Citation: | SUN Ling, LI Tantan, WU Xifeng, MEN Lijie, JIA Meiyan, LU Jun. Correlations of serum tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1, matrix metalloproteinase-9 and vascular endothelial growth factor with degree of myelofibrosis in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2024, 28(11): 34-40. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20234037 |
To explore the correlations of serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1) with grading of myelofibrosis (MF) in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN).
Ninety patients with Philadelphia chromosome negative (Ph-)MPN were selected as MPN group. According to the grading criteria for myelofibrosis by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2016, MPN patients were divided into pre-fibrosis or early fibrosis group with 54 cases and significant fibrosis group with 36 cases; another 50 healthy volunteers were selected as the control group. Levels of serum VEGF, MMP-9 and TIMP-1 were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and the ratio of TIMP-1 to MMP-9 (TIMP-1/MMP-9) was calculated. Spearman rank correlation test was used to analyze the correlations of VEGF, MMP-9, TIMP-1 and TIMP-1/MMP-9 with MF grading. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn to analyze the predictive value of each indicator alone or their combination for diagnosing MPN or distinguishing MF grading.
Compared with the control group, the serum levels of VEGF, MMP-9 and TIMP-1 in the MPN group increased significantly (P < 0.05). Values of area under the curve (AUC) of VEGF, MMP-9, TIMP-1 and TIMP-1/MMP-9 for diagnosing MPN were 0, 834, 0.745, 0.923 and 0.618 respectively; the AUC of the combined diagnosis of MPN by VEGF, MMP-9 and TIMP-1 was 0.960; when the optimal cut-off value was 0.627, the sensitivity was 85.56%, and the specificity was 92.00%. Compared with the pre-fibrosis or early fibrosis group, the serum levels of VEGF, TIMP-1 and TIMP-1/MMP-9 in the significant fibrosis group increased significantly (P < 0.05). Spearman correlation analysis showed that VEGF (r=0.378, P=0.001), TIMP-1 (r=0.512, P < 0.001) and TIMP-1/MMP-9 (r=0.353, P=0.001) were positively correlated with the MF grading of MPN patients (P < 0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the values of AUC of VEGF, MMP-9, TIMP-1 and TIMP-1/MMP-9 for distinguishing patients with pre-fibrosis or early fibrosis from those with significant fibrosis were 0.723, 0.523, 0.802 and 0.708 respectively; the AUC of the combined detection of VEGF, TIMP-1 and TIMP-1/MMP-9 for distinguishing patients with pre-fibrosis or early fibrosis from those with significant fibrosis was 0.838; when the optimal cut-off value was 0.530, the sensitivity was 72.22%, and the specificity was 85.19%.
Serum VEGF, TIMP-1 and TIMP-1/MMP-9 can reflect the MF progression of MPN patients, and the combined detection of these indicators can predict the MF degree of MPN patients.
[1] |
GODFREY A L. Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs)[J]. Blood Rev, 2020, 42: 100717. doi: 10.1016/j.blre.2020.100717
|
[2] |
SHAHIN O A, CHIFOTIDES H T, BOSE P, et al. Accelerated phase of myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. Acta Haematol, 2021, 144(5): 484-499. doi: 10.1159/000512929
|
[3] |
PRAKASH S, ARBER D A, BUESO-RAMOS C, et al. Advances in myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. Virchows Arch, 2023, 482(1): 69-83. doi: 10.1007/s00428-022-03465-7
|
[4] |
EL-SHARKAWY F, MARGOLSKEE E. Pediatric myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. Clin Lab Med, 2021, 41(3): 529-540. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2021.04.010
|
[5] |
GANGAT N, TEFFERI A. Myelofibrosis biology and contemporary management[J]. Br J Haematol, 2020, 191(2): 152-170. doi: 10.1111/bjh.16576
|
[6] |
GREENFIELD G, MCMULLIN M F, MILLS K. Molecular pathogenesis of the myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. J Hematol Oncol, 2021, 14(1): 103. doi: 10.1186/s13045-021-01116-z
|
[7] |
AHMAD A, NAWAZ M I. Molecular mechanism of VEGF and its role in pathological angiogenesis[J]. J Cell Biochem, 2022, 123(12): 1938-1965. doi: 10.1002/jcb.30344
|
[8] |
TEFFERI A. Primary myelofibrosis: 2021 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification and management[J]. Am J Hematol, 2021, 96(1): 145-162. doi: 10.1002/ajh.26050
|
[9] |
RAJA V, FARAJZADEGAN Z, MANSOURIAN M, et al. Diagnostic value of nonacid nucleic blood tumor marker panels in early diagnosing breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis[J]. Dis Markers, 2022, 2022: 4119345.
