Abstract

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) are inflammatory neuropathies with different clinical courses but similar underlying mechanisms. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) might affect pathogenesis of these conditions. In the current project, we have selected HULC, PVT1, MEG3, SPRY4-IT1, LINC-ROR and DSCAM-AS1 lncRNAs to appraise their transcript levels in the circulation of CIDP and GBS cases versus controls. Expression of HULC was higher in CIDP patients compared with healthy persons (Ratio of mean expression (RME) = 7.62, SE = 0.72, P < 0.001). While expression of this lncRNA was not different between female CIDP cases and female controls, its expression was higher in male CIDP cases compared with male controls (RME = 13.50, SE = 0.98, P < 0.001). Similarly, expression of HULC was higher in total GBS cases compared with healthy persons (RME = 4.57, SE = 0.65, P < 0.001) and in male cases compared with male controls (RME = 5.48, SE = 0.82, P < 0.001). Similar pattern of expression was detected between total cases and total controls. PVT1 was up-regulated in CIDP cases compared with controls (RME = 3.04, SE = 0.51, P < 0.001) and in both male and female CIDP cases compared with sex-matched controls. Similarly, PVT1 was up-regulated in GBS cases compared with controls (RME = 2.99, SE = 0.55, P vale < 0.001) and in total patients compared with total controls (RME = 3.02, SE = 0.43, P < 0.001). Expression levels of DSCAM-AS1 and SPRY4-IT1 were higher in CIDP and GBS cases compared with healthy subjects and in both sexes compared with gender-matched healthy persons. Although LINC-ROR was up-regulated in total CIDP and total GBS cases compared with controls, in sex-based comparisons, it was only up-regulated in male CIDP cases compared with male controls (RME = 3.06, P = 0.03). Finally, expression of MEG3 was up-regulated in all subgroups of patients versus controls except for male GBS controls. SPRY4-IT could differentiate CIDP cases from controls with AUC = 0.84, sensitivity = 0.63 and specificity = 0.97. AUC values of DSCAM-AS1, MEG3, HULC, PVT1 and LINC-ROR were 0.80, 0.75, 0.74, 0.73 and 0.72, respectively. In differentiation between GBS cases and controls, SPRY4-IT and DSCAM-AS1 has the AUC value of 0.8. None of lncRNAs could appropriately differentiate between CIDP and GBS cases. Combination of all lncRNAs could not significantly enhance the diagnostic power. Taken together, these lncRNAs might be involved in the development of CIDP or GBS.

Highlights

  • Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) are inflammatory neuropathies with different clinical courses but similar underlying mechanisms

  • Expression of HULC was higher in total GBS cases compared with controls (RME = 4.57, SE = 0.65, P < 0.001) and in male cases compared with male controls (RME = 5.48, SE = 0.82, P < 0.001)

  • PVT1 was up-regulated in GBS cases compared with controls (RME = 2.99, SE = 0.55, P vale < 0.001) and in total patients compared with total controls (RME = 3.02, SE = 0.43, P < 0.001)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) are inflammatory neuropathies with different clinical courses but similar underlying mechanisms. We have selected HULC, PVT1, MEG3, SPRY4-IT1, LINC-ROR and DSCAM-AS1 lncRNAs to appraise their transcript levels in the circulation of CIDP and GBS cases versus controls. Expression levels of DSCAM-AS1 and SPRY4-IT1 were higher in CIDP and GBS cases compared with healthy subjects and in both sexes compared with gender-matched healthy persons. While CIDP has a slowly progressive ­onset[1], GBS has an acute-onset with ascending pattern of n­ europathy[2] Both conditions are associated with dysregulation of immune ­response[3,4]. We have selected HULC, PVT1, MEG3, SPRY4-IT1, LINC-ROR and DSCAM-AS1 lncRNAs to appraise their transcript. Gene HULC PVT1 MEG3 SPRY4-IT1 LINC-ROR DSCAM-AS1 B2M levels in the circulation of CIDP and GBS cases versus controls.

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.