Literature DB >> 29769552

A comprehensive bioinformatics analysis on multiple Gene Expression Omnibus datasets of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.

Shanzhou Huang1,2,3, Chengjun Sun1,2,3, Yuchen Hou1,2,3, Yunhua Tang1,2,3, Zebin Zhu1,2,3, Zhiheng Zhang1,2,3, Yixi Zhang1,2,3, Linhe Wang1,2,3, Qiang Zhao1,2,3, Mao-Gen Chen1,2,3, Zhiyong Guo1,2,3, Dongping Wang1,2,3, Weiqiang Ju1,2,3, Qi Zhou4, Linwei Wu5,6,7, Xiaoshun He8,9,10.   

Abstract

Fatty liver disease is one of the leading causes of chronic damage in western countries. Approximately 25% of adults in the United States have fatty livers in the absence of excessive alcohol consumption, a condition termed nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Little is known about the prevalence and genetic background of NAFLD or the factors that determine its development. In this study, we used the Gene-Cloud of Biotechnology Information bioinformatics platform to carry out a comprehensive bioinformatics analysis identifying differentially expressed genes (DEGs), key biological processes and intersecting pathways. We imported 3 Gene Expression Omnibus datasets (GSE31803, GSE49541, and GSE63067). Then, we assessed the expression of the DEGs in clinical samples. We found that CD24 was the only gene co-expressed in all 3 datasets. "Glycolysis/gluconeogenesis", "p53 signaling pathway" and "glycine, serine and threonine metabolism" were 3 common pathways related to the fatty liver process. In NAFLD tissues, CD24, COL1A1, LUM, THBS2 and EPHA3 were upregulated, and PZP was downregulated. CD24 is a core gene among these DEGs and have not yet been studied of its impact on NAFLD. Co-expressed genes, common biological processes and intersecting pathways identified in the study might play an important role in NAFLD progression. Further studies are needed to elucidate the mechanism of these potential genes and pathways in NAFLD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29769552      PMCID: PMC5955936          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-25658-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Introduction

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and its subtype nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) have become an increasingly important clinical and economic burden for public health[1,2]. NAFLD is the leading cause of liver damage and dysfunction in the western world and is strongly associated with obesity and insulin resistance[3]. Fatty liver could subsequently develop to malignancy and end-stage liver failure[4-6]. Currently, NAFLD is a leading indication for liver transplantation in the United States[7]. Mechanistic, preclinical, and clinical studies provided an initial view into NAFLD progression along with the process from NAFLD to NASH and fibrosis[8,9]. However, owing to the epidemics of NAFLD and the unclear mechanism of NAFLD progression, it is important to elucidate the underlying NAFLD mechanisms in detail. Gene profiling experiments in cross-sectional studies have been useful in identifying factors involved in NAFLD progression[10-12]. Gene profiling studies identified novel targets of NAFLD and demonstrated the roles of specific metabolic and repair pathways in the disease[11]. In the present study, we carried out a comprehensive bioinformatics analysis between normal liver tissues and NAFLD/NASH tissues on the Gene-Cloud of Biotechnology Information (GCBI) bioinformatics platform. Based on the comprehensive bioinformatics analysis, we determined to identify key differentially expressed genes (DEGs), biological processes and pathways that are closely associated with NAFLD/NASH.

Materials and Methods

Gene expression omnibus datasets

The Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gds) is a public repository at the National Center of Biotechnology Information for storing high-throughput gene expression datasets. We selected potential GEO datasets according to the following inclusion criteria: 1) specimens had histological diagnosis; 2) human liver tissues diagnosed as hepatocyte steatosis for the experimental group; 3) normal liver tissues used as controls; 4) expression profiling by array and raw data had the CEL format; 5) performed on the GPL570 platform ([HGU133_Plus_2] Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array) and Human Exon 1.0 ST v1 Array; and 6) supported by GCBI analysis laboratory. Datasets with specimens from other organisms, expression profiling by RT-PCR (or genome variation profiling by SNP array/SNP genotyping by SNP array), analyses on platforms other than GPL570, or sample size <10 were excluded. We used the search terms “Fatty liver” [MeSH Terms] AND “Homo sapiens” [Organism] and “Non-alcoholic” [Description] and “CEL” [Supplementary Files] and “Expression profiling by array” [DataSet Type] in the GEO DataSets to identify potential datasets. Then, we further screened these datasets according to the above inclusion criteria. Finally, 3 GEO datasets, GSE66676, GSE49541, and GSE834521, were included in our study.

