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
. 2024 Mar 28;14(1):7433.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-58233-1.

Plasma Epstein-Barr virus microRNA BART8-3p as a potential biomarker for detection and prognostic prediction in early nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Cheng Lin #  1 , Yuebing Chen #  1 , Xiandong Lin  2 , Hewei Peng  3 , Juan Huang  1 , Shaojun Lin  1 , Jianji Pan  1   4 , Meifang Li  5 , Jingfeng Zong  6
Affiliations

Plasma Epstein-Barr virus microRNA BART8-3p as a potential biomarker for detection and prognostic prediction in early nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Cheng Lin et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) encoded microRNA BART8-3p (miR-BART8-3p) was significantly associated with the metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). To explore the clinical values of plasma miR-BART8-3p in patients with early NPC. We retrospectively analyzed 126 patients with stage I and II NPC. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to examine the diagnostic performance. Kaplan‒Meier analysis was applied to determine survival differences. Cox regression was used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Compared to healthy subjects, plasma EBV miR-BART8-3p was highly expressed in early NPC patients. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve value of plasma miR-BART8-3p combined with plasma EBV DNA was up to 88.9%, 94.4%, and 0.931. Compared to patients with low expression of miR-BART8-3p, patients with high expression of miR-BART8-3p had poorer 5-year overall survival (OS) (98.9% vs. 91.1%, P = 0.025), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) (100% vs. 83.9%, P < 0.001) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (98.9% vs. 88.0%, P = 0.006). Risk stratification analysis revealed that high-risk patients (with high levels of EBV DNA and miR-BART8-3p) had inferior OS, LRRFS, and DMFS than low-risk patients (without high levels of EBV DNA and miR-BART8-3p). Multivariate analysis verified that the high-risk group was an unfavorable factor for OS, LRRFS, and DMFS. A combination of plasma EBV miR-BART8-3p and EBV DNA could be a potential biomarker for the diagnosis and prognosis in early NPC.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Diagnostic performance of plasma BART8-3p and EBV DNA in early nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Levels of plasma BART8-3p and EBV DNA in healthy controls and early NPC (A, B). Levels of BART8-3p in different T stages, N stages, and TNM stages (C–E). Correlation between expression of BART8-3p and EBV DNA (F). Receiver operating characteristic curves of miR-BART8-3p, EBV DNA, and the combination of miR-BART8-3p and EBV DNA (G–I).
Figure 2
Figure 2
The complementary performance of BART8-3p and EBV DNA in early nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Patients with undetectable EBV DNA levels but detectable BART8-3p (A). Patients with undetectable BART8-3p but detectable EBV DNA (B). The performance of BATR8-3p and EBV DNA in predicting metastasis and relapse using different cut-off values (C–F).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan‒Meier curves for overall survival (OS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) based on miR-BART8-3p in early nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Kaplan–Meier curves for OS, LRRFS, and DMFS according to low or high expression of BART8-3p (A–C). Survival outcomes of four subgroups based on EBV DNA and BART8-3p (D–F). Survival outcomes of patients at low- or high risk based on the combination of EBV DNA and BART8-3p (G–I).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Chen Y-P, et al. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The Lancet. 2019;394:64–80. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30956-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wong KCW, et al. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma: An evolving paradigm. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2021;18:679–695. doi: 10.1038/s41571-021-00524-x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tang L-L, et al. The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Commun. (Lond., Engl.) 2021;41:1195–1227. doi: 10.1002/cac2.12218. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Damania B, Kenney SC, Raab-Traub N. Epstein-Barr virus: Biology and clinical disease. Cell. 2022;185:3652–3670. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.08.026. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pathmanathan R, et al. Undifferentiated, nonkeratinizing, and squamous cell carcinoma of the nasopharynx. Variants of Epstein-Barr virus-infected neoplasia. Am. J. Pathol. 1995;146:1355–1367. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

-