Role of micro-RNAs 21, 124 and other novel biomarkers in distinguishing between group 1 WHO pulmonary hypertension and group 2, 3 WHO pulmonary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary hypertension "PH" is considered a serious cardiovascular disease. World Health Organization divided PH into groups depending on many factors like pathological, hemodynamic, and clinical pictures. Lately, various micro-RNAs "miRNAs" and other novel biomarkers like endoglin and asymmetric dimethylarginine "ADMA" might have a role in diagnosis of PH and may differentiate between pulmonary arterial hypertension "PAH" and non-PAH. The purpose of the study is to show the role of miR-21, miR-124, endoglin and ADMA in the diagnosis of PH and distinguishing between WHO group 1 PH and WHO group 2 and 3 PH and to identify patients who might benefit from non-invasive and inexpensive tools to diagnose PAH.

RESULTS

miR-21 was upregulated in group 1 PH, and there was significant difference between group 1 PH as compared with group 2 PH, group 3 PH and control; miR-124 was down-regulated in group 1 PH with highly significant difference between group 1 and group 2 PH and control but no significant difference with group 3 PH, endoglin was elevated in group 1 PH with a significant difference as compared to group 2 PH, group 3 PH and control. ADMA was elevated in group 1 PH as compared to control; however, there was no significant difference between it and group 2, 3 PH.

CONCLUSIONS

miR-21, miR-124, endoglin and ADMA are good biomarkers to diagnose PH; however, only miR-21 and endoglin could distinguish group 1 PH from group 2 and 3 PH.

Role of some serum biomarkers in the early detection of diabetic cardiomyopathy

AIM

To assess the role of serum biomarkers in early prediction of diabetic cardiomyopathy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The participants were three groups of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) patients having diastolic dysfunction (DM-DD), systolic dysfunction (DM-SD) and normal echocardiography (DM-N) with two control groups: non-DM diastolic dysfunction patients (DD) and healthy controls. AGEs, TNF-α, IL-6, IGFBP-7, creatinine and insulin were assessed.

RESULTS

TNF-α, AGEs, creatinine and insulin panel had area under the curve (AUC) of 0.913 in distinguishing DM-DD from DM-N (78.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity). IL-6 and AGEs panel had AUC 0.795 for differentiating DM-SD from DM-DD (90.6% sensitivity). IL-6, TNF-α and AGEs panel had AUC 0.924 for differentiating diabetic cardiomyopathy from DM-N (85% sensitivity and specificity).

CONCLUSION

A panel of AGEs, IL-6, TNF-α, insulin and creatinine might be used for early detection of DM-DD among T2DM patients.