Gene-Cloud of Biotechnology Information (GCBI)

GCBI (Shanghai, China, https://www.gcbi.com.cn) is an online comprehensive bioinformatics analysis platform that combines a variety of research findings, genetic information, sample information, data algorithms and bioinformatics to create a “gene knowledge base,” which involves GEO datasets. GCBI platform can systematically analyze GEO dataset-derived gene expression information[13], including more than 120 million copies of genomic samples. In the present study, GCBI was used to identify DEGs between NAFLD/NASH liver tissues and normal liver tissues. In the Differential Gene Expression Analysis module on the GCBI platform, we identified DEGs with a fold expression change >5 at cut off values Q < 0.05 and P < 0.05. Venn diagrams were used to compare the top 100 DEGs from 3 cohorts by Venny (http://bioinfogp.cnb.csic.es/tools/venny/index.html). Based on the DEGs, we further performed gene ontology (GO) analysis in terms of biological functions and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analysis in terms of pathway analysis. The top 20 biological functions and pathways are presented. Furthermore, a pathway relation network module was used to identify the core networks and pathway connections. Then, we applied the Gene Co-expression Network module on the GCBI platform to build gene co-expression networks for the DEGs to determine core genes in the networks.

Tissue specimens, RNA extraction and qRT-PCR analysis

15 healthy liver tissues and 10 fatty liver tissues from liver donors were enrolled in our study to validate the expression levels of co-expressed DEGs. Prior patient consent and ethical approval from the ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen were obtained. All methods were performed in accordance with the ethics guidelines and regulations. We selected 8 co-expressed DEGs, including CD24, PZP, COL1A1, COL1A2, LUM, VCAN, THBS2 and EPHA3, for validation. All tissues were histologically diagnosed. Total RNA from the tissue specimens was isolated using TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, California, USA), and qRT-PCR was performed with SYBR® Green dye (TaKaRa, Shiga, Japan), following the manufacturer’s instructions. The primer sequences are provided in Supplementary Table S1. β-tubulin was used as a reference gene.

Ethics statement

The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen. All experiments were conducted in accordance with approved guidelines of the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the ethical committee of the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University were obtained and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable. NO tissues were procured from prisoners. All the livers were procured in Organ Transplant Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University.

Ethical standards

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Statistical analysis

Data are presented as the mean ± SD for continuous variables. Student’s t-test and analysis of variance were used to evaluate significant differences in demographic data. All P values were two-sided, and P < 0.05 was defined as statistically significant. Analyses were carried out by the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) 22.0 (IBM, USA).

Results

Study design

The flow diagram of our study design is shown in Fig. 1. Our initial aim was to identify core genes in the development of fatty liver. We used 3 GEO datasets (GSE66676, GSE49541, and GSE834521) in the GCBI bioinformatics analysis platform. We extracted gene expression data of NAFLD/NASH and normal liver tissues to identify DEGs between the two histological diagnosis types in these 3 cohorts. Co-expressed DEGs were identified based on these DEGs. Biological function and KEGG pathway analyses were then performed. Finally, we verified expression of the core co-expressed genes in clinical samples to confirm the results.
Figure 1

Flow diagram of the study design. NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; DEGs, differentially expressed genes; KEGG, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes.

Flow diagram of the study design. NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; DEGs, differentially expressed genes; KEGG, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes.

Major characteristics of samples in 3 datasets

GEO datasets GSE66676 (Cohort 1), GSE49541 (Cohort 2), and GSE834521 (Cohort 3) were enrolled in our study. All 3 datasets were available in the GCBI bioinformatics analysis platform. GSE66676 contained 33 NAFLD or NASH tissues and 34 normal liver tissues. GSE49541 contained 32 advanced NAFLD tissues and 40 mild NAFLD tissues. GSE834521 included 126 NASH tissues and 98 normal liver tissues.

