ArticleScientific reports2022
Establishment of prognostic risk model and drug sensitivity based on prognostic related genes of esophageal cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Collagen type I alpha 2 acts as a potential diagnostic biomarker and therapeutic targets for the prognosis in gastric cancer.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Classifying Molecular Subtypes and Establishing a Prognosis Model using Oxidative Stress-related Genes for Lung Adenocarcinoma.Current medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Identification of potential molecular targets for thyroid cancer using multiple-omics analysis and machine learning.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- A nine-gene signature with potential targets for predicting the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Molecular function validation and prognostic value analysis of the cuproptosis-related gene ferredoxin 1 in papillary thyroid carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- SERPINA1 is a new frontier in cancer immunotherapy and drug targeting by pan-cancer analysis.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Identification of chromatin remodeling-related gene signature to predict the prognosis in breast cancer.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- UBE2C enhances temozolomide resistance by regulating the expression of p53 to induce aerobic glycolysis in glioma.Acta biochimica et biophysica Sinica · 2024Article
- Article
- Comprehensive analysis of the Cullin family of genes reveals that CUL7 and CUL9 are the significant prognostic biomarkers in colorectal cancer.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Identification of tumor heterogeneity associated with KRAS/TP53 co-mutation status in lung adenocarcinoma based on single-cell RNA sequencing.American journal of cancer research · 2024Article
- The Multifunctional Family of Mammalian Fatty Acid-Binding Proteins.Annual review of nutrition · 2023Review
- Mutations in Structural Genes of the Mitochondrial Complex IV May Influence Breast Cancer.Genes · 2023Article
- 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
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
At present, the treatment of esophageal cancer (EC) is mainly surgical and drug treatment. However, due to drug resistance, these therapies can not effectively improve the prognosis of patients with the EC. Therefore, a multigene prognostic risk scoring system was constructed by bioinformatics analysis method to provide a theoretical basis for the prognosis and treatment decision of EC. The gene expression profiles and clinical data of esophageal cancer patients were gathered from the Cancer Genome Atlas TCGA database, and the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were screened by R software. Genes with prognostic value were screened by Kaplan Meier analysis, followed by functional enrichment analysis. A cox regression model was used to construct the prognostic risk score model of DEGs. ROC curve and survival curve were utilized to evaluate the performance of the model. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate whether the model has an independent prognostic value. Network tool mirdip was used to find miRNAs that may regulate risk genes, and Cytoscape software was used to construct gene miRNA regulatory network. GSCA platform is used to analyze the relationship between gene expression and drug sensitivity. 41 DEGs related to prognosis were pre-liminarily screened by survival analysis. A prognostic risk scoring model composed of 8 DEGs (APOA2, COX6A2, CLCNKB, BHLHA15, HIST1H1E, FABP3, UBE2C and ERO1B) was built by Cox regression analysis. In this model, the prognosis of the high-risk score group was poor (P < 0.001). The ROC curve showed that (AUC = 0.862) the model had a good performance in predicting prognosis. In Cox regression analysis, the comprehensive risk score can be employed as an independent prognostic factor of the EC. HIST1H1E, UBE2C and ERO1B interacted with differentially expressed miRNAs. High expression of HIST1H1E was resistant to trametinib, selumetinib, RDEA119, docetaxel and 17-AAG, High expression of UBE2C was resistant to masitinib, and Low expression of ERO1B made the EC more sensitive to FK866. We constructed an EC risk score model composed of 8 DEGs and gene resistance analysis, which can provide reference for prognosis prediction, diagnosis and treatment of the EC patients.
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.