Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32474729›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2021

Immunohistochemical analysis of SLFN11 expression uncovers potential non-responders to DNA-damaging agents overlooked by tissue RNA-seq.

Tsuyoshi Takashima, Naoya Sakamoto, Junko Murai, Daiki Taniyama, Ririno Honma, Shoichi Ukai, Ryota Maruyama, Kazuya Kuraoka, Vinodh N Rajapakse, Yves Pommier and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. PARP Inhibitors in Genitourinary Cancer: A New Paradigm Beyond Prostate Cancer.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Tsuyoshi TakashimaDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Naoya SakamotoDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Junko MuraiInstitute for Advanced Biosciences, Keio University, Tsuruoka, Yamagata, 997-0052, Japan.
Daiki TaniyamaDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Ririno HonmaDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Shoichi UkaiDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Ryota MaruyamaDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan.
Kazuya KuraokaDepartment of Diagnostic Pathology, National Hospital Organization, Kure Medical Center and Chugoku Cancer Center, Kure city, Hiroshima, 737-0023, Japan.
Vinodh N RajapakseDevelopmental Therapeutics Branch and Laboratory of Molecular Pharmacology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Yves PommierDevelopmental Therapeutics Branch and Laboratory of Molecular Pharmacology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Wataru YasuiDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8551, Japan. wyasui@hiroshima-u.ac.jp.
Hiroshima University · JPCenter for Cancer Research · USKeio University · JPKure Medical Center · JPNational Cancer Institute · US

Funding

DNA Repair, Cell Cycle Checkpoints and Apoptosis as Targets for Anticancer DrugsZIABC006150 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI POMMIER, YVES · 2009 to 2025
$23.0M
Development Therapeutics Branch Clinical TrialsZIABC011746 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI POMMIER, YVES · 2017 to 2025
$2.6M
PROTEIN-ASSOCIATED DNA BREAKS AS INDICATOR OF TOPOISOMERASE INHIBITIONZ01BC006150 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI POMMIER, YVES · 1996 to 2008
$1.5M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 BC006150Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC006150Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 19H03505Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 26670175Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP16H06999Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP16K08691Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP16K15247Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JP) JP15H04713
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA-damaging agents include first-line drugs such as platinum (cisplatin, carboplatin), topoisomerase inhibitors (etoposide, doxorubicin), and replication inhibitors (cytarabine, gemcitabine). Despite their wide and long usage, there is no clinically available biomarker to predict responses to these drugs. Schlafen 11 (SLFN11), a putative DNA/RNA helicase, recently emerged as a dominant determinant of sensitivity to these drugs by enforcing the replication block in response to DNA damage. Since the clinical importance of SLFN11 is implicated, a comprehensive analysis of SLFN11 expression across human organs will provide a practical resource to develop the utility of SLFN11 in the clinic. In this study, we established a scoring system of SLFN11 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and assessed SLFN11 expression in ~ 700 malignant as well as the adjacent non-tumor tissues across 16 major human adult organs. We found that the SLFN11 expression is tissue specific and varies during tumorigenesis. Although The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) is a prevailing tool to assess gene expression in various malignant and normal tissues, our IHC data exhibited obvious discrepancy from the TCGA data in several organs. Importantly, SLFN11-negative tumors, potentially non-responders to DNA-damaging agents, were largely overrated in TCGA because TCGA samples are a mixture of infiltrating immune cells, including T cells, B cells, and macrophages, which have strong SLFN11 expression. Thus, our study reveals the significance of immunohistochemical procedures for evaluating expression of SLFN11 in patient samples and provides a robust resource of SLFN11 expression across adult human organs.

Indexed as

DNA DamageDrug Resistance, NeoplasmImmunohistochemistryRNA-SeqAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorCell Line, TumorClinical Decision-MakingDatabases, GeneticFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsNuclear ProteinsPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorNuclear ProteinsSLFN11 protein, humanDNA damageDNA repairDrug resistanceImmunohistochemistrySLFN11

Identifiers

PMID32474729
PMCPMC9175511
OpenAlexW3029013190

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.