ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2018
Pan-Cancer Analysis Reveals Differential Susceptibility of Bidirectional Gene Promoters to DNA Methylation, Somatic Mutations, and Copy Number Alterations.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reply to: "Comments on the paper 'Extensive epigenomic dysregulation is a hallmark of homologous recombination deficiency in triple-negative breast cancer' by Y. Chen et al."International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Molecular environment and atypical function: What do we know about enzymes associated with Mucopolysaccharidoses?Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Review
- Multi-omics analysis: Paving the path toward achieving precision medicine in cancer treatment and immuno-oncology.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Review
- Co-regulation and function ofeLife · 2021Article
- Pan-Cancer Analysis of Head-to-Head Gene Pairs in Terms of Transcriptional Activity, Co-expression and Regulation.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- Multi-omics Data Integration, Interpretation, and Its Application.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bidirectional gene promoters affect the transcription of two genes, leading to the hypothesis that they should exhibit protection against genetic or epigenetic changes in cancer. Therefore, they provide an excellent opportunity to learn about promoter susceptibility to somatic alteration in tumors. We tested this hypothesis using data from genome-scale DNA methylation (14 cancer types), simple somatic mutation (10 cancer types), and copy number variation profiling (14 cancer types). For DNA methylation, the difference in rank differential methylation between tumor and tumor-adjacent normal matched samples based on promoter type was tested by the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Logistic regression was used to compare differences in simple somatic mutations. For copy number alteration, a mixed effects logistic regression model was used. The change in methylation between non-diseased tissues and their tumor counterparts was significantly greater in single compared to bidirectional promoters across all 14 cancer types examined. Similarly, the extent of copy number alteration was greater in single gene compared to bidirectional promoters for all 14 cancer types. Furthermore, among 10 cancer types with available simple somatic mutation data, bidirectional promoters were slightly more susceptible. These results suggest that selective pressures related with specific functional impacts during carcinogenesis drive the susceptibility of promoter regions to somatic alteration.
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.