Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29182684›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Colorectal cancer stages transcriptome analysis.

Tianyao Huo, Ronald Canepa, Andrei Sura, François Modave, Yan Gong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Adhesion molecule Amigo2 is involved in the fasciculation process of the fasciculus retroflexus.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Tianyao HuoDepartment of Health Outcomes & Policy, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Ronald CanepaInformation Technology and Services, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Andrei SuraDepartment of Health Outcomes & Policy, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
François ModaveDepartment of Health Outcomes & Policy, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Yan GongDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8218-1620

Funding

University of Florida Older Americans Independence Center (OAIC)P30AG028740 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI Peihua Qiu · 2007 to 2026
$22.8M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the gene expression differences in different stages of CRC. Gene expression data on 433 CRC patient samples were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Gene expression differences were evaluated across CRC stages using linear regression. Genes with p≤0.001 in expression differences were evaluated further in principal component analysis and genes with p≤0.0001 were evaluated further in gene set enrichment analysis. A total of 377 patients with gene expression data in 20,532 genes were included in the final analysis. The numbers of patients in stage I through IV were 59, 147, 116 and 55, respectively. NEK4 gene, which encodes for NIMA related kinase 4, was differentially expressed across the four stages of CRC. The stage I patients had the highest expression of NEK4 genes, while the stage IV patients had the lowest expressions (p = 9*10-6). Ten other genes (RNF34, HIST3H2BB, NUDT6, LRCh4, GLB1L, HIST2H4A, TMEM79, AMIGO2, C20orf135 and SPSB3) had p value of 0.0001 in the differential expression analysis. Principal component analysis indicated that the patients from the 4 clinical stages do not appear to have distinct gene expression pattern. Network-based and pathway-based gene set enrichment analyses showed that these 11 genes map to multiple pathways such as meiotic synapsis and packaging of telomere ends, etc. Ten of these 11 genes were linked to Gene Ontology terms such as nucleosome, DNA packaging complex and protein-DNA interactions. The protein complex-based gene set analysis showed that four genes were involved in H2AX complex II. This study identified a small number of genes that might be associated with clinical stages of CRC. Our analysis was not able to find a molecular basis for the current clinical staging for CRC based on the gene expression patterns.

Indexed as

TranscriptomeAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPrincipal Component Analysis

Identifiers

PMID29182684
PMCPMC5705125

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.