ArticlePloS one2020
Development and validation of a lipogenic genes panel for diagnosis and recurrence of colorectal cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- "Resolving the SCD1-oleic acid paradox: majority of oleic acid is converted to free cholesterol in colorectal cancer cells".Cancer cell international · 2026Article
- Translating Molecular Subtypes into Cost-Effective Radiogenomic Biomarkers for Prognosis of Colorectal Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Acyl-CoA thioesterases and their derived lipid mediators: linking Acyl-CoA metabolic reprogramming to the tumor microenvironment.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- TSC22D2 Regulates ACOT8 to Delay the Malignant Progression of Colorectal Cancer.OncoTargets and therapy · 2024Article
- ACSL5, a prognostic factor in acute myeloid leukemia, modulates the activity of Wnt/β-catenin signaling by palmitoylation modification.Frontiers of medicine · 2023Article
- Circular RNA Expression Signatures Provide Promising Diagnostic and Therapeutic Biomarkers for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.Cancers · 2023Article
- Targeted O-glycoproteomics for the development of diagnostic markers for advanced colorectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Clinical and molecular assessment of an onco-immune signature with prognostic significance in patients with colorectal cancer.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Development and Clinical Validation of a Novel 5 Gene Signature Based on Fatty Acid Metabolism-Related Genes in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022Article
- A Novel Signature of Lipid Metabolism-Related Gene Predicts Prognosis and Response to Immunotherapy in Lung Adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
- Roles of ferroptosis in urologic malignancies.Cancer cell international · 2021Review
- Alterations of Lipid Metabolism in Cancer: Implications in Prognosis and Treatment.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Review
- Whole-transcriptome Analysis of Fully Viable Energy Efficient Glycolytic-null Cancer Cells Established by Double Genetic Knockout of Lactate Dehydrogenase A/B or Glucose-6-Phosphate Isomerase.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimAccumulated evidence indicates that the elevation of lipid metabolism is an essential step in colorectal cancer (CRC) development, and analysis of the key lipogenic mediators may lead to identifying the new clinically useful prognostic gene signatures.
methodsThe expression pattern of 61 lipogenic genes was assessed between CRC tumors and matched adjacent normal tissues in a training set (n = 257) with the Mann-Whitney U test. Cox's proportional hazards model and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to identifying a lipogenic-biomarkers signature associated with the prognosis of CRC. The biomarkers signature was then confirmed in two independent validation groups, including a set of 223 CRC samples and an additional set of 203 COAD profiles retrieving from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA).
resultsFive genes, including ACOT8, ACSL5, FASN, HMGCS2, and SCD1, were significantly enhanced in CRC tumors. Using the cutoff value 0.493, the samples were classified into high risk and low risk. The AUC of panel for discriminating of all, early (I-II stages), and advanced CRC (III-IV stages) were 0.8922, 0.8446, and 0.9162 (Training set), along with 0.8800, 0.8205, and 0.7351 (validation set I), and 0.9071, 0.8946, and 0.9107 (Validation set II), respectively. There was a reverse correlation between the high predicted point of panel and worse OS of CRC patients in training set (HR (95% CI): 0.1096 (0.07089-0.1694), P < 0.001), validation set I (HR (95% CI): 0.3350 (0.2116-0.5304), P < 0.001), and validation set II (HR (95% CI): 0.1568 (0.1090-0.2257), P < 0.001).
conclusionOur study showed that the panel of ACOT8/ACSL5/FASN/HMGBCS2/SCD1 genes had a better prognostic performance than validated clinical risk scales and is applicable for early detection of CRC and tumor recurrence.
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.