Cargando…

Clinical values of expression signature of circCDR1AS and circHIAT1 in prostate cancer: Two circRNAs with regulatory function in androgen receptor (AR) and PI3K/AKT signaling pathways

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is a genetically heterogeneous disease with highly molecular aberrations. It has been revealed that a newly discovered class of non‐coding RNAs called circular RNAs (circRNAs) play key roles in dictating tumor behaviors and phenotypes of the prostate tumors. In the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aghajani Mir, Mahsa, Dinmohammadi, Hossein, Moudi, Emadoddin, Motamed, Nima, Daraei, Abdolreza
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8841177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35007362
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24220
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is a genetically heterogeneous disease with highly molecular aberrations. It has been revealed that a newly discovered class of non‐coding RNAs called circular RNAs (circRNAs) play key roles in dictating tumor behaviors and phenotypes of the prostate tumors. In the current study, our aim was to determine the expression profiles of circHIAT1 and circCDR1AS in PCa compared with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) tissues, as well as their clinicopathological relevance. METHODS: The 50 prostate tissues including 25 PCa tissues and 25 BPH samples were collected for analyzing the expression levels of target circRNAs by quantitative real‐time PCR (qRT‐PCR). RESULTS: The results revealed that expression of circCDR1AS was significantly elevated in PCa compared with the BPH (p < 0.05). We also observed that PCa patients over the age of 60 had a higher expression of the circCDR1AS than patients under the age of 60 (p = 0.017). Moreover, a lower expression level of circHIAT1 was found in the PCa than BPH tissues (p < 0.05), and finally, the findings indicated that the area under the curve (AUC) of circCDR1AS was 0.848, with 92% sensitivity and 76% specificity, as well as an AUC of 0.828, with the 80% sensitivity and 76% specificity for circHIAT1. CONCLUSION: These observations suggest that the abnormal expression of circCDR1AS and circHIAT1 can be regarded as two different types of molecular pathology with potential biomarker values for PCa, although further studies are needed.