Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
ObjectivesIn this study, we explore the molecular basis of the literature-reported inverse association between brain neoplasms and neurodegenerative disorders, including Parkinson's disease (PD). As miRNAs are post-transcriptional regulators, we selected them as candidates underlying opposite processes of neurodegeneration and glioma development.MethodsWe used bioinformatic analyses for disease-gene extraction, miRNA target prediction, enrichment analyses, and miRNA ranking. We identified 953 shared genes between PD and glioblastoma (GBM) in DisGeNET, then prioritized miRNAs predicted to regulate the largest number of shared targets. Next, we collected peripheral blood from patients with PD (n = 12), patients with gliomas (the most advanced-grade IV, n = 10 and grade III n = 3) and controls undergoing spinal surgery for disk pathology (n = 10). Blood samples were obtained pre-operatively in controls and glioma patients. Tumor and peritumoral tissues were obtained from glioma patients, whereas tissue sampling is not feasible in PD. Brain tissues and plasma were analyzed using RT-qPCR (miRNA) and ELISA (p53).ResultsWe observed increased levels of miR-16-5p (p p p p p p ConclusionsAlthough these analyses highlight miR-16-5p and miR-32-5p as candidate biomarkers associated with glioma related pathways, the results did not provide evidence for the expected opposite regulation between PD and glioma. Future studies with a larger cohort of patients using high-throughput methods are needed to validate these findings and to elucidate the mechanisms driving neurodegeneration or excessive proliferation.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.