ArticleTzu chi medical journal
Comparing miR-16 and miR-1228 as an optimal endogenous control for quantification of circulating microRNAs in colorectal cancer patients.
Article in Tzu chi medical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A miRNA Signature for Non-Invasive Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis in Morocco: miR-21, miR-29a and miR-92a.Non-coding RNA · 2025Article
- MicroRNAs implicated in canine diffuse large B-cell lymphoma prognosis.FEBS open bio · 2024Article
- IL-2RG as a possible immunotherapeutic target in CRC predicting poor prognosis and regulated by miR-7-5p and miR-26b-5p.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
- Utilizing an In-silico Approach to Pinpoint Potential Biomarkers for Enhanced Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer.Cancer informatics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) have been discovered to play a novel role in intercellular communication and cancer biology. They are emerging candidates for noninvasive molecular biomarkers of cancer and other diseases. However, current translational researches have been limited by the lack of consensus on the optimal endogenous control of circulating miRNAs quantitation. In this study, we compared two promising miRNAs, miR-1228 and miR-16, as an endogenous control. The effects of normalizers on the relative quantification of circulating miR-31 in plasma samples of colorectal cancer (CRC) were also assessed. Materials and Methods: The cel-miR-39 was a spiked-in RNA used as an external control and added to plasma samples before RNA extraction. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction technology was used to analyze the expression levels of circulating miRNAs in plasma samples of 4 healthy controls and 14 CRC patients. The expression stability of the candidate controls was compared by Ct analysis and NormFinder algorithms. Results: There was no significant difference in expression level of miR-16 and miR-1228 between healthy control group and before or after therapy of CRC patient groups. The expression of miR-1228 has smaller the range Ct values (28.25-25.64)compared with those of miR-16 (24.91-20.34). The stability value of miR-1228 (0.102) is lower than that of miR-16 (0.350). The expression of miR-1228 endogenous reference candidate has lower stability value and smaller the range Ct values compared with those in miR-16. According to the range Ct values and stability value, miR-1228 is better than miR-16 as endogenous control in CRC patients. There are significant differences in circulating miR-31 expression between healthy control and CRC patients when miR-1228 was used to standardize miR-31 expression. Conclusions: miR-1228 is recommended as a better endogenous control in quantification of circulating miRNAs in CRC patients.
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.