ArticlePloS one2011
Consensus pathways implicated in prognosis of colorectal cancer identified through systematic enrichment analysis of gene expression profiling studies.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of gene expression signatures defining the epithelial to mesenchymal transition during cancer progression.PloS one · 2012Pooled it
- Clinical value of prognosis gene expression signatures in colorectal cancer: a systematic review.PloS one · 2012Pooled it
- Identification ofOncology letters · 2021Article
- Exploring and modelling colon cancer inter-tumour heterogeneity: opportunities and challenges.Oncogenesis · 2020Review
- Screening for implicated genes in colorectal cancer using whole‑genome gene expression profiling.Molecular medicine reports · 2018Article
- Platform-independent gene expression signature differentiates sessile serrated adenomas/polyps and hyperplastic polyps of the colon.BMC medical genomics · 2017Article
- Colon cancer recurrence‑associated genes revealed by WGCNA co‑expression network analysis.Molecular medicine reports · 2017Article
- Quantitative proteomic profiling of paired cancerous and normal colon epithelial cells isolated freshly from colorectal cancer patients.Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2017Article
- 2017 update on the relationship between diabetes and colorectal cancer: epidemiology, potential molecular mechanisms and therapeutic implications.Oncotarget · 2017Review
- Colorectal Cancer Classification and Cell Heterogeneity: A Systems Oncology Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2015Review
- Altered pathways and colorectal cancer prognosis.BMC medicine · 2015Article
- Pathway analysis of genome-wide association study and transcriptome data highlights new biological pathways in colorectal cancer.Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2015Article
- Detecting modules in biological networks by edge weight clustering and entropy significance.Frontiers in genetics · 2015Article
- A gene expression and pre-mRNA splicing signature that marks the adenoma-adenocarcinoma progression in colorectal cancer.PloS one · 2014Article
- Article
- Role of MUC20 overexpression as a predictor of recurrence and poor outcome in colorectal cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2013Article
- Poor-prognosis colon cancer is defined by a molecularly distinct subtype and develops from serrated precursor lesions.Nature medicine · 2013Article
- Association study identifying polymorphisms in CD47 and other extracellular matrix pathway genes as putative prognostic markers for colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013Article
- Pathway analysis of genomic data: concepts, methods, and prospects for future development.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2012Review
- Polymorphisms in the mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation chain genes as prognostic markers for colorectal cancer.BMC medical genetics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA large number of gene expression profiling (GEP) studies on prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) has been performed, but no reliable gene signature for prediction of CRC prognosis has been found. Bioinformatic enrichment tools are a powerful approach to identify biological processes in high-throughput data analysis. PRINCIPAL
findingsWe have for the first time collected the results from the 23 so far published independent GEP studies on CRC prognosis. In these 23 studies, 1475 unique, mapped genes were identified, from which 124 (8.4%) were reported in at least two studies, with 54 of them showing consisting direction in expression change between the single studies. Using these data, we attempted to overcome the lack of reproducibility observed in the genes reported in individual GEP studies by carrying out a pathway-based enrichment analysis. We used up to ten tools for overrepresentation analysis of Gene Ontology (GO) categories or Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways in each of the three gene lists (1475, 124 and 54 genes). This strategy, based on testing multiple tools, allowed us to identify the oxidative phosphorylation chain and the extracellular matrix receptor interaction categories, as well as a general category related to cell proliferation and apoptosis, as the only significantly and consistently overrepresented pathways in the three gene lists, which were reported by several enrichment tools.
conclusionsOur pathway-based enrichment analysis of 23 independent gene expression profiling studies on prognosis of CRC identified significantly and consistently overrepresented prognostic categories for CRC. These overrepresented categories have been functionally clearly related with cancer progression, and deserve further investigation.
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.