Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24879114›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Impact of gene dosage on gene expression, biological processes and survival in cervical cancer: a genome-wide follow-up study.

Ingrid Medina-Martinez, Valeria Barrón, Edgar Roman-Bassaure, Eligia Juárez-Torres, Mariano Guardado-Estrada, Ana María Espinosa, Miriam Bermudez, Fernando Fernández, Carlos Venegas-Vega, Lorena Orozco and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Drug repositioningFrontiers in oncology · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ingrid Medina-MartinezUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Valeria BarrónUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Edgar Roman-BassaureServicio de Oncología, Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Eligia Juárez-TorresUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Mariano Guardado-EstradaUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Ana María EspinosaUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Miriam BermudezUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México.
Fernando FernándezServicio de Genética, Hospital General de México/Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. México.
Carlos Venegas-VegaServicio de Genética, Hospital General de México/Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. México.
Lorena OrozcoLaboratorio de Genómica de Enfermedades Complejas, Instituto Nacional de Medicina Genómica. México, D.F. México.
Edgar ZentenoDepartamento de Bioquímica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. México.
Susana KofmanServicio de Genética, Hospital General de México/Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. México.
Jaime BerumenUnidad de Medicina Genómica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Hospital General de México, México, D.F. México; Departamento de Medicina Experimental, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D.F. México.
Hospital General de México · MXUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México · MXNational Institute of Genomic Medicine · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigated the role of tumor copy number (CN)-altered genome (CN-AG) in the carcinogenesis of cervical cancer (CC), especially its effect on gene expression, biological processes, and patient survival. Fifty-nine human papillomavirus 16 (HPV16)-positive CCs were investigated with microarrays-31 for mapping CN-AG and 55 for global gene expression, with 27 CCs in common. Five-year survival was investigated in 55 patients. Deletions and amplifications >2.5 Mb were defined as CN alterations. The %CN-AG varied from 0 to 32.2% (mean = 8.1±8.9). Tumors were classified as low (mean = 0.5±0.6, n = 11), medium (mean = 5.4±2.4, n = 10), or high (mean = 19.2±6.6, n = 10) CN. The highest %CN-AG was found in 3q, which contributed an average of 55% of all CN alterations. Genome-wide, only 5.3% of CN-altered genes were deregulated directly by gene dosage. In contrast, the rate in fully duplicated 3q was twice as high. Amplification of 3q explained 23.2% of deregulated genes in whole tumors (r2 = 0.232, p = 0.006; analysis of variance), including genes located in 3q and other chromosomes. A total of 862 genes were deregulated exclusively in high-CN tumors, but only 22.9% were CN altered. This suggests that the remaining genes are not deregulated directly by gene dosage, but by mechanisms induced in trans by CN-altered genes. Anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C)-dependent proteasome proteolysis, glycolysis, and apoptosis were upregulated, whereas cell adhesion and angiogenesis were downregulated exclusively in high-CN tumors. The high %CN-AG and upregulated gene expression profile of APC/C-dependent proteasome proteolysis were associated with poor patient survival (p<0.05, log-rank test). Along with glycolysis, they were linearly associated with FIGO stage (r>0.38, p<0.01, Spearman test). Therefore, inhibition of APC/C-dependent proteasome proteolysis and glycolysis could be useful for CC treatment. However, whether they are indispensable for tumor growth remains to be demonstrated.

Indexed as

Gene DosageGene Expression ProfilingGenomicsAdultAgedCarcinogenesisChromosomes, HumanFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGenes, NeoplasmHuman papillomavirus 16HumansMiddle AgedSurvival AnalysisUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24879114
PMCPMC4039463
OpenAlexW2026125672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.