Serum exosomal miR-122-5p, GAS, and PGR in the non-invasive diagnosis of CAG

Naihua Liu; Yuancheng Huang; Fengbin Liu; Hong Liu

doi:10.1515/med-2021-0342

Article Open Access

Serum exosomal miR-122-5p, GAS, and PGR in the non-invasive diagnosis of CAG

Naihua Liu , Yuancheng Huang , Fengbin Liu and Hong Liu

Published/Copyright: September 8, 2021

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Open Medicine Volume 16 Issue 1

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to integrate the serum exosomal miRNA miR-122-5p with canonical serological biomarkers for the non-invasive screening of chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) patients.

Methods

miR-122-5p and U6 were amplified by the quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), gastrin (GAS), pepsinogen I (PG-I), and PG-II and were measured by ELISA. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and their correlation were analyzed.

Results

In the present study, GAS level and PG-I/PG-II ratio (PGR) were increased in CAG group, but there was no significant difference in PG-I or PG-II levels between CAG group and chronic non-atrophic gastritis (CNAG) group. Only GAS level and PG-I/PG-II ratio were significantly correlated with atrophy, and not any other clinicopathologic factors. Expression of hsa-miR-122-5p positively correlated with GAS level, PG-I level, and PGR, while it negatively correlated with PG-II level; however, none of them had significant difference. The combination of GAS, PGR, and hsa-miR-122-5p presented as a better model for non-invasive screening of CAG compared to others.

Conclusion

These results suggested that serum exosomal hsa-miR-122-5p combined with GAS and PGR would elevate accuracy and specificity in non-invasive screening of CAG.

Keywords: serum exosomes; hsa-miR-122-5p; non-invasive diagnosis; chronic atrophic gastritis

1 Introduction

Chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) is a precancerous, wild-spread gastrointestinal disease. The prevalence of CAG is 10% in 20–50 years old population, and more than 50% in 51–65 years old population [1]. In China, the proportion of CAG is different between regions, but CAG is commonly and highly correlated with the incidence of gastric cancer [2]. Clinically, the diagnosis and staging of CAG mainly depended on the presence of chronic inflammatory cells established by endoscopic and histological examination, including lymphocytes and plasma cells that expanded in lamina propria, and the disappearance of the normal glands [3,4,5]. Up to date, diagnostic methods of CAG are usually invasive, which are hardly accepted by the patients [2]. Fortunately, accumulating serological biomarkers were highlighted in CAG diagnosis. It is reported that gastrin (GAS), pepsinogen I (PG-I), or pepsinogen II (PG-II) might be helpful for non-invasive diagnosis of atrophic gastritis [2,6]. Besides, previous study showed that the sensitivity and specificity of a panel test (G-17, PG, and anti-Helicobacter pylori) was 74.7 and 95.6%, respectively [7].

Exosomes, a form of endosome-derived extracellular vesicle, transfer various proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids to play an important role in cell–cell communication process [8]. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) consist of approximately 21–25 nucleotides, which function to regulate translational repression or mRNA degradation [9]. miRNAs can be detected in blood, bound to protein complexes [10]. Exosome is an enclosed vesicle, which in turn provide a stable environment to protect miRNAs from RNase degradation [11]. Interestingly, serum exosomal miR-19b-3p and miR-106a-5p were suggested as diagnostic biomarkers for gastric cancer [12]. However, serum exosomal miRNAs tested for diagnosis of CAG patients remain largely elusive.

Our previous study first screened and compared the serum exosomal miRNA expression profile between CAG group and chronic non-atrophic gastritis (CNAG) group, and these previous results suggested that hsa-miR-122-5p has a potential diagnostic value for CAG [13]. Thus, in the present study, we further evaluated potential value of hsa-miR-122-5p combination with other serological markers on non-invasive diagnosis of CAG patients.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Patients and samples

CNAG (n = 30 cases) and CAG (n = 30 cases) patients recruitment, serum samples collection, and the raw data of serum exosomal miRNA expression profile were shared from our previous study, and will be found here: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-5328-7 [13]. Briefly, all participants were recruited from 2016 to 2017 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine in Guangzhou, China. They all confirmed that they were not carrying Helicobacter pylori. Then, these participants were divided into the CAG group and the CNAG group to receive physical examination, laboratory safety tests, gastroscopy, and biopsies. The CAG group was accompanied with or without intestinal metaplasia. The CNAG group was composed of health honors and patients who had mild or moderate superficial gastritis.

Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital, and it was one part of our trial study (ChiCTR-IOR-16008027, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?Proj=12924). All participants provided informed consent.

2.2 ELISA for serum GAS, PG-I, or PG-II concentrations

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were performed using Human GAS/PG-I/PG-II Kit (Cusabio. China). Fifty microliter of serum was used to measure PG-I, PG-II, and gastrin-17 (G-17) concentrations according to the manufacturers’ instructions.

2.3 Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS software (20.0 version), and the graphs were generated using GraphPad Prism 7.0 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). The difference among treatment groups were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Student’s t-test. p < 0.05 considered as statistically significant.

3 Results

3.1 Serum GAS, PG-I, and PG-II level in CAG patients

First, serum PG-I, PG-II, and G-17 concentrations were detected by ELISA assay. Compared with CNAG group, serum GAS level was significantly upregulated in CAG group (Figure 1a). There were no significant difference in serum PG-I, PG-II, or G-17 level between CNAG group and CAG group (Figure 1b and c). However, PG-I/PG-II ratio (PGR) showed a statistically significant difference between CNAG group and CAG group (Figure 1d).

Figure 1

Common serum biomarkers level in CAG patients. (a) Serum GAS level in the CNAG group (n = 30) and CAG group (n = 30). (b) Serum PGI level in the CNAG group (n = 30) and CAG group (n = 30). (c) Serum PGII level in the CNAG group (n = 30) and CAG group (n = 30). (d) Serum PGI/PGII ratio in the CNAG group (n = 30) and CAG group (n = 30). *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01.

3.2 Correlation between serum GAS, PGR, and clinicopathologic factors

Our results further showed that PGR had not significantly correlated with any CAG clinicopathologic factors (Table 1), at least including age, gender, atrophic, intestinal metaplasia, dysplasia, chronic inflammation, and active inflammation. Otherwise, GAS level significantly and positively correlated with atrophy (Table 1).

Table 1

Relationships between serum exosomal PGR, GAS, and clinicopathologic factors

Variables		PGR		GAS
Variables		Mean value ± SD	P	Median + QR	P
Age	<50 (n = 28)	16.35 ± 16.73	0.60	14.34 (13.60, 17.72)	0.42
Age	≥50 (n = 32)	18.39 ± 13.23		16.18 (13.60, 17.54)
Gender	Male (n = 26)	17.30 ± 15.83	0.94	15.26 (13.81, 16.91)	0.94
Gender	Female (n = 34)	17.62 ± 13.81		15.38 (13.44, 18.66)
Atrophic	Absent (n = 30)	12.83 ± 10.90	0.05	14.28 (13.44, 15.84)	0.01^*
	Mild (n = 14)	19.00 ± 15.17		17.24 (14.81, 21.85)
	Moderate (n = 11)	22.79 ± 15.75^a		17.42 (14.68, 20.75)
	Severe (n = 5)	28.96 ± 24.83^*b		15.49 (14.00, 18.63)
Intestinal metaplasia	Absent (n = 42)	16.98 ± 14.56	0.41	14.51 (13.44, 16.82)	0.08
	Mild (n = 9)	13.93 ± 9.39		16.59 (13.52, 18.02)
	Moderate-severe (n = 9)	23.09 ± 20.10		16.77 (15.09, 21.58)
Dysplasia	Absent (n = 52)	16.31 ± 14.76	0.14	14.86 (13.56, 17.59)	0.40
Dysplasia	Light-median (n = 8)	24.75 ± 14.32		15.84 (14.85, 18.09)
Chronic inflammation	Mild (n = 31)	14.53 ± 11.70	0.17	14.68 (13.44, 16.290	0.25
	Moderate (n = 24)	22.33 ± 19.46		16.13 (13.89, 19.85)
	Severe (n = 5)	15.87 ± 9.06		16.68 (14.03, 20.04)
Active inflammation	No activity (n = 40)	19.03 ± 15.97	0.17	15.84 (13.60, 17.87)	0.77
	Mild (n = 17)	12.20 ± 11.91		14.68 (13.60, 16.98)
	Moderate (n = 3)	25.95 ± 4.13		15.37 (13.10, /)

^aModerate vs absent, P value is 0.052. ^*bSevere vs absent, P value is 0.023.

