ArticleBiochemistry and biophysics reports2025
Screening and validation of diagnostic markers for keloids via bioinformatics analysis.
Article in Biochemistry and biophysics reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Keloid (KD) disease is a skin lesions caused by abnormal wound healing that involve complex cellular and molecular mechanisms. The aim of this study was to screen diagnostic markers of KD via bioinformatics methods and evaluate their clinical application value. Methods: The GSE44270, GSE145725, GSE7890 and GSE83286 datasets were analyzed in combination with difference analysis and weighted gene coexpression network analysis (WGCNA) and machine learning algorithms, candidate genes related to KD were screened and verified via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and external datasets. KD samples were classified by consistent clustering, and the infiltration of immune cells was investigated. Simultaneously, a diagnostic biomarker-related ceRNA network was constructed. Drug small molecules and compounds were predicted online, and molecular docking was performed. Finally, RT‒qPCR and WB were used to verify the expression of the markers. Results: In this study, two upregulated genes, SMURF2 and CCDC80, which are significantly associated with a variety of immune cells, were screened. KD was divided into the C1 and C2 subtypes, SMURF2 was highly expressed in C1, and CCDC80 was highly expressed in C2. Drug prediction and molecular docking analysis suggest that bisphenol A may have a potential effect on KD therapy. RT‒qPCR and WB revealed that the mRNA and protein expression levels of SMURF2 and CCDC80 in KD samples were significantly increased. Conclusion: Our study identified two genes that may be used as diagnostic markers of KD, providing new perspectives and potential molecular targets for the study of the molecular mechanisms and clinical diagnosis of KD.
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.