| Literature DB >> 26425543 |
Guiying Bai1, Chenxuan Wu2, Yingtang Gao3, Guiming Shu4.
Abstract
This study has analyzed the gene expression patterns of an IPMN microarray dataset including normal pancreatic ductal tissue (NT), intraductal papillary mucinous adenoma (IPMA), intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma (IPMC), and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) samples. And eight clusters of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) with similar expression pattern were detected by k-means clustering. Then a survey map of functional disorder in IPMN progression was established by functional enrichment analysis of these clusters. In addition, transcription factors (TFs) enrichment analysis was used to detect the key TFs in each cluster of DEGs, and three TFs (FLI1, ERG, and ESR1) were found to significantly regulate DEGs in cluster 1, and expression of these three TFs was validated by qRT-PCR. All these results indicated that these three TFs might play key roles in the early stages of IPMN progression.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26425543 PMCID: PMC4573622 DOI: 10.1155/2015/197603
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Genomics ISSN: 2314-436X Impact factor: 2.326
The PCR primers of gene.
| Gene | Sequence (5′ → 3′) | Length |
|---|---|---|
|
| Forward primer | CATGTACGTTGCTATCCAGGC |
| Reverse primer | CTCCTTAATGTCACGCACGAT | |
|
| ||
| ESR1 | Forward primer | GGGAAGTATGGCTATGGAATCTG |
| Reverse primer | TGGCTGGACACATATAGTCGTT | |
|
| ||
| ERG | Forward primer | CGTGCCAGCAGATCCTACG |
| Reverse primer | GGTGAGCCTCTGGAAGTCG | |
|
| ||
| FLI1 | Forward primer | CCAACGAGAGGAGAGTCATCG |
| Reverse primer | TTCCGTGTTGTAGAGGGTGGT | |
Figure 1Overlap of DEGs and known cancer genes. The P value was calculated by hypergeometric test.
Figure 2The clustering map of DEGs clusters and expression patterns.
Figure 3The biological processes and pathways related to DEGs clusters. Red node: cluster of DEGs; green node: biological process; line: relationship between cluster and biological process.
The TFs and target genes in different clusters.
| Cluster | TF | Target genes |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | FLI1 | ANPEP, PDGFRB, SLA, ERG, PDGFC, MMP2, CCND2 |
|
| ERG | ANPEP, CDH5, ESR1, FLT1, MMP2, VIM, VWF |
| |
| ESR1 | CXCL12, IGF1, ANGPTL4, APOE, ERG, SOCS2, CYP1B1, CAV1, EGF, PNRC1, PGR, FBLN1, SERPINE1 |
| |
| NFIC | VWF, COL18A1, ELN, IL6, TFPI2, ADA, RGN, SERPINE1, RBP1, F13A1 | 0.1671 | |
| PGR | ALB, EGF | 0.3925 | |
| CEBPD | ELN, IL6 | 0.5027 | |
| AR | IL6, PNRC1 | 0.4326 | |
| CREM | FHL5, PLN | 0.5806 | |
|
| |||
| C3 | PPARG | CASP3, ADAM28 | 0.3851 |
| PPARA | HMGCS1 | 0.7016 | |
|
| |||
| C5 | MYC | NFIL3 | 0.8412 |
|
| |||
| C7 | SP1 | ABCG1, CYP3A4, KRT19 | 0.2409 |
| STAT1 | IRF7 | 0.6291 | |
| SMAD3 | BCL2L1 | 0.4531 | |
Figure 4The TF and target genes networks in different clusters of DEGs. Red diamond: TF; salmon circle: target gene; blue line: regulatory relationships.
Figure 5Expression of three TFs in different stages of IPMN samples. P < 0.05 as determined by a Student's t-test compared with the NT samples.
Figure 6The overall survey map of functional disorder for IPMN progression.