Key result
Plasma cell-free DNA integrity was significantly decreased in patients with calcific aortic valve disease compared to controls (0.41 vs 0.50; P<0.01) and was independently associated with the disease.
Why the study?
Calcific aortic valve disease is common, but a biomarker suitable for routine clinical testing is still needed.
Does plasma cell-free DNA integrity serve as a diagnostic biomarker for calcific aortic valve disease?
Case-Control (n=317)
Does plasma cell-free DNA integrity serve as a diagnostic biomarker for calcific aortic valve disease?
Plasma cell-free DNA integrity is significantly decreased in patients with calcific aortic valve disease and may serve as a potential diagnostic biomarker.
cfDNA may aid noninvasive CAVD diagnosis; hypothesis-generating and requires validation before routine clinical use.
INTRODUCTION: Calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD) is the third most common cardiovascular disease in aging populations. Despite a growing number of biomarkers having been shown to be associated with CAVD, a marker suitable for routine testing in clinical practice is still needed. Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has been suggested as a biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis in multiple diseases. In this study, we aimed to test whether cfDNA could be used as a biomarker for the diagnosis of CAVD. METHODS: Serum samples were collected from 137 diagnosed CAVD patients and 180 normal controls. The amount of cfDNA was quantified by amplifying a short fragment (ALU 115) and a long fragment (ALU 247) using quantitative real-time PCR. The cfDNA integrity (cfDI) was calculated as the ratio of ALU247 to ALU115. The association between CAVD and cfDI was evaluated using regression analysis. RESULTS: CAVD patients had increased ALU 115 fragments (median, 185.14 (416.42) versus 302.83 (665.41), p < 0.05) but a decreased value of cfDI (mean, 0.50 ± 0.25 vs. 0.41 ± 0.26, p < 0.01) in their serum when compared to controls. This difference was more dramatic in non-rheumatic CAVD patients (p < 0.001) versus rheumatic CAVD patients (no significant difference). Similarly, CAVD patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) (p < 0.01) showed a greater difference than non-BAV CAVD patients (p < 0.05). Linear regression and logistic regression showed that cfDI was independently and significantly associated with the presence of CAVD (95% CI, 0.096 to 0.773, p < 0.05). The ROC assay revealed that cfDI combined with clinical characteristics had a better diagnostic value than cfDI alone (AUC = 0.6191, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: cfDI may be a potential biomarker for diagnosis of CAVD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ma et al. (2023) conducted a case-control in Calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD) (n=317). Plasma cell-free DNA integrity (cfDI) vs. Normal controls was evaluated on Presence of CAVD (95% CI 0.096 to 0.773, p=< 0.05). Plasma cell-free DNA integrity was significantly decreased in patients with calcific aortic valve disease compared to controls (0.41 vs 0.50; P<0.01) and was independently associated with the disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: