ArticlePloS one2010
Microarray analysis reveals distinct gene expression profiles among different tumor histology, stage and disease outcomes in endometrial adenocarcinoma.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of gene expression studies in endometrial cancer identifies gene expression profiles associated with aggressive disease and patient outcome.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- Candidate locus analysis of the TERT-CLPTM1L cancer risk region on chromosome 5p15 identifies multiple independent variants associated with endometrial cancer risk.Human genetics · 2015Trial
- Novel fatty acid metabolism risk score model for guiding treatment in endometrial endometrioid cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- KIF14 in cancer biology: implications for diagnosis and therapy.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2026Review
- STK4 protein expression pattern follows different trends in endometrioid and serous endometrial adenocarcinoma upon tumor progression.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Integrating pathology, chromosomal instability and mutations for risk stratification in early-stage endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.Cell & bioscience · 2020Article
- Prediction of lymphovascular space invasion in endometrial cancer using the 55-gene signature selected by DNA microarray analysis.PloS one · 2019Article
- Comprehensive single-cell transcriptome analysis reveals heterogeneity in endometrioid adenocarcinoma tissues.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Mitochondrial ribosomal protein S18-2 is highly expressed in endometrial cancers along with free E2F1.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- Contactin 1: A potential therapeutic target and biomarker in gastric cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
- Individualised proteome profiling of human endometrial tumours improves detection of new prognostic markers.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- Pair-Box (PAX8) protein-positive expression is associated with poor disease outcome in women with endometrial cancer.British journal of cancer · 2012Article
- Claudin7 and moesin in endometrial Adenocarcinoma; a retrospective study of 265 patients.BMC research notes · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy in developed countries and little is known about the underlying mechanism of stage and disease outcomes. The goal of this study was to identify differentially expressed genes (DEG) between late vs. early stage endometrioid adenocarcinoma (EAC) and uterine serous carcinoma (USC), as well as between disease outcomes in each of the two histological subtypes. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDING: Gene expression profiles of 20 cancer samples were analyzed (EAC = 10, USC = 10) using the human genome wide illumina bead microarrays. There was little overlap in the DEG sets between late vs. early stages in EAC and USC, and there was an insignificant overlap in DEG sets between good and poor prognosis in EAC and USC. Remarkably, there was no overlap between the stage-derived DEGs and the prognosis-derived DEGs for each of the two histological subtypes. Further functional annotation of differentially expressed genes showed that the composition of enriched function terms were different among different DEG sets. Gene expression differences for selected genes of various stages and outcomes were confirmed by qRT-PCR with a high validation rate.
conclusionThis data, although preliminary, suggests that there might be involvement of distinct groups of genes in tumor progression (late vs. early stage) in each of the EAC and USC. It also suggests that these genes are different from those involved in tumor outcome (good vs. poor prognosis). These involved genes, once clinically verified, may be important for predicting tumor progression and tumor outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.