Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35359376›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Gene Promoter-Methylation Signature as Biomarker to Predict Cisplatin-Radiotherapy Sensitivity in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.

Carlos Contreras-Romero, Eloy-Andrés Pérez-Yépez, Antonio Daniel Martinez-Gutierrez, Alma Campos-Parra, Alejandro Zentella-Dehesa, Nadia Jacobo-Herrera, César López-Camarillo, Guillermo Corredor-Alonso, Jaime Martínez-Coronel, Mauricio Rodríguez-Dorantes and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Promising predictive molecular biomarkers for cervical cancer (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Carlos Contreras-RomeroLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Eloy-Andrés Pérez-YépezLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Antonio Daniel Martinez-GutierrezLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Alma Campos-ParraLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Alejandro Zentella-DehesaPrograma Institucional de Cáncer de Mama, Dpto Medicina Genómica y Toxicología Ambiental, IIB, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico.
Nadia Jacobo-HerreraUnidad de Bioquímica, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán (INCMNSZ), Ciudad de México, Mexico.
César López-CamarilloPosgrado en Ciencias Genómicas, Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México (UACM), Mexico City, Mexico.
Guillermo Corredor-AlonsoLaboratorio de Patología, Hospital General de Zona #92, Ciudad Acuña, Mexico.
Jaime Martínez-CoronelLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Mauricio Rodríguez-DorantesLaboratorio de Oncogenómica, Instituto Nacional de Medicina Genómica, Mexico City, Mexico.
David Cantu de LeónLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Carlos Pérez-PlasenciaLaboratorio de Genómica, Insituto Nacional de Cancerología, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
Instituto Nacional de Cancerología · MXHospital General De Zona · MXInstituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán · MXNational Institute of Genomic Medicine · MXUniversidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México · MXUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite efforts to promote health policies focused on screening and early detection, cervical cancer continues to be one of the leading causes of mortality in women; in 2020, estimated 30,000 deaths in Latin America were reported for this type of tumor. While the therapies used to treat cervical cancer have excellent results in tumors identified in early stages, those women who are diagnosed in locally advanced and advanced stages show survival rates at 5 years of <50%. Molecular patterns associated with clinical response have been studied in patients who present resistance to treatment; none of them have reached clinical practice. It is therefore necessary to continue analyzing molecular patterns that allow us to identify patients at risk of developing resistance to conventional therapy. In this study, we analyzed the global methylation profile of 22 patients diagnosed with locally advanced cervical cancer and validated the genomic results in an independent cohort of 70 patients. We showed that BRD9 promoter region methylation and CTU1 demethylation were associated with a higher overall survival (p = 0.06) and progression-free survival (p = 0.0001), whereas DOCK8 demethylation was associated with therapy-resistant patients and a lower overall survival and progression-free survival (p = 0.025 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Our results suggest that methylation of promoter regions in specific genes may provide molecular markers associated with response to treatment in cancer; further investigation is needed.

Indexed as

biomarkerscervical cancerchemoradioresistanceCisplatin-Radiotherapy sensitivitygene promoter methylation

Identifiers

PMID35359376
PMCPMC8963763
OpenAlexW4214948692

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.