DEGs between NAFLD/NASH and normal liver tissues

We identified 8503, 1538, and 94 potential DEGs in GSE66676, GSE49541, and GSE834521, respectively (Fig. 2a–c). The top 10 DEGs from 3 cohorts are shown in Tables 1–3. After removing duplicate genes and expression values lacking specific gene symbols, we used the top 100 DEGs from GSE66676 and GSE49541 and 93 DEGs from GSE834521 to create a Venn diagram. The intersection of these 3 datasets in Fig. 3 shows that CD24 was the only co-expressed DEG found in all 3 cohorts. Twelve genes were co-expressed in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, including COL1A1, COL1A2, MOXD1, LUM, VCAN, EFEMP1, THBS2, MGP, COL3A1, EPHA3, BICC1, and COL6A3, all of which were upregulated. Seventeen genes were co-expressed in Cohort 1 and Cohort 3, including SPP1, FABP4, PZP, UTY, SLC1A2, GPNMB, DDX3Y, SAA1, MT1M, FAT1, USP9Y, LYZ, CXCL10, VIL1, EIF1AY, UBD, and CYP3A43. Further investigation showed that the regulation of MT1M, SLC1A2, CYP3A43 and VIL1 was not consistent. Therefore, 13 genes were co-expressed in Cohort 1 and Cohort 3.
Figure 2

(a–c) Heat maps for potential DEGs between fatty liver and normal liver tissues in 3 cohorts. Heat maps for potential DEGs in GSE66676 (containing 33 NAFLD/NASH tissues and 34 normal liver tissues) (a), GSE49541 (containing contained 32 advanced NAFLD tissues and 40 mild NAFLD tissues) (b), and GSE834521 (126 NASH tissues and 98 normal liver tissues) (c).

Table 1

Top 10 differentially expressed genes in Cohort 1.

RankProbe Set IDGene SymbolGene DescriptionRegulation
17903765GSTM1glutathione S-transferase mu 1Downregulated
28096301SPP1secreted phosphoprotein 1Upregulated
38151532FABP4fatty acid binding protein 4Upregulated
47960984PZPpregnancy-zone proteinDownregulated
57914000NR0B2nuclear receptor subfamily 0, group B, member 2Downregulated
68174474ACSL4acyl-CoA synthetase long-chain family member 4Upregulated
77908481CFHR3complement factor H-related 3Upregulated
88136336AKR1B10aldo-keto reductase family 1, member B10Upregulated
98150920CYP7A1cytochrome P450, family 7, subfamily A, polypeptide 1Upregulated
107948420FABP5fatty acid binding protein 5Upregulated
Table 3

Top 10 differentially expressed genes in Cohort 3.

RankProbe Set IDGene SymbolGene DescriptionRegulation
116829985ENO3enolase 3 (beta, muscle)Upregulation
216766132APOFapolipoprotein FDownregulation
316895179TP53I3tumor protein p53 inducible protein 3Upregulation
417104259MSNmoesin (MSN)Upregulation
516789484ADSSL1adenylosuccinate synthase like 1 (ADSSL1)Upregulation
616977052CXCL10chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 10Upregulation
716890891VIL1villin 1Downregulation
816909401SLC16A14solute carrier family 16, member 14Upregulation
916811975TSPAN3tetraspanin 3Upregulation
1016841768CENPVcentromere protein VDownregulation
Figure 3

The Venn diagram shows the top 100 DEGs and co-expressed genes among cohort 1 (GSE66676), cohort 2 (GSE49541) and cohort 3 (GSE834521).

(a–c) Heat maps for potential DEGs between fatty liver and normal liver tissues in 3 cohorts. Heat maps for potential DEGs in GSE66676 (containing 33 NAFLD/NASH tissues and 34 normal liver tissues) (a), GSE49541 (containing contained 32 advanced NAFLD tissues and 40 mild NAFLD tissues) (b), and GSE834521 (126 NASH tissues and 98 normal liver tissues) (c). Top 10 differentially expressed genes in Cohort 1. Top 10 differentially expressed genes in Cohort 2. Top 10 differentially expressed genes in Cohort 3. The Venn diagram shows the top 100 DEGs and co-expressed genes among cohort 1 (GSE66676), cohort 2 (GSE49541) and cohort 3 (GSE834521).

