ArticlePloS one2019
ΔNp63 to TAp63 expression ratio as a potential molecular marker for cervical cancer prognosis.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- TWIST1 Upregulation Is a Potential Target for Reversing Resistance to the CDK4/6 Inhibitor in Metastatic Luminal Breast Cancer Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- DNA Demethylation Switches Oncogenic ΔNp63 to Tumor Suppressive TAp63 in Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- The role of HPV-induced epigenetic changes in cervical carcinogenesis (Review).Biomedical reports · 2021Review
- Synergetic Effects of Intronic Mature miR-944 and ΔNp63 Isoforms on Tumorigenesis in a Cervical Cancer Cell Line.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Correction: ΔNp63 to TAp63 expression ratio as a potential molecular marker for cervical cancer prognosis.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
p63 is a transcription factor p53 family. Two major isoforms of p63, TAp63 with transactivation (TA) domain and ΔNp63 with truncated TA domain, have been reported to play opposing roles either in tumor suppression or oncogenic function. Little is known about the association of these two isoforms of p63 in the carcinogenesis of cervical cancer. In this study, the mRNA expression levels of TAp63 and ΔNp63 in 40 normal, 30 low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL), 38 high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL), and 52 cervical cancer formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues were examined using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). We analyzed the association between the ΔNp63 and ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio and clinicopathological parameters and compared disease-specific survival of each ΔNp63 mRNA expression and ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio. The ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio in cervical cancer showed higher sensitivity than the mRNA expression levels of ΔNp63 (52.0% vs 44.2%). The level of ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio in precancerous LSIL and HSIL was higher than in normal tissues (P = 0.01 and P = 0.003) and lower than in cervical cancer tissues (P = 0.03 and P = 0.02). Besides, the positive ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio was associated with bulky tumor size and high expression of Ki-67, the proliferation marker, in cervical cancer (P = 0.04 and P = 0.02). The cervical cancer patients with the positive ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio showed worse survival compared to those who with the negative expression ratio of ΔN/TAp63 (HR = 5.7, 95% CI: 1.6-19.9). In conclusion, the balance of TAp63 and ΔNp63 is closely related to the carcinogenesis of cervical cancer. The ΔN/TAp63 mRNA expression ratio could be useful as a diagnostic and prognostic marker of cervical cancer.
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.