Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26586793›Full record

ArticleCarcinogenesis2016

Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of RECQL5 helicase expression in breast cancers.

Arvind Arora, Tarek M A Abdel-Fatah, Devika Agarwal, Rachel Doherty, Deborah L Croteau, Paul M Moseley, Khalid Hameed, Andrew Green, Mohammed A Aleskandarany, Emad A Rakha and 7 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Carcinogenesis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Theranostic Interpolation of Genomic Instability in Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. RecQ Helicase Somatic Alterations in Cancer.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. RECQL5 at theFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

17 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Arvind AroraAcademic Unit of Oncology, Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG51PB, UK, Department of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG51PB, UK.
Tarek M A Abdel-FatahDepartment of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG51PB, UK.
Devika AgarwalSchool of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Clifton campus, Nottingham NG11 8NS, UK.
Rachel DohertyAcademic Unit of Oncology, Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG51PB, UK.
Deborah L CroteauLaboratory of Molecular Gerontology, Biomedical Research Center, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Baltimore, MA 21224-6825, USA.
Paul M MoseleyDepartment of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG51PB, UK.
Khalid HameedDepartment of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG51PB, UK.
Andrew GreenDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG51PB, UK and.
Mohammed A AleskandaranyDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG51PB, UK and.
Emad A RakhaDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG51PB, UK and.
Karl PattersonAcademic Unit of Molecular Oncology, Department of Oncology, Medical School Sheffield Cancer Research Centre, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK.
Graham BallSchool of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Clifton campus, Nottingham NG11 8NS, UK.
Stephen Y T ChanDepartment of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG51PB, UK.
Ian O EllisLaboratory of Molecular Gerontology, Biomedical Research Center, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Baltimore, MA 21224-6825, USA.
Vilhelm A BohrLaboratory of Molecular Gerontology, Biomedical Research Center, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Baltimore, MA 21224-6825, USA.
Helen E BryantAcademic Unit of Molecular Oncology, Department of Oncology, Medical School Sheffield Cancer Research Centre, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK.
Srinivasan MadhusudanAcademic Unit of Oncology, Division of Cancer and Stem Cells, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG51PB, UK, Department of Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG51PB, UK, srinivasan.madhusudan@nottingham.ac.uk.
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBNational Institutes of Health · USNottingham Trent University · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBNational Institute on Aging · US

Funding

Function of RecQ helicases in genome stabilityZIAAG000726 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI BROSH, ROBERT · 2009 to 2025
$13.1M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RECQL5 is a member of the RecQ family of DNA helicases and has key roles in homologous recombination, base excision repair, replication and transcription. The clinicopathological significance of RECQL5 expression in breast cancer is unknown. In this study, we have evaluated RECQL5 mRNA expression in 1977 breast cancers, and RECQL5 protein level in 1902 breast cancers [Nottingham Tenovus series (n = 1650) and ER- cohort (n = 252)]. Expression levels were correlated to aggressive phenotypes and survival outcomes. High RECQL5 mRNA expression was significantly associated with high histological grade (P = 0.007), HER2 overexpression (P = 0.032), ER+/HER2-/high proliferation genefu subtype (P < 0.0001), integrative molecular clusters (intClust 1and 9) (P < 0.0001) and poor survival (P < 0.0001). In subgroup analysis, high RECQL5 mRNA level remains significantly associated with poor BCSS in ER+ cohort (P < 0.0001) but not in ER- cohort (P = 0.116). At the protein level, in tumours with low RAD51, high RECQL5 level was significantly associated with high histological grade (P < 0.0001), higher mitotic index (P = 0.008), dedifferentiation (P = 0.025), pleomorphism (P = 0.027) and poor survival (P = 0.003). In subgroup analysis, high RECQL5/low RAD51 remains significantly associated with poor BCSS in ER+ cohort (P = 0.010), but not in ER- cohort (P = 0.628). In multivariate analysis, high RECQL5 mRNA and high RECQL5/low RAD51 nuclear protein coexpression independently influenced survival (P = 0.022) in whole cohort and in the ER+ subgroup. Preclinically, we show that exogenous expression of RECQL5 in MCF10A cells can drive proliferation supporting an oncogenic function for RECQL5 in breast cancer. We conclude that RECQL5 is a promising biomarker in breast cancer.

Indexed as

Antigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Topoisomerases, Type IIFemaleGene Knockdown TechniquesHumansImmunohistochemistryMCF-7 CellsNeoplasm InvasivenessPrognosisRad51 RecombinaseRecQ HelicasesRNA, MessengerTissue Array AnalysisAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, TumorDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Topoisomerases, Type IIRAD51 protein, humanRad51 RecombinaseRecQ HelicasesRECQL5 protein, humanRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID26586793
PMCPMC4715235
OpenAlexW2263758983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.