Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25904753›Full record

ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2015

Promoter Methylation of CDO1 Identifies Clear-Cell Renal Cell Cancer Patients with Poor Survival Outcome.

Ivette A G Deckers, Leo J Schouten, Leander Van Neste, Iris J H van Vlodrop, Patricia M M B Soetekouw, Marcella M L L Baldewijns, Jana Jeschke, Nita Ahuja, James G Herman, Piet A van den Brandt and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. HAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. DNA Methylation inCancers · 2021
    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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ivette A G DeckersDepartment of Epidemiology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Leo J SchoutenDepartment of Epidemiology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Leander Van NesteDepartment of Pathology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Iris J H van VlodropDepartment of Pathology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Patricia M M B SoetekouwDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Marcella M L L BaldewijnsDepartment of Pathology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Jana JeschkeDepartment of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. Laboratory of Cancer Epigenetics, Faculty of Medicine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Nita AhujaDepartment of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. Department of Urology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
James G HermanDepartment of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Piet A van den BrandtDepartment of Epidemiology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Manon van EngelandDepartment of Pathology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands. manon.van.engeland@mumc.nl.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Translational Research Central ServicesP30CA006973 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Rosalie Wollett · 1985 to 2026
$208.6M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn this era of molecular diagnostics, prediction of clear-cell renal cell cancer (ccRCC) survival requires optimization, as current prognostic markers fail to determine individual patient outcome. Epigenetic events are promising molecular markers. Promoter CpG island methylation of cysteine dioxygenase type 1 (CDO1), which was identified as prognostic marker for breast cancer, is studied as a potential marker for ccRCC survival. EXPERIMENTAL

designWe collected primary tissues of 365 ccRCC cases identified within the prospective Netherlands Cohort Study (NLCS). In this population-based series, CDO1 promoter methylation was observed in 124 of 324 (38.3%) patients with successful methylation-specific PCR analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves and Wilcoxon tests were used to evaluate 10-year ccRCC-specific survival. Cox regression analysis was used to obtain crude and multivariate HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The relative prognostic value of multivariate models with and without CDO1 promoter methylation was compared using likelihood-ratio tests.

resultsPatients with CDO1 promoter methylation have a significantly poorer survival than those without (Wilcoxon P = 0.006). Differences in survival were independent of other prognostic factors, including age and sex (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.12-2.45) and TNM stage, tumor size, and Fuhrman grade (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.25-2.85). Multivariate models performed better with than without CDO1 promoter methylation status (likelihood-ratio P = 0.003). Survival curves were validated in an independent series of 280 ccRCC cases from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA; Wilcoxon P < 0.001).

conclusionsCDO1 promoter methylation may not substitute common prognostic makers to predict ccRCC survival, but offers additional, relevant prognostic information, indicating that it might be a novel molecular marker to determine ccRCC prognosis.

Indexed as

AgedBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Renal CellCpG IslandsCysteine DioxygenaseDisease-Free SurvivalDNA MethylationFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPrognosisPromoter Regions, GeneticRisk FactorsBiomarkers, TumorCDO1 protein, humanCysteine Dioxygenase

Identifiers

PMID25904753
PMCPMC4612631
OpenAlexW2042464369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.