3.3 Expression correlation between hsa-miR-122-5p and other biomarkers

Serum exosomal hsa-miR-122-5p expression was investigated in our previous study [13]. Here we extracted this result, and then combined with serum GAS, PG-I, and PG-II level to evaluate the relationship between hsa-miR-122-5p and other biomarkers. Our results showed that the expression of hsa-miR-122-5p positively correlated with GAS level, PG-I level, and PG-I/PG-II ratio (PGR), while negatively correlated with PG-II level. However, none of them had significant difference (Table 2).

Table 2

Spearman’s correlation analysis between hsa-miR-122-5p and other serum common biomarkers

		GAS	PG-I	PG-II	PGR
hsa-miR-122-5p	Correlation coefficient	0.14	0.16	−0.03	0.06
hsa-miR-122-5p	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.30	0.22	0.82	0.63

3.4 ROC analysis

We also calculated ROC curve of hsa-miR-122-5p in our previous study [13]. Its AUC was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.55–0.96). In the present study, our results showed that AUC of serum GAS, PG-I, PG-II, and PG-I/PG-II ratio (PGR) were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.61–0.88), 0.54 (95% CI: 0.38–0.39), 0.56 (95% CI: 0.41–0.72), and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.53–0.81), respectively (Figure 2a–d). Moreover, AUC of panel 1 (combination of GAS, PG-I, and PG-II) was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66–0.91) (Figure 2e). AUC of panel 2 (combination of GAS, PG-I, PG-II, and PGR) was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.68–0.91) (Figure 2f). AUC of panel 3 (combination of GAS, PG-I, PG-II, PGR, and hsa-miR-122-5p) was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71–0.93) (Figure 2g). AUC of panel 4 (combination of GAS, PGR, and hsa-miR-122-5p) was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.74–0.94) (Figure 2h). These results indicated that hsa-miR-122-5p combined with GAS and PGR has a good diagnostic value for CAG disease.

Figure 2

ROC analysis of biomarkers in CAG. (a) ROC analysis of GAS; (b) ROC analysis of PG-I. (c) ROC analysis of PG-II. (d) ROC analysis of PGR. (e) ROC analysis of Panel 1(combination of GAS, PG-I, and PG-II). (f) ROC analysis of Panel 2 (combination of GAS, PG-I, PG-II, and PGR). (g) ROC analysis of Panel 3 (combination of GAS, PG-I, PG-II, PGR, and hsa-miR-122-5p). (h) ROC analysis of Panel 4 (combination of GAS, PGR, and hsa-miR-122-5p).

4 Discussion

Up to date, the diagnosis of CAG still depends on endoscopic examination and pathological biopsy, which are invasive and thus hard to be accepted by patients. Recently, accumulating studies have discussed the potential value of several serum biomarkers in the non-invasive diagnosis of AG, at least including GAS, PG-I, PG-II, and Helicobacter pylori infection [2]. However, these biomarkers usually overlap in diagnosis of gastric cancer, their true sensitivity and specificity need to be further confirmed by multicenter trials. In particular, non-invasive diagnosis of CAG remains largely unknown. In the present study, our results showed that serum GAS level was significantly upregulated in CAG group and significantly correlated to the clinicopathologic factor of CAG, but not serum PG-I or PG-II level. However, there was a significant difference in serum PGR between CNAG group and CAG group. A cross-sectional study highlighted that GAS was upregulated in atrophic gastritis of southwest China, in line with previous studies, they intended to suggest that serum GAS was upregulated in atrophic gastritis patients [14,15]. Otherwise, our results also show that there was no significant difference in PG-I or PG-II between CNAG group and CAG group, but PGR was significantly increased in CAG group. Previous study found that PGR was downregulated in chronic atrophic autoimmune gastritis patients with gastric neuroendocrine tumors [14]. The other study found that pepsinogen level remained unchanged in atrophic antral gastritis patients, while decreased in atrophic fundal gastritis patients [16]. Thus, it needs more evidence to address the relationship between PGR and CAG in future. A cross-sectional study highlighted that GAS was upregulated in atrophic gastritis patients of southwest China.

