiR-16 and 5S, which are often used as normalization controls for microRNAs, showed remarkable experimental variability and thus are not ideal for normalization.

conclusionsElevated serum U6 levels in breast cancer patients irrespective of disease activity at the time of serum collection suggest a new paradigm in cancer; persistent systemic changes during cancer progression, which result in elevated activity of RNAP-III and/or the stability/release pathways of U6 in non-cancer tissues. Additionally, these results highlight the need for developing standards for normalization between samples in microRNA-related studies for healthy versus cancer and for inter-laboratory reproducibility. Our studies rule out the utility of miR-16, U6 and 5S RNAs for this purpose.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansMicroRNAsMiddle AgedReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReference ValuesRNA, Small NuclearRNA, Small NucleolarBiomarkers, TumorMicroRNAsMIRN155 microRNA, humanMIRN16 microRNA, humanMIRN21 microRNA, humanRNA, Small NuclearRNA, Small NucleolarU6 small nuclear RNA

Identifiers

PMID21914171
PMCPMC3262198
OpenAlexW2133635440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.