Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Reviews
Full Version
miRNA26 Expression in Plasma- A Potential Biomarker for the Diagnosis of Parkinson’s Disease
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Usha S Adiga,
Professor, Department of Biochemistry, KS Hegde Medical Academy, Deralakatte,
Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: ushachidu@yahoo.com
Parkinson’s Disease (PD) is a chronic, progressive neurodegenerative disease characterised by both motor and non motor features. The diagnosis of PD is based on clinical evaluation, patient’s signs and symptoms, neurological and physical examinations. No diagnostic tests have been devised so far that can conclusively diagnose PD. So, the review aimed to assess the role of a minimally invasive biomarker for the early diagnosis of PD. Circulating microRibonucleic Acid (miRNA) could be the promising biomarker for PD. miRNA expression could be a useful marker for the diagnosis of PD. Early diagnosis may help in improving quality of life of patients with PD. Correlation of miRNA with disease severity may be useful in predicting the response to therapy as well as prognosis of the disease.
Alternative marker, Neurodegenerative disorder, Prognosis
The Parkinson’s Disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder worldwide (1). Its main neuropathological hallmarks are the degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra and alpha-synuclein containing protein inclusions, called Lewy Bodies. The diagnosis of idiopathic PD is still based on the assessment of clinical criteria, resting tremor, cogwheel rigidity, and bradykinesia, three “cardinal signs” of PD, and postural instability, a late finding in PD, is the fourth cardinal sign of PD (2). This has lead to an insufficient diagnostic accuracy. There is no biomarker available for the diagnosis that allows the prediction of the disease course or monitoring the response to therapeutic approaches to the best of our knowledge. As of now, the protein biomarker candidates like alpha-synuclein have not established their role in the diagnosis of PD (3).
As there is a lack of a standard test for the diagnosis of PD, molecular genetic techniques for the analysis of mutations in various genes may be of great help in the diagnosis of PD. A number of genes have been discovered and debated for their role in causing PD, by both physicians and patients. Their role in the diagnosis and genetic testing of PD in the presymptomatic phase are of great interest (4). It has been proposed that the gene expression differences between PD and healthy controls can be used as a potential biomarker for the diagnosis of PD.
MicroRIBONUCLEIC ACID (miRNA) AND PARKINSON’S DISEASE (PD)
Circulating miRNA in body fluids may be biomarker candidates for PD, as they are easily accessible by nonor minimally-invasive procedures (5). Changes in their expression may be associated with pathophysiological processes relevant for PD. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are non coding, single-stranded RNA molecules that regulate target gene expression via post-transcriptional modifications (6),(7). Changes in the expression of miRNAs may be associated with PD relevant pathophysiological processes, thus they are auspicious body fluid-derived biomarkers for diagnosis and progression of PD.
Since, the affected Central Nervous System (CNS) tissue itself is not routinely accessible, it is important to consider that body fluid that is used as biomarker source only partially recapitulates Central Nervous System (CNS) pathology. Possible sources for miRNAs include non neuronal cells or easily accessible body fluids. One of the best studied non neuronal cell types in neurodegenerative disease biomarker research is Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMCs), which contain lymphocytes and monocytes. Several studies have investigated the comparability of genetic and epigenetic signatures in the CNS and blood, at which epigenomic changes like Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) methylation showed a higher correlation than transcriptomic changes (8). Furthermore, it was shown that analysis of miRNA expression in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PMBC) helped to discriminate diseased and non diseased status in various neurological disorders (9),(10),(11),(12),(13). Consequently, miRNA expression in PBMCs may be suggested as a diagnostic biomarker for PD.
miR-26 was shown as the only significantly increased miRNA in whole blood a of PD patients (14). The role of miRNAs including miR-34b, miR-205, miR-34c, miR-144-5p as possible biomarkers for PD has been discussed in previous reviews. So far, few studies have been published on miRNA 16 expressions in plasma from PD patients (15),(16),(17). The present review article aimed to review miRNA26 expression in plasma and neurogenesis of PD, whether circulating miRNA26 can be used as a potential biomarker for the diagnosis of PD.