In the previous study, we compared profiles of serum exosomal miRNA between CAG group and CNAG group. We then upregulated hsa-miR-122-5p significantly in CAG group, and diagnostic value of which (AUC 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52–0.82, sensitivity 62%, and specificity 86%) was better than other significantly changed miRNAs. Moreover, combination of miRNA did not significantly elevate the diagnostic value [13]. We next wonder how to improve the diagnostic value of serum exosomal miRNA in non-invasive diagnosis of CAG. In the present study, our results first showed that there was no significant difference between serum hsa-miR-122-5p expression and serum GAS level, PG-I level, PG-II level, or PGR. Thus, it suggested that hsa-miR-122-5p was an independent biomarker for CAG diagnosis.

We next investigated the possibility of these potential biomarkers on diagnosis of CAG. Previous study found that upregulation of GAS might be a reliable biomarker to predict atrophic gastritis (AUC = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89–0.94; SE = 85.5%; and SP = 93.2%) [17]. However, the other study showed that GAS was not a good biomarker to predict atrophic gastritis (AUC = 0.58) [15]. Lower PGR might be a reliable biomarker to predict chronic atrophic autoimmune gastritis in patients with gastric neuroendocrine tumors (AUC = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89–0.94; SE = 85.5%; and SP = 93.2%) [14]. In the present study, our result showed that diagnostic value of GAS (AUC = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61–0.87; SE = 65.5%; and SP = 79.3%) was better than PG-I, PG-II, or PGR. We further stochastically combined these potential biomarkers to predict CAG, and our result showed that the best panel was consisted of serum exosomal hsa-miR-122-5p, serum GAS, and PGR (AUC = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.74–0.94; SE = 67.9%; and SP = 89.7%).

Taken these together, the present study first discussed the combination of serum exosomal miRNA and other serum biomarkers in diagnosis of CAG, and our results suggested that serum exosomal hsa-miR-122-5p combined with GAS and PGR would elevate the accuracy and specificity in non-invasive screening of CAG. Otherwise, it is true that the number of participants was limited, and it will need more evidence to confirm these findings. However, the present study indeed rationally prompts us to design new clinical studies to further validate the clinical relevance and diagnostic value of these candidate markers in the future study.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Chronic Heart Failure Research Center and Chinese Medicine Laboratory, Lingnan Medical Center, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine for providing Laboratory Equipment.

Funding information: This work was supported by Basic and Applied Basic Research Fund Project of Guangdong Province (2020A1515110615) and Medical Research Foundation of Guangdong Province (B2020043). All funders had no role in the design of the study, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, and in writing the manuscript and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author contributions: H.L. and F.B.L. conceived and designed the study. N.H.L. and Y.C.H. performed the experiments, and acquired and analyzed the results. N.H.L. prepared the manuscript. H.L. submitted the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Data availability statement: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Reference

[1] Weck MN , Brenner H . Prevalence of chronic atrophic gastritis in different parts of the world. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2006;15(6):1083–94.10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0931Search in Google Scholar

[2] Fang JY , Du YQ , Liu WZ , Ren JL , Li YQ , Chen XY , et al. Chinese consensus on chronic gastritis (2017, Shanghai). J Dig Dis. 2018;19(4):182–203.10.1111/1751-2980.12593Search in Google Scholar