Biological process analysis

In the present study, GO analysis was applied to investigate the biological function of the DEGs. The biological process analysis (Fig. 4a–c) revealed that “small molecule metabolic process” was a common biological function in 3 cohorts. “Cellular lipid metabolic process” and “cell adhesion” were the common biological processes in Cohort 2 and Cohort 3. Four common biological processes in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 were “blood coagulation, transmembrane transport, positive regulation of transcription from RNA polymerase II promoter and signal transduction”. Metabolic processes, such as “alpha-linolenic acid metabolic process, unsaturated fatty acid metabolic process, mRNA/RNA metabolic process” and other biological processes, were also vital in each cohort.
Figure 4

(a–c) Top 20 biological functions in terms of GO analysis related to DEGs in cohort 1 (a), cohort 2 (b) and cohort 3 (c).

(a–c) Top 20 biological functions in terms of GO analysis related to DEGs in cohort 1 (a), cohort 2 (b) and cohort 3 (c).

Pathway analysis

KEGG pathway analysis were used to investigate the pathway based on the DEGs identified. Figure 5a–c shows the top 20 pathways involved in each cohort. Among them, glycine, serine and threonine metabolism; cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction; PI3K-Akt signaling pathway; p53 signaling pathway; and metabolic pathways were 5 common pathways related to the fatty liver process. Among the top ten pathways in the pathway relation network in 3 cohorts, “glycolysis/gluconeogenesis”, “p53 signaling pathway” and “glycine, serine and threonine metabolism” were 3 intersecting pathways in the relation network (Table 4). MAPK signaling pathway, apoptosis, pathways in cancer, cell cycle, Wnt signaling pathway and pyruvate metabolism were the other intersecting pathways in pairwise comparisons.
Figure 5

(a–c) Top 20 pathways in terms of KEGG pathway analysis related to DEGs in cohort 1 (a), cohort 2 (b) and cohort 3 (c). (d–f) Pathway relation network in 3 cohorts.

Table 4

Top 10 pathways in pathway relation network of the 3 cohorts.

RankCohort 1Cohort 2Cohort 3
1MAPK signaling pathwayMAPK signaling pathwayPyruvate metabolism
2ApoptosisPathways in cancerGlycolysis/Gluconeogenesis
3Pathways in cancerApoptosisFatty acid biosynthesis
4Cell cycleCell cycleGlycine, serine and threonine metabolism
5Glycolysis/Gluconeogenesisp53 signaling pathwayProstate cancer
6p53 signaling pathwayPyruvate metabolismCytokine-cytokine receptor interaction
7Glycine, serine and threonine metabolismGlycolysis/GluconeogenesisToll-like receptor signaling pathway
8Calcium signaling pathwayWnt signaling pathwayp53 signaling pathway
9Citrate cycle (TCA cycle)Focal adhesion
10Wnt signaling pathwayGlycine, serine and threonine metabolism
(a–c) Top 20 pathways in terms of KEGG pathway analysis related to DEGs in cohort 1 (a), cohort 2 (b) and cohort 3 (c). (d–f) Pathway relation network in 3 cohorts. Top 10 pathways in pathway relation network of the 3 cohorts.

The validation of core genes expression in clinical samples

To further determine which genes might play a significant role in the progression of fatty liver, we used real-time qPCR to detect the expression of 8 DEGs using clinical samples, including CD24, PZP, COL1A1, COL1A2, LUM, VCAN, THBS2 and EPHA3. 15 healthy liver tissues and 10 fatty liver tissues from liver donors were enrolled. We noted that CD24, COL1A1, LUM, THBS2 and EPHA3 were usually upregulated in fatty liver tissues comparing to normal liver tissues, which is consistent with the results of bioinformatics analysis above (Fig. 6a–f). PZP was significantly downregulated in fatty livers compared with normal livers, which is also consistent with the co-expressed results (Fig. 6h).
Figure 6

(a–h) Real-time qPCR validation of 8 co-expressed DEGs in 10 NAFLD and 15 normal liver tissues. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, NS represents no significant difference, analysis by non-paired t tests.

