Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24643086›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of biological sciences2014

ZIP4, a novel determinant of tumor invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma, contributes to tumor recurrence after liver transplantation.

Xiao Xu, Hai-Jun Guo, Hai-Yang Xie, Jie Li, Run-Zhou Zhuang, Qi Ling, Lin Zhou, Xu-Yong Wei, Zhi-Kun Liu, Song-Ming Ding and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of biological sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. The Transcription ofFrontiers in immunology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Xiao Xu1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 3. Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, Hangzhou, China.
Hai-Jun Guo1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Hai-Yang Xie1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Jie Li1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Run-Zhou Zhuang1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Qi Ling1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Lin Zhou1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Xu-Yong Wei1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Zhi-Kun Liu1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Song-Ming Ding1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Kang-Jie Chen1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Zhi-Yuan Xu1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 2. Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health and Key Laboratory of Organ Transplantation of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China;
Shu-Sen Zheng1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated, Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; ; 3. Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeRecently, evidence that Zinc transporter ZRT/IRT-like protein 4 (ZIP4) is involved in invasiveness and apoptosis has emerged in pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer. Our aim was to assess the role of ZIP4 in invasiveness, migration and apoptosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The prognostic value of ZIP4 in HCC after liver transplantation was evaluated.

methodsThe role of ZIP4 in HCC was investigated by overexpressing ZIP4 in BEL7402 and HepG2 cells and inhibiting ZIP4 in HuH-7 and HepG2 cells, using overexpression and shRNA plasmids in vitro studies. Immunohistochemical analysis was used to evaluate ZIP4 expression in HCC tissues from 60 patients undergoing liver transplantation, 36 cirrhotic tissue samples, and 6 normal tissue samples. Prognostic significance was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test.

resultsSpecific suppression of ZIP4 reduced cell migration and invasiveness, whereas ZIP4 overexpression caused increases in cell migration and invasiveness. Furthermore, overexpression of ZIP4 resulted in increased expression of pro-metastatic genes (MMP-2, MMP-9) and decreased expression of pro-apoptotic genes (caspase-3, caspase-9, Bax). In contrast, suppression of ZIP4 resulted in an opposite effect. ZIP4 was more highly expressed in tumor tissues than non-tumor tissues (P < 0.0001). ZIP4 expression was significantly associated with tumor recurrence (P = 0.002), tumor node metastasis stage (P = 0.044), Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (P = 0.042), and tumor size (P = 0.022). Univariate analysis showed that ZIP4 expression was significantly associated with overall survival (P = 0.020) and tumor-free survival (P = 0.049). Multivariate analysis revealed that ZIP4 was an independent predictor of overall survival (P = 0.037) after liver transplantation.

conclusionsZIP4 could promote migration, invasiveness, and suppress apoptosis in hepatocellular carcinoma, and represent a novel predictor of poor prognosis and therapeutic target for patients with HCC who undergo liver transplantation.

Indexed as

Neoplasm InvasivenessApoptosisCarcinoma, HepatocellularCase-Control StudiesCation Transport ProteinsCell CycleChinaFemaleHep G2 CellsHumansLiverLiver NeoplasmsLiver TransplantationMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalCation Transport ProteinsSLC39A4 protein, humanhepatocellular carcinomaliver transplantationZIP4

Identifiers

PMID24643086
PMCPMC3957080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.