Expression Profiling of the Tripartite Motif Family Genes in Chronic Hepatitis C Patients

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Structural organization of TRIM proteins. Schematic representation of domain organization in TRIM11, TRIM14, and TRIM25. The scheme shows the N-terminal tripartite motif and its composing domains (RING domain, B-box domain, and coiled-coil region) and the variable C-terminal domains. TRIM14 lacks a ring domain, whereas TRIM25 lacks a B-box compared to TRIM11.

• 

  Figure 2. Relative expression of TRIM protein (fold change) is shown in three different study groups, i.e., SVR (n = 100), RVR (n = 61), and control (n = 23), whose expression is taken as 1. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean, level of significance was calculated by ordinary one-way ANOVA. * Shows the level of significance. Ns means non-significant.

• 

  Figure 3. Expression analysis of TRIM proteins in naïve vs HCC patients. Analysis of mRNA transcript levels in naïve (n = 37) vs HCC (n = 21) patients as compared to the control group (n = 23) for (A) TRIM11, (B) TRIM14, and (C) TRIM25. Ordinary one-way ANOVA determined the level of significance. * indicates significant p-values, and “ns” indicates non-significant changes.

• 

  Figure 4. Correlation of TRIM proteins expression levels is shown with viral loads. The expression was analyzed at different time points and documented along with the viral loads at respective time points. The highest elevation is observed in TRIM14, followed by TRIM25. Each dot point represents an average value from all the patients recruited during the study (n = 182).

• 

  Figure 5. Comparative analysis of viral loads in different study groups. The viral loads have been detected and documented in RVR (n = 61), SVR (n = 100), and HCC (n = 21) for all the three of the TRIM mRNA transcripts. The RVR group showed highest viral loads and highest levels of TRIM14 mRNA expression as opposed to the other groups.