(a–h) Real-time qPCR validation of 8 co-expressed DEGs in 10 NAFLD and 15 normal liver tissues. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, NS represents no significant difference, analysis by non-paired t tests.

Discussion

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis is strongly associated with strong genetic component and dietary component[1]. A number of genes could be associated with the susceptibility and development of NAFLD and NASH[1,2]. In our present study, we imported three GEO datasets into the GCBI comprehensive analysis platform to extract gene expression data of NAFLD/NASH tissue comparing to normal liver tissue or NASH tissue comparing to NAFLD liver tissue. We identified co-expressed DEGs, common biological processes and pathways between NAFLD/NASH and normal liver tissues through differential expression analysis in GCBI. We found that CD24, PZP, COL1A1, COL1A2, LUM, VCAN, THBS2 and EPHA3 were potential biomarkers for distinguishing NAFLD/NASH. Further validation by clinical samples, the expression of CD24, PZP, COL1A1, LUM, THBS2 and EPHA3 were significantly regulated. Moreover, CD24 is a core gene among these DEGs and have not yet been studied of its impact on hepatocyte steatosis. CD24 encodes a sialoglycoprotein that is expressed on mature granulocytes and B cells and modulates growth and differentiation signals to these cells[13]. Several studies have reported that CD24 is widely distributed, including on hematopoietic cells[14] and non-hematopoietic cells[15,16]. CD24 has been studied to be associated with various pathophysiological processes, including tracking divergent states of cells[17], regulating CD8 (+) T cell activation[18] and participating in mutant-IDH1-dependent chromatin state reprogramming[19]. Accumulating evidence showed that this protein is overexpressed in many types of cancers, resulting in cancer cell growth, proliferation and metastasis[20]. Previous studies have reported that CD24 is overexpressed in nearly 70% of human cancers, and intracellular CD24 disrupts the ARF-NPM interaction and enables mutational and viral oncogene-mediated p53 inactivation[21]. CD24 is significantly correlated with tumorigenesis genes, such as non-coding RNAs[22]. It was previously demonstrated that a subpopulation of adipocyte progenitor cells was identified with the expression of the cell surface molecule CD24 being critically important for reconstitution of white adipose tissue function in vivo[23]. CD24 was shown to be important in the reconstitution of white adipocyte (WAT) function in vivo, as well as a specific regulator of adipogenesis in vitro[23,24]. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that losing CD24 in male mice leads to a generalized reduction of WAT and metabolic disturbances[24]. Fairbridge et al.[25]. reported that the global absence of CD24 affects adipocyte cell size in vivo in a sex- and diet-dependent manner, as well as causing metabolic disturbances in glucose homeostasis and free fatty acid levels. However, the precise function of CD24 and the underlying mechanisms of its activity in NAFLD/NASH progression remain unclear. This is the first study to identify the prominent correlation between CD24 and NAFLD/NASH. Insulin resistance (IR) is central in the pathogenesis of NAFLD. NAFLD often significantly impacts glucose and lipid metabolism by exacerbating hepatic IR[26]. CD24 can regulate lipid raft occupancy and may affect glucose uptake by regulating lipid raft protein localization[27]. Additional studies will be required to identify whether there is a potential mechanism among CD24, glucose uptake, and insulin resistance. IR is a major factor for hepatic fat accumulation[28]. Several studies only focused on a single protein, which ignored the various potential pathways in this complex disease[29]. In our study, we found that “glycolysis/gluconeogenesis”, “p53 signaling pathway” and “glycine, serine and threonine metabolism” were 3 intersecting pathways in the relation network. Several studies have reported that glycolysis/gluconeogenesis[30], the p53 signaling pathway[31], and glycine metabolism[32] were each associated with IR. The biological process “small molecule metabolic process” was reported to be vital in cancer[33], hepatic metabolism disorder like IR[34]. We supposed it to be a key biological process in fatty liver. Further studies will be required to determine whether the co-expressed DEGs including CD24 could activate one of these pathways or other mechanisms to induce NAFLD/NASH in humans. In summary, we first used the GCBI bioinformatics analysis platform to identify DEGs between NAFLD/NASH tissues and normal liver tissues, which showed that CD24 is the hub gene and identify 3 intersecting pathways in the relation network. Then, using qRT-PCR analysis, we concluded that the mRNA expression of CD24 is upregulated in fatty liver. Further studies are required to elucidate the function and underlining mechanisms of this potential biomarker in the progression of hepatocyte steatosis. Table S1
Table 2

Top 10 differentially expressed genes in Cohort 2.

