Progress of research on microRNAs with diagnostic value in asbestos exposure: A call for method standardization

Our plain-English summary of Progress of research on microRNAs with diagnostic value in asbestos exposure: A call for method standardization, by L. Micolucci, M.R. Rippo, F. Olivieri, et al (Bioscience Trends, 2017).

The study

• Authors: L. Micolucci, M.R. Rippo, F. Olivieri, A.D. Procopio
• Journal: Bioscience Trends
• Published: 2017;11(1):105-109
• Cited by: 6 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an insidious, lethal asbestos-related cancer that is poorly responsive to current treatments. Specific and sensitive biomarkers providing early MM diagnosis in exposed subjects, who are at high-risk of developing it, are sorely needed. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are endogenous, non-coding, small RNAs with a well-established diagnostic role in cancer and pollution exposure. In a recent systematic review and qualitative meta-analysis followed by a functional investigation, we examined all the available data on the miRNA biomarkers involved in asbestos exposure and MM pathways. This invited commentary aims to provide an insightful critique into the state of the art of the research into clinically relevant miRNA biomarkers, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of current research efforts in this field. It also reviews the suggestions advanced to improve biomarker development productivity and the translation of research results into clinical practice, stressing that multicenter multidisciplinary studies adopting standardized methods and protocol sharing are the key to move from the workbench to the clinic.

In plain English

This was an invited commentary, not a new study. In 2015 the authors carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of published research on microRNAs (small RNA molecules) as markers of asbestos exposure and malignant mesothelioma (MM). Here they used that review to discuss the state of this research. Drawing on it, they reported that three microRNAs circulating in the blood (miR-126-3p, miR-103a-3p and miR-625-3p) appeared to form a promising panel for early, non-invasive diagnosis and screening of high-risk exposed people, when combined with the markers mesothelin and/or fibulin-3. They also reported that nine tissue microRNAs pooled into a signature were found to have diagnostic value. The commentary gave no numbers for these findings. The authors described weaknesses in the field:

• a lack of standardized study design and methods, which hampers reproducibility between laboratories
• small, statistically underpowered samples
• inconsistent control samples
• validation that was often missing or done in the same patients used for discovery

The authors concluded that a multicenter, multidisciplinary, standardized approach would give the fastest return. They called for validation studies in people at risk.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Invited commentary discussing the authors' own earlier systematic review and qualitative meta-analysis; no new data
• Who was studied: No new study population; the commentary draws on the authors' 2015 systematic review of published studies of microRNAs in asbestos-exposed subjects and MM patients
• Exposure: Asbestos exposure in general (no fiber types named); the subject is microRNA biomarkers in asbestos-exposed people and MM patients
• Main results:
  • In the authors' earlier review, the circulating microRNAs miR-126-3p, miR-103a-3p and miR-625-3p were seen as a promising multi-marker panel when combined with mesothelin and/or fibulin-3, for early non-invasive diagnosis and screening of high-risk exposed subjects (no performance numbers given here)
  • Nine consistently described tissue microRNAs were pooled into a meta-signature that was found to have diagnostic value (no numbers given here)
  • Across the reviewed studies, a lack of standardized study design and methods hampered reproducibility between laboratories
  • Reviewed studies often had small, statistically underpowered samples
  • Validation was often missing, or was done in the same patient cohort used for screening
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that a multicenter, multidisciplinary, closely regulated, integrated and standardized systems-based approach would give the fastest return

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Lung cancer, Mesothelioma.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Asbestos Exposure, Malignant Mesothelioma, Biomarker, Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, State-of-the-Art Defense.

Related studies

• Diagnostic value of microRNAs in asbestos exposure and malignant mesothelioma: systematic review and qualitative meta-analysis — L. Micolucci, M.M. Akhtar, et al. (2016)
• MicroRNAs diagnostic and prognostic value as predictive markers for malignant mesothelioma — E. Sturchio, M.G. Berardinelli, et al. (2020)
• MicroRNA signature of malignant mesothelioma with potential diagnostic and prognostic implications — S. Busacca, S. Germano, et al. (2010)
• A diagnostic assay based on microRNA expression accurately identifies malignant pleural mesothelioma — H. Benjamin, D. Lebanony, et al. (2010)
• MicroRNA profiling in serous cavity specimens: Diagnostic challenges and new opportunities — L. Nicolè, F. Cappello, et al. (2019)
• microRNAs in Cancer Chemoprevention: Method to Isolate Them from Fresh Tissues — F. Ganci, G. Blandino (2016)

Browse return to medical research.