ArticlePloS one2010
Identification of C16orf74 as a marker of progression in primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.
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 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- C16orf74 is a novel prognostic biomarker and associates with immune infiltration in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.PloS one · 2025Article
- LncRNA HAND2-AS1 represses cervical cancer progression by interaction with transcription factor E2F4 at the promoter of C16orf74.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2020Article
- A robust 11-genes prognostic model can predict overall survival in bladder cancer patients based on five cohorts.Cancer cell international · 2020Article
- Article
- Metabolic Pathway Signatures Associated with Urinary Metabolite Biomarkers Differentiate Bladder Cancer Patients from Healthy Controls.Yonsei medical journal · 2016Article
- Upregulated MiR-1269 in hepatocellular carcinoma and its clinical significance.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Article
- Aberrant methylation of CDH13 is a potential biomarker for predicting the recurrence and progression of non muscle invasive bladder cancer.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2014Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMethylation-induced silencing of PRSS3 has been shown to be significantly associated with invasive bladder cancer, and expression of the C16orf74 gene locus has been shown to correlate positively with PRSS3. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the relationship between C16orf74 expression level and progression in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). MATERIALS AND
methodsC16orf74 mRNA levels were examined by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis of 193 tumor specimens from patients with primary NMIBC. Expression data were analyzed in terms of clinical and experimental parameters. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression models, respectively, were used to determine progression-free survival and to identify independent predictive parameters of progression.
resultsAnalysis using Kaplan-Meier curves revealed prolonged progression-free survival of high-C16orf74-expressors as compared to low-expressors (p<0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that low C16orf74 mRNA expression levels are a significant risk factor for disease progression in patients with primary NMIBC (HR: 10.042, CI:2.699-37.360, p = 0.001).
conclusionsDecreased expression of C16orf74 correlates significantly with progression in primary NMIBC. C16orf74 expression level represents a potentially useful marker for predicting progression in primary NMIBC patients.
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.