RankProbe Set IDGene SymbolGene DescriptionRegulation
1201842_s_atEFEMP1EGF containing fibulin-like extracellular matrix protein 1Upregulation
2201843_s_atEFEMP1EGF containing fibulin-like extracellular matrix protein 1Upregulation
3205422_s_atITGBL1integrin, beta-like 1Upregulation
4201744_s_atLUMlumicanUpregulation
5214247_s_atDKK3dickkopf WNT signaling pathway inhibitor 3Upregulation
6213071_atDPTdermatopontinUpregulation
71557080_s_atITGBL1integrin, beta-like 1 (with EGF-like repeat domains)Upregulation
8206070_s_atEPHA3EPH receptor A3Upregulation
9207173_x_atCDH11cadherin 11, type 2, OB-cadherinUpregulation
10209291_atID4inhibitor of DNA binding 4Upregulation
  34 in total

1.  Distinct dendritic cell subsets dictate the fate decision between effector and memory CD8(+) T cell differentiation by a CD24-dependent mechanism.

Authors:  Taeg S Kim; Stacey A Gorski; Steven Hahn; Kenneth M Murphy; Thomas J Braciale
Journal:  Immunity       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 31.745

Review 2.  From NAFLD to NASH to cirrhosis-new insights into disease mechanisms.

Authors:  Alexander Wree; Lori Broderick; Ali Canbay; Hal M Hoffman; Ariel E Feldstein
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-08-20       Impact factor: 46.802

3.  Transcriptome analysis reveals the molecular mechanism of hepatic metabolism disorder caused by chromium poisoning in chickens.

Authors:  Xinxin Tian; Hui Zhang; Yali Zhao; Khalid Mehmood; Xiaoxing Wu; Zhenyu Chang; Min Luo; Xueting Liu; Muhammad Ijaz; Muhammad Tariq Javed; Donghai Zhou
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  OPTN/SRTR 2015 Annual Data Report: Liver.

Authors:  W R Kim; J R Lake; J M Smith; M A Skeans; D P Schladt; E B Edwards; A M Harper; J L Wainright; J J Snyder; A K Israni; B L Kasiske
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 8.086

5.  CD24 induces localization of beta1 integrin to lipid raft domains.

Authors:  Steffen Runz; Claudia T Mierke; Safwan Joumaa; Jürgen Behrens; Ben Fabry; Peter Altevogt
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 3.575

6.  Long non-coding RNA DILC regulates liver cancer stem cells via IL-6/STAT3 axis.

Authors:  Xue Wang; Wen Sun; Weifeng Shen; Mingyang Xia; Cheng Chen; Daimin Xiang; Beifang Ning; Xiuliang Cui; Hengyu Li; Xiaofeng Li; Jin Ding; Hongyang Wang
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2016-01-23       Impact factor: 25.083

7.  Identification and validation co-differentially expressed genes with NAFLD and insulin resistance.

Authors:  Xiao-Chen Wang; Xiao-Rong Zhan; Xin-Yu Li; Jun-Jie Yu; Xiao-Min Liu
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 3.633

8.  Biological analysis of cancer specific microRNAs on function modeling in osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Hao Wang; Min Tang; Liping Ou; Mengyi Hou; Tianyu Feng; Yu-E Huang; Yaqian Jin; Heng Zhang; Guowei Zuo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  miRNA-132 induces hepatic steatosis and hyperlipidaemia by synergistic multitarget suppression.

