ArticleOncology letters2016
Comparative analysis of gene expression profiles of gastric cardia adenocarcinoma and gastric non-cardia adenocarcinoma.
Article in Oncology letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a prognostic signature: identifying differentially expressed genes in cardia and non-cardia gastric cancer for immunity and therapeutic sensitivity analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Molecular dysexpression in gastric cancer revealed by integrated analysis of transcriptome data.Oncology letters · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, gene expression profiles were analyzed to identify the molecular mechanisms underlying gastric cardia adenocarcinoma (GCA) and gastric non-cardia adenocarcinoma (GNCA). A gene expression dataset (accession number GSE29272) was downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus, and consisted of 62 GCA samples and 62 normal controls, as well as 72 GNCA samples and 72 normal controls. The two groups of differentially-expressed genes (DEGs) were compared to obtain common and unique DEGs. A differential analysis was performed using the Linear Models for Microarray Data package in R. Functional enrichment analysis was conducted for the DEGs using the Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery. Protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks were constructed for the DEGs with information from the Search Tool for the Retrieval of Interacting Genes. Subnetworks were extracted from the whole network with Cytoscape. Compared with the control, 284 and 268 genes were differentially-expressed in GCA and GNCA, respectively, of which 194 DEGs were common between GCA and GNCA. Common DEGs [e.g., claudin (CLDN)7, CLDN4 and CLDN3] were associated with cell adhesion and digestion. GCA-unique DEGs [e.g., MAD1 mitotic arrest deficient like 1, cyclin (CCN)B1, CCNB2 and CCNE1] were associated with the cell cycle and the regulation of cell proliferation, while GNCA-unique DEGs (e.g., GATA binding protein 6 and hyaluronoglucosaminidase 1) were implicated in cell death. A PPI network with 141 nodes and 446 edges were obtained, from which two subnetworks were extracted. Genes [e.g., fibronectin 1, collagen type I α2 chain (COL1A2) and COL1A1] from the two subnetworks were implicated in extracellular matrix organization. These common DEGs could advance our understanding of the etiology of gastric cancer, while the unique DEGs in GCA and GNCA could better define the properties of specific cancers and provide potential biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis or therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.