SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Identification of circulating microRNAs for the differential diagnosis of Parkinson's disease and Multiple System Atrophy.

Front Cell Neurosci · 2014-06-10

DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2014.00156PMID: 24959119

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder which may be misdiagnosed with atypical conditions such as Multiple System Atrophy (MSA), due to overlapping clinical features. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNAs with a key role in post-transcriptional gene regulation. We hypothesized that identification of a distinct set of circulating miRNAs (cmiRNAs) could distinguish patients affected by PD from MSA and healthy individuals. Results. Using TaqMan Low Density Array technology, we analyzed 754 miRNAs and found 9 cmiRNAs differentially expressed in PD and MSA patients compared to healthy controls. We also validated a set of 4 differentially expressed cmiRNAs in PD and MSA patients vs. controls. More specifically, miR-339-5p was downregulated, whereas miR-223(*), miR-324-3p, and mir-24 were upregulated in both diseases. We found cmiRNAs specifically deregulated in PD (downregulation of miR-30c and miR-148b) and in MSA (upregulation of miR-148b). Finally, comparing MSA and PD, we identified 3 upregulated cmiRNAs in MSA serum (miR-24, miR-34b, miR-148b). Conclusions. Our results suggest that cmiRNA signatures discriminate PD from MSA patients and healthy controls and may be considered specific, non-invasive biomarkers for differential diagnosis.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.