Authors:  Geula Hanin; Nadav Yayon; Yonat Tzur; Rotem Haviv; Estelle R Bennett; Shiran Udi; Yoganathan R Krishnamoorthy; Eleni Kotsiliti; Rivka Zangen; Ben Efron; Joseph Tam; Orit Pappo; Eyal Shteyer; Eli Pikarsky; Mathias Heikenwalder; David S Greenberg; Hermona Soreq
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2017-04-05       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 10.  Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: Pathogenesis and Disease Spectrum.

Authors:  Timothy Hardy; Fiona Oakley; Quentin M Anstee; Christopher P Day
Journal:  Annu Rev Pathol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 23.472

View more
  15 in total

1.  Identification of key regulators associated with colon cancer prognosis and pathogenesis.

Authors:  Narges Toolabi; Fattane Sam Daliri; Amir Mokhlesi; Mahmood Talkhabi
Journal:  J Cell Commun Signal       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 5.782

2.  Dynamic co-expression modular network analysis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Jing Zheng; Huizhong Wu; Zhiying Zhang; Songqiang Yao
Journal:  Hereditas       Date:  2021-08-21       Impact factor: 3.271

3.  Large-scale analysis reveals a novel risk score to predict overall survival in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Yujia Zheng; Yulin Liu; Songfeng Zhao; Zhetian Zheng; Chunyi Shen; Li An; Yongliang Yuan
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 3.989

4.  Bioinformatics analysis on multiple Gene Expression Omnibus datasets of the hepatitis B virus infection and its response to the interferon-alpha therapy.

Authors:  Zebin Zhu; Shanzhou Huang; Yixi Zhang; Chengjun Sun; Yunhua Tang; Qiang Zhao; Qi Zhou; Weiqiang Ju; Xiaoshun He
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 3.090

5.  Behavioral Characterizing of CD24 Knockout Mouse-Cognitive and Emotional Alternations.

Authors:  Keren Nitzan; Roni Toledano; Shiran Shapira; Nadir Arber; Ravid Doron
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-02-06

6.  Remodeling of whole-body lipid metabolism and a diabetic-like phenotype caused by loss of CDK1 and hepatocyte division.

Authors:  Jin Rong Ow; Matias J Cadez; Gözde Zafer; Juat Chin Foo; Hong Yu Li; Soumita Ghosh; Heike Wollmann; Amaury Cazenave-Gassiot; Chee Bing Ong; Markus R Wenk; Weiping Han; Hyungwon Choi; Philipp Kaldis
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 8.140

7.  Extra virgin olive oil improved body weight and insulin sensitivity in high fat diet-induced obese LDLr-/-.Leiden mice without attenuation of steatohepatitis.

Authors:  Leticia Álvarez-Amor; Amparo Luque Sierra; Antonio Cárdenas; Lucía López-Bermudo; Javier López-Beas; Eloísa Andújar; Mónica Pérez-Alegre; Rocío Gallego-Durán; Lourdes M Varela; Alejandro Martin-Montalvo; Genoveva Berná; Anabel Rojas; Mª José Robles-Frías; Abdelkrim Hmadcha; Manuel Romero-Gómez; Robert Kleemann; Franz Martín
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Da-Chai-Hu Decoction Ameliorates High Fat Diet-Induced Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Through Remodeling the Gut Microbiota and Modulating the Serum Metabolism.

Authors:  Huantian Cui; Yuting Li; Yuming Wang; Lulu Jin; Lu Yang; Li Wang; Jiabao Liao; Haoshuo Wang; Yanfei Peng; Zhaiyi Zhang; Hongwu Wang; Xiangguo Liu
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 5.810

9.  Comparison of hepatic gene expression profiles between three mouse models of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Liping Xiang; Yang Jiao; Yiling Qian; Yao Li; Fei Mao; Yan Lu
Journal:  Genes Dis       Date:  2021-02-27

10.  Renalase Attenuates Mouse Fatty Liver Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury through Mitigating Oxidative Stress and Mitochondrial Damage via Activating SIRT1.

Authors:  Tao Zhang; Jian Gu; Jianrong Guo; Ke Chen; Huili Li; Jiliang Wang
Journal:  Oxid Med Cell Longev       Date:  2019-12-14       Impact factor: 6.543

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.