[3] Dixon MF , Genta RM , Yardley JH , Correa P . Classification and grading of gastritis. the updated Sydney System. International workshop on the histopathology of gastritis, Houston 1994. Am J Surg Pathol. 1996;20(10):1161–81.10.1097/00000478-199610000-00001Search in Google Scholar

[4] Misiewicz JJ . The Sydney system: a new classification of gastritis. Introduction. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1991;6(3):207–8.10.1111/j.1440-1746.1991.tb01467.xSearch in Google Scholar

[5] Plummer M , Buiatti E , Lopez G , Peraza S , Vivas J , Oliver W , et al. Histological diagnosis of precancerous lesions of the stomach: a reliability study. Int J Epidemiol. 1997;26(4):716–20.10.1093/ije/26.4.716Search in Google Scholar

[6] Syrjänen K . A panel of serum biomarkers (GastroPanel®) in non-invasive diagnosis of atrophic gastritis. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Anticancer Res. 2016;36(10):5133–44.10.21873/anticanres.11083Search in Google Scholar

[7] Zagari RM , Rabitti S , Greenwood DC , Eusebi LH , Vestito A , Bazzoli F . Systematic review with meta-analysis: diagnostic performance of the combination of pepsinogen, gastrin-17 and anti-Helicobacter pylori antibodies serum assays for the diagnosis of atrophic gastritis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2017;46(7):657–67.10.1111/apt.14248Search in Google Scholar

[8] Valadi H , Ekström K , Bossios A , Sjöstrand M , Lee JJ , Lötvall JO . Exosome-mediated transfer of mRNAs and microRNAs is a novel mechanism of genetic exchange between cells. Nat Cell Biol. 2007;9(6):654–9.10.1038/ncb1596Search in Google Scholar

[9] Bartel DP . MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell. 2004;116(2):281–97.10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00045-5Search in Google Scholar

[10] Arroyo JD , Chevillet JR , Kroh EM , Ruf IK , Pritchard CC , Gibson DF , et al. Argonaute2 complexes carry a population of circulating microRNAs independent of vesicles in human plasma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108(12):5003–8.10.1073/pnas.1019055108Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[11] Koga Y , Yasunaga M , Moriya Y , Akasu T , Fujita S , Yamamoto S , et al. Exosome can prevent RNase from degrading microRNA in feces. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2011;2(4):215–22.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Wang N , Wang L , Yang Y , Gong L , Xiao B , Liu X . A serum exosomal microRNA panel as a potential biomarker test for gastric cancer. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2017;493(3):1322–8.10.1016/j.bbrc.2017.10.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[13] Liu H , Li PW , Yang WQ , Mi H , Pan JL , Huang YC , et al. Identification of non-invasive biomarkers for chronic atrophic gastritis from serum exosomal microRNAs. BMC Cancer. 2019;19(1):129.10.1186/s12885-019-5328-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[14] Magris R , De ReV , Maiero S , Fornasarig M , Guarnieri G , Caggiari L , et al. Low pepsinogen I/II ratio and high gastrin-17 levels typify chronic atrophic autoimmune gastritis patients with gastric neuroendocrine tumors. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2020;11(9):e00238.10.14309/ctg.0000000000000238Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[15] Broutet N , Plebani M , Sakarovitch C , Sipponen P , Mégraud F . Pepsinogen A, pepsinogen C, and gastrin as markers of atrophic chronic gastritis in European dyspeptics. Br J Cancer. 2003;88(8):1239–47.10.1038/sj.bjc.6600877Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[16] Valenkevich LN . The gastrin and pepsinogen levels of patients with chronic atrophic gastritis and duodenal ulcer. Likars’ka Sprava. 1993;2–3:56–9.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Wang R , Chen XZ . Prevalence of atrophic gastritis in southwest China and predictive strength of serum gastrin-17: a cross-sectional study (SIGES). Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):4523.10.1038/s41598-020-61472-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Received: 2021-01-27

Revised: 2021-07-22

Accepted: 2021-08-12

Published Online: 2021-09-08

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2021-0342

Keywords for this article

serum exosomes; hsa-miR-122-5p; non-invasive diagnosis; chronic atrophic gastritis

Creative Commons

BY 4.0