|
[10] |
MARIA A T J, BOURGIER C, MARTINAUD C, et al. From fibrogenesis towards fibrosis: Pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical presentations[J]. Rev Med Interne, 2020, 41(5): 325-329. doi: 10.1016/j.revmed.2020.01.002
|
[11] |
HENDERSON N C, RIEDER F, WYNN T A. Fibrosis: from mechanisms to medicines[J]. Nature, 2020, 587(7835): 555-566. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2938-9
|
[12] |
ARBER DA, ORAZI A, HASSERJIAN R, et al. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood. 2016; 127(20): 2391-2405[J]. Blood, 2016, 128(3): 462-463.
|
[13] |
MORSIA E, GANGAT N. Myeloproliferative neoplasms with monocytosis[J]. Curr Hematol Malig Rep, 2022, 17(1): 46-51. doi: 10.1007/s11899-021-00660-2
|
[14] |
BARBUI T, THIELE J, GISSLINGER H, et al. The 2016 WHO classification and diagnostic criteria for myeloproliferative neoplasms: document summary and in-depth discussion[J]. Blood Cancer J, 2018, 8(2): 15. doi: 10.1038/s41408-018-0054-y
|
[15] |
聂子元, 罗建民. 《原发性骨髓纤维化诊断与治疗中国指南(2019年版)》解读: 原发性骨髓纤维化从指南到实践[J]. 河北医科大学学报, 2019, 40(7): 745-748, 752. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-3205.2019.07.001
|
[16] |
高晓冬, 张志南, 宋燕, 等. JAK2V617F基因突变与骨髓增殖性肿瘤类型及疾病转化的相关性分析[J]. 哈尔滨医科大学学报, 2015, 49(3): 236-238. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HYDX201503012.htm
|
[17] |
FERRARI A, SCANDURA J, MASCIULLI A, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for Pulmonary Hypertension associated with chronic Myeloproliferative Neoplasms[J]. Eur J Haematol, 2021, 106(2): 250-259. doi: 10.1111/ejh.13543
|
[18] |
LEE Y C, HSIEH C C, LEE Y L, et al. Molecular markers and prognosis of myelofibrosis in the genomic era: a meta-analysis[J]. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk, 2018, 18(9): 558-568. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2018.06.004
|
[19] |
SUBOTICKI T, MITROVICAJTICO, ŽIVKOVICE, et al. VEGF regulation of angiogenic factors via inflammatory signaling in myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2021, 22(13): 6671. doi: 10.3390/ijms22136671
|
[20] |
GADOMSKA G, STANKOWSKA K, BOINSKA J, et al. VEGF-A, sVEGFR-1, and sVEGFR-2 in BCR-ABL negative myeloproliferative neoplasms[J]. Medicina, 2017, 53(1): 34-39. doi: 10.1016/j.medici.2017.01.004
|
[21] |
HUANG H. Matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) as a cancer biomarker and MMP-9 biosensors: recent advances[J]. Sensors, 2018, 18(10): 3249. doi: 10.3390/s18103249
|
[22] |
GOBIN E, BAGWELL K, WAGNER J, et al. A pan-cancer perspective of matrix metalloproteases (MMP) gene expression profile and their diagnostic/prognostic potential[J]. BMC Cancer, 2019, 19(1): 581. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5768-0
|
[23] |
WANG J C. Importance of plasma matrix metalloproteinases (MMP) and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinase (TIMP) in development of fibrosis in agnogenic myeloid metaplasia[J]. Leuk Lymphoma, 2005, 46(9): 1261-1268. doi: 10.1080/10428190500126463
|
[24] |
CHAUDHARY A K, CHAUDHARY S, GHOSH K, et al. Secretion and expression of matrix metalloproteinase-2 and 9 from bone marrow mononuclear cells in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia[J]. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2016, 17(3): 1519-1529. doi: 10.7314/APJCP.2016.17.3.1519
|
[25] |
MURATE T, YAMASHITA K, ISOGAI C, et al. The production of tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs) in megakaryopoiesis: possible role of platelet- and megakaryocyte-derived TIMPs in bone marrow fibrosis[J]. Br J Haematol, 1997, 99(1): 181-189. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.1997.3293146.x
|
[26] |
陈禾惠, 王冲, 陈朴, 等. 血清LDH、TIMP1、BLC、Eotaxin2预测骨髓增殖性肿瘤患者骨髓纤维化程度的效能[J]. 临床检验杂志, 2023, 41(3): 204-207. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCJY202303010.htm
|