ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2015
Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma with and without sarcomatoid change: a clinicopathological, comparative genomic hybridization, and whole-exome sequencing study.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: Novel molecular insights and clinicopathologic updates.Asian journal of urology · 2022Review
- Key miRNAs and target genes played roles in the development of clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2018Article
- Molecular profiling of renal cell carcinoma: building a bridge toward clinical impact.Current opinion in urology · 2016Review
- A Rare Inherited 15q11.2-q13.1 Interstitial Duplication with Maternal Somatic Mosaicism, Renal Carcinoma, and Autism.Frontiers in genetics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chromophobe renal cell carcinomas (CRCC) with and without sarcomatoid change have different outcomes; however, fewstudies have compared their genetic profiles. Therefore, we identified the genomic alterationsin CRCC common type (CRCC C) (n=8) and CRCC with sarcomatoid change (CRCC S) (n=4) using comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and whole-exome sequencing. The CGH profiles showed that the CRCC C group had more chromosomal losses (72 vs. 18) but fewer chromosomal gains (23 vs. 57) than the CRCC S group. Losses of chromosomes 1p, 8p21-23, 10p16-20, 10p12-ter, 13p20-30, and 17p13 and gains of chromosomes 1q11, 1q21-23, 1p13-15, 2p23-24, and 3p21-ter differed between the groups. Whole-exome sequencing showed that the mutational status of 270 genes differed between CRCC (n=12) and normal renal tissues (n=18). In the functional enrichment analysis, the missense-mutated genes were classified into 6 biological processes (38 functions) and 5 pathways. The biological processes included cell adhesion, cell motility, ATP metabolism, sensory perception, carbohydrate and lipid metabolism and transport. The pathways included ATP-binding cassette transporter, extracellular matrix-receptor interaction, olfactory transduction, chondroitin sulfate biosynthesis, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Whole-exome sequencing analysis revealed that the missense mutation statuses of 49 genes differed between the CRCC C and CRCC S groups. Furthermore, genetic alterations in metastasis suppressor 1, serine peptidase inhibitor Kazal type 8, transient receptor potential cation channel super family M member 6, Rh family B glycoprotein, and mannose receptor C type 1 were located in different chromosomal regions. These alterations may provide clues regarding CRCC tumorigenesis and provide a basis for future targeted therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26807193PMC4697725W2280384315What 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.