Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 May 17;9(5):193.
doi: 10.3390/biom9050193.

Clinical Value of Circulating Microribonucleic Acids miR-1 and miR-21 in Evaluating the Diagnosis of Acute Heart Failure in Asymptomatic Type 2 Diabetic Patients

Affiliations

Clinical Value of Circulating Microribonucleic Acids miR-1 and miR-21 in Evaluating the Diagnosis of Acute Heart Failure in Asymptomatic Type 2 Diabetic Patients

Mutaa Abdalmutaleb Al-Hayali et al. Biomolecules. .

Abstract

To investigate whether the circulating miR-1 (microRNA-1) and miR-21 expression might be used in the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) and silent coronary artery disease (SCAD) in asymptomatic type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients and to explore the relationship of these miRs with N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and galectin-3. One hundred thirty-five consecutive patients with T2DM and 45 matched control subjects were enrolled in the study. This study consisted of the following four groups: control group (mean age: 60.23 ± 6.27 years, female/male (F/M): 23/22); diabetic group (DM) (mean age: 61.50 ± 5.08, F/M: 23/22); DM + SCAD group (mean age: 61.61 ± 6.02, F/M: 20/25); and DM + acute HF group (mean age: 62.07 ± 5.26 years, F/M: 20/25). miR-1 was downregulated in the DM, CAD + DM and HF + DM groups by 0.54, 0.54, and 0.12 fold as compared with controls, respectively. The miR-1 levels were significantly lower in HF + DM than DM with 0.22 fold changes (p < 0.001); and in patients with CAD + DM group with 0.22 fold changes (p < 0.001). Similarly, miR-21 was overexpressed in patients with DM, CAD + DM, and HF + DM with 1.30, 1.79 and 2.21 fold changes as compared with controls, respectively. An interesting finding is that the miR-21 expression was significantly higher in the HF + DM group as compared with the CAD + DM group; miR-1 was negatively correlated with NT-proBNP (r = -0.891, p < 0.001) and galectin-3 (r = -0.886, p < 0.001) in the HF + DM group; and miR-21 showed a strongly positive correlation with (r = 0.734, p < 0.001) and galectin-3 (r = 0.764. p < 0.001) in the HF + DM group. These results suggest that the circulating decreased miR-1 and increased miR-21 expression are associated with NT-proBNP and galectin-3 levels in acute HF + DM. Especially the miR-21 expression might be useful in predicting the onset of acute HF in asymptomatic T2DM patients. The miR-21 expression is more valuable than the miR-1 expression in predicting cardiovascular events of acute HF and the combined analysis of miR-21 expression, galectin-3, and NT-proBNP can increase the predictive value of miR-21 expression.

Keywords: NT-proBNP; acute heart failure; asymptomatic type 2 diabetes mellitus; galectin-3; miRNA-1; miRNA-21; silent coronary artery disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Relative expression levels of miR-1. The miR-1 levels were significantly lower in patients from the DM, CAD + DM and HF + DM groups than in the control groups, with 0.54-, 0.54- and 0.12-fold changes, respectively. The miR-1 levels were significantly lower in patients from the HF + DM group than in patients with DM with 0.22-fold changes; and in patients from the CAD + DM group with 0.22-fold changes. Data are presented as fold-change derived from mean 2−ΔΔCT method. *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Relative expression levels of miR-21. The miR-21 levels were significantly higher in patients from the CAD + DM and HF + DM groups than the control groups, with 1.79-, and 2.21-fold changes, respectively. The miR-21 levels were significantly higher in patients from the HF + DM group than in patients with DM with 1.70-fold changes, and in patients from the CAD + DM group with 1.24-fold changes, and in patients from the CAD + DM group than in patients with DM with 1.37-fold changes. Data are presented as fold-change derived from mean 2−ΔΔCT method. ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The miR-1 correlations with NT-proBNP and galectin-3 in the DM, CAD + DM and HF + DM groups. Data are presented as fold-change derived from mean 2−ΔΔCT method. Rs: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (r) (A) miR-1 vs. NT-proBNP in DM group; (B) miR-1 vs. galectin-3 in DM group; (C) miR-1 vs. NT-proBNP in CAD + DM group; (D) miR-1 vs. galectin-3 in CAD + DM group; (E) miR-1 vs NT-proBNP in HF + DM group; (F) miR-1 vs galectin-3 in HF + DM group.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The miR-1 correlations with NT-proBNP and galectin-3 in the DM, CAD + DM and HF + DM groups. Data are presented as fold-change derived from mean 2−ΔΔCT method. Rs: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (r) (A) miR-1 vs. NT-proBNP in DM group; (B) miR-1 vs. galectin-3 in DM group; (C) miR-1 vs. NT-proBNP in CAD + DM group; (D) miR-1 vs. galectin-3 in CAD + DM group; (E) miR-1 vs NT-proBNP in HF + DM group; (F) miR-1 vs galectin-3 in HF + DM group.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The miR-21 correlations with NT-proBNP and galectin-3 in the DM, CAD + DM and HF + DM groups. Data are presented as fold-change derived from mean 2−ΔΔCT method. Rs: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (r). (A) miR-21 vs. NT-proBNP in DM group; (B) miR-21 vs. galectin-3 in DM group; (C) miR-21 vs. NT-proBNP in CAD + DM group; (D) miR-21 vs galectin-3 in CAD + DM group; (E) miR-21 vs. NT-proBNP in HF + DM group; (F) miR-21 vs galectin-3 in HF + DM group.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The miR-21 correlations with NT-proBNP and galectin-3 in the DM, CAD + DM and HF + DM groups. Data are presented as fold-change derived from mean 2−ΔΔCT method. Rs: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (r). (A) miR-21 vs. NT-proBNP in DM group; (B) miR-21 vs. galectin-3 in DM group; (C) miR-21 vs. NT-proBNP in CAD + DM group; (D) miR-21 vs galectin-3 in CAD + DM group; (E) miR-21 vs. NT-proBNP in HF + DM group; (F) miR-21 vs galectin-3 in HF + DM group.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The ROC analysis of laboratory findings for different groups: (A) Control vs. DM groups, (B) Control vs. CAD + DM groups, (C) Control vs. HF + DM groups, (D) DM vs. CAD + DM groups, (E) DM vs. HF + DM groups, and (F) CAD + DM vs. HF + DM vs. CAD + DM groups.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Thomas M.C. Type 2 Diabetes and Heart Failure: Challenges and Solutions. Cardiol. Rev. 2016;12:249–255. doi: 10.2174/1573403X12666160606120254. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kannel W.B., Hjortland M., Castelli W.P. Role of diabetes in congestive heart failure: The Framingham study. Am. J. Cardiol. 1974;34:29–34. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(74)90089-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dei Cas A., Khan S.S., Butler J., Mentz R.J., Bonow R.O., Avogaro A., Tschoepe D., Doehner W., Greene S.J., Senni M., et al. Impact of diabetes on epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes of patients with heart failure. JACC Heart Fail. 2015;3:136–145. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2014.08.004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pandit K., Mukhopadhyay P., Ghosh S., Chowdhury S. Natriuretic peptides: Diagnostic and therapeutic use. Indian. J. Endocrinol. Metab. 2011;15:S345–S353. doi: 10.4103/2230-8210.86978. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Oremus M., McKelvie R., Don-Wauchope A., Santaguida P.L., Ali U., Balion C., Hill S., Booth R., Brown J.A., Bustamam A., et al. A systematic review of BNP and NT-proBNP in the management of heart failure: Overview and methods. Hear. Fail. Rev. 2014;19:413–419. doi: 10.1007/s10741-014-9440-0. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types