To the best of our knowledge, there is only one study by Margis R and Rieder CRM which have analysed miRNA levels in whole blood by PCR arrays and revealed a set of differentially expressed miRNAs, miR-1-3p, miR-22-5p, and miR-29a-3p that differentiated PD patients and controls. It also studied the expressions of miR-16-2-3p, miR-26a-2-3p, and miR30a-5p to differentiate levodopa/carbidopa-treated and untreated PD groups (14). A limited number of studies have been published on miRNA expression in biological fluids from PD patients (14). Blood and its derivatives were studied most extensively. The research revealed that blood samples can be utilised to identify miRNAs linked to PD. Six microRNAs were found to be differently expressed. They were divided into two groups based on their expression profiles in PD patients with control, non treated, early-onset, and treated PD. While the expression levels of miR-29, miRNA-22 and miR-1 were able to distinguish untreated parkinson’s patients from healthy subjects, miR-16-26a2 and miR-30 and miR2 were able to distinguish untreated from treated subjects. This study is novel in terms of contributing a biomarker panel for PD.
Several studies examined miRNA levels in PD patient’s plasma using either microarrays or quantitative real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR). Surprisingly, the outcomes of each of these trials were completely distinct, with no overlap. Khoo SK et al., used microarrays to identify a set of PD-predictive miRNAs (miR-626, miR-505-3p and miR-1826) (18). In a replication cohort, the candidates were further evaluated using qRT-PCR, which exhibited good sensitivity, predictive power and specificity. Using qRT-PCR, Cardo LF et al., found a significantly higher level of miR-331-5p in plasma of PD patients in a group with similar numbers (19). There are reports which assessed the levels of miRNAs, which were reported to be associated with neurogenesis and PD-related processes (20),(21),(22). Li N et al., found two significantly regulated miRNAs, miR-137-3p, and miR-124-3p, in PD patients (23). Increased expression of two miRNAs, miR-30a-5p and miR-30b-5p, out of five miRNAs were identified by Schwienbacher C et al., in PD patients (24). A study including a significantly larger number of subjects in both discovery and validation cohorts distinguished a set of five serum-miRNAs namely miR-195-5p, miR-185-5p, miR-15b-5p, miR-221-3p, and miR-181a-5p that were able to differentiate PD patients from controls (25). Vallelunga A et al., reported a down regulated miRNAs, miR-30c-5p and miR-148b-3 pin the serum of PD patients as compared to control subjects (26). Evaluation of four candidate miRNAs in serum of PD patients by qRT-PCR were identified (miR-29c-3p, miR-146a-5p, miR-214-3p, and miR-221-3p). Among those, miR-221 was found decreased and showed a positive correlation to Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores and PD-prediction (27).
Thus there are some studies that have reported unregulated miRNA 26, while some have reported down-regulated miRNA26 in neuronal tissue of PD patients, as shown in (Table/Fig 1) (28),(29),(30),(31),(32). However, there is a lack of literature on miRNA26 expression in blood in PD patients.
Future Perspectives
There is no established biomarker available for the diagnosis of PD so far. miRNA expression may emerge as a promising biomarker in the diagnosis of PD. This marker may be used as screening test for PD even before signs and symptoms appear. Early diagnosis may help in improving quality of life of patients with PD. Correlation of miRNA with disease severity may be useful in predicting the response to therapy as well as prognosis of the disease. Further research may be done in this regard.
The miRNA26 can be a useful marker in the early diagnosis of PD. It can also be a tool for assessing the disease severity.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/49972.16535
Date of Submission: Apr 17, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Jul 15, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Aug 23, 2021
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2022
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? NA
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Apr 20, 2021
• Manual Googling: Aug 21, 2021
• iThenticate Software: May 18, 2022 (27%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com