الفهرس 
Introduction & Aim of workOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 75 |  |  |
| | | from | 75 | | |
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer related death among men. MiRNAs are small non-coding endogenous RNA molecules that vary in length from 18 to 25 nucleotides. There are numerous dysregulated miRNAs that are implicated in the pathogenesis of cancer.
MiRNA 222 is an oncogenic microRNA which prevents cell migration and proliferation .Recent studies have reported that miR-222 is involved in the development and metastasis of PCa.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of microRNA 222 in prostate cancer and assess the relationship between its expression and clinicopathological features of prostate cancer.
Our study included 2 groups of subject:-
• Twenty patients with prostate cancer(group 2).
• Twenty seven patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (group 1).
Both groups were subjected to:
1- History including:
• Name and age.
• Present history of the current complaint and any other associated symptoms.
• Past history regarding any previous surgical procedures or any medical condition.
2- General and local examination including digital rectal examination (DRE).
3- TRUS guided biopsy for patients with above normal PSA .
4- Serum PSA level and routine laboratory investigations(complete blood picture,creatinie and glucose level).
5-Molecular analysis of miRNA using real time PCR.
This work revealed the following results:-
Our results showed that the microRNA 222 was found in 24 patients in group 1 and in the whole 20 patients in group 2, yet this difference didn’t reach statistical significance(p=0.142).
PSA values was observed when compared between both groups, although this difference didn’t reach statistical significance.
Among the clinicopathologic features of patient group, group 2 was divided into two subgroups; group A which contains 12 non metastatic patient and group B which contains 8 metastatic patients. All 8 patients had bone metastasis proved by bone scan. There was no statistical significance between the two groups (P = 0.15). Also we further divided group 2 according to Gleason score into 4subgroups: group 1 had 1 patient with GS 6, group 2 had 10 patients with GS 7, group 3 had 6 patients with GS 8 and group 4 with 3 patients who had GS 9. There was no statistical significance between different groups (P = 0.69).