ArticleClinical epigenetics2017
Pyrosequencing quantified methylation level of miR-124 predicts shorter survival for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome.
Article in Clinical epigenetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- MicroRNA dysregulation in myelodysplastic syndromes: implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic response.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Review
- Contingent Synergistic Interactions between Non-Coding RNAs and DNA-Modifying Enzymes in Myelodysplastic Syndromes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Epigenetic regulation ofMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2022Article
- Identification of miR-320 family members as potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in myelodysplastic syndromes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Unravelling the Epigenome of Myelodysplastic Syndrome: Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Response to Therapy.Cancers · 2020Review
- Microarray analysis of differentially expressed microRNAs in myelodysplastic syndromes.Medicine · 2020Article
- Comprehensive Assessment of the Relationship Between MicroRNA-124 and the Prognostic Significance of Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAberrant CpG island methylation has been increasingly recognized as a common event in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). To date, most of the previous studies of miR-124 in MDS have focused on epigenetic changes and little is known about the underlying mechanism through which miR-124 regulates
resultsIn the present study, we employed pyrosequencing analysis to quantify the methylation levels of upstream regions of the miR-124 genes (miR-124-1, miR-124-2 and miR-124-3) in 56 primary MDS patients. We found the three miR-124 genes were methylated in MDS patients. Univariate analysis revealed that the World Health Organization (WHO) classification, marrow blast count, karyotype, International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS), mean corpuscular volume, as well as high methylation of miR-124-1, miR-124-2 and miR-124-3 were significantly related to overall survival. In leukaemia-free survival, patients who were older and had an advanced WHO classification, high marrow blast counts, high IPSS risk and high methylation of miR-124-1 and miR-124-2 progressed rapidly to acute myeloid leukaemia. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that high methylation of miR-124-3 was an independent factor of overall survival. Median survival of patients with high miR-124-3 methylation was significantly shorter (7.6 months) than patients with low methylation (32.7 months;
conclusionsHigh methylation of miR-124-3 predicts shorter survival for patients with MDS, which may be a useful prognostic marker in MDS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.