Literature DB >> 29988738

High expression of ALDOA and DDX5 are associated with poor prognosis in human colorectal cancer.

Ling Dai1, Guangdong Pan2, Xiaojia Liu3, Jiang Huang4, Zhiqing Jiang1, Xiaobao Zhu1, Xinli Gan1, Qing Xu5, Ning Tan5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The identification of prognostic markers for colorectal cancer (CRC) is needed for clinical practice. Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A (ALDOA) and DEAD box p68 RNA helicase (DDX5) are commonly overexpressed in cancer and correlate with tumorigenesis. However, association between expression of ALDOA and DDX5, and CRC outcome has not been reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used 141 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens collected from 105 patients with CRC treated at the Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University and the People's Hospital of Liuzhou. We performed tissue microarray based immunohistochemistry to explore expression features and prognostic value (overall survival, OS; disease-free survival, [DFS]) of ALDOA and DDX5 in CRC tissues. The prognostic values were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox regression analyses.
RESULTS: ALDOA and DDX5 were highly expressed in CRC tissues and liver metastatic CRC tissues compared with normal glandular epithelium tissues (all p<0.05). Interestingly, primary CRC tissues highly expressing ALDOA or DDX5 had poor outcome (p<0.0001 for both OS and DFS for ALDOA; p=0.001 for OS; and p=0.011 for DFS for DDX5) compared with patients who had low expression of those proteins. Furthermore, multivariate Cox analysis showed that ALDOA/DDX5 combination was an independent risk factor for OS and ALDOA was an independent risk factor for DFS.
CONCLUSION: High levels of ALDOA and DDX5 contribute to the aggressiveness and poor prognosis of CRC. ALDOA/DDX5 expression could be a biomarkers for the prognosis of CRC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DEAD box p68 RNA helicase; X-tile; colorectal cancer; disease free survival; fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A; overall survival

Year:  2018        PMID: 29988738      PMCID: PMC6029611          DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S157925

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Manag Res        ISSN: 1179-1322            Impact factor:   3.989


Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common malignancy of the digestive system and ranks fifth in China for both cancer incidence (376.3 per 100,000) and mortality (191.0 per 100,000).1 Over the past decade, significant progress has been made in the treatment of CRC through advances in surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy.2–4 However, the majority of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, limiting the therapeutic options for improving the survival rate and leading to a poor prognosis.5 In recent years, several prognostic markers such as SERPINA4,6 c-MYC, and ß-catenin7 have been proposed as immunohistochemical markers for CRC, while established diagnostic and prognostic serum biomarkers, including carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9),8 are of value in the treatment of CRC patients. However, the need remains to identify effective biomarkers that can classify patients at high or low risk of outcomes after surgical resection. Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A (ALDOA), an aldolase isozyme, plays a key role in glycolysis and gluconeogenesis9 and is highly expressed in many types of cancers, including kidney, lung,10 oral squamous cell,11 and hepatocellular carcinomas.12 DEAD box p68 RNA helicase (DDX5) is considered a prototypic member of the DEAD-box family of RNA helicases.13 Recent studies have also demonstrated that DDX5 is aberrantly expressed in several types of cancers, including colon cancer,14 breast cancer,15 lung cancer,16 cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma,17 and suggesting that DDX5 plays important roles in cancer development and progression.18 However, limited information was available for prognostic value of ALDOA and DDX5 in CRC. In this study, we demonstrated that ALDOA is highly expressed in CRC and liver metastatic CRC tissues compared with paired normal glandular epithelium tissues, and could therefore represent a potential prognostic marker for primary CRC patients after surgical resection.

Materials and methods

Patient tissue samples

We evaluated 141 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens (105 CRC tissues, 18 paired normal glandular epithelium tissues, and 18 liver metastatic CRC tissues) collected from 105 patients with CRC treated at the Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University and the People’s Hospital of Liuzhou from April 2012 to March 2015 with written informed consent by each patient and approval from the institutional review board of Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University and the People’s Hospital of Liuzhou was obtained. H&E-stained slides were prepared from each FFPE specimen and were reviewed by experienced pathologists. The diagnosis of CRC was confirmed based on clinical manifestation, and pathological and serological examinations.

Follow-up

Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of surgery to the date of death or the last known follow-up. Disease-free survival (DFS) was calculated from the date of tumor resection until the detection of tumor recurrence, metastasis, or death. All patients enrolled in this study provided written informed consent and the protocol was approved by the ethics committees of the Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University and the People’s Hospital of Liuzhou. No patients had received radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, or other related anti-tumor therapies prior to surgery. Follow-up data were summarized at the end of October 2016. Follow-up of all of the patients was carried out at both hospitals, including tumor marker testing every 3 months and diagnostic imaging at least every 6 months, based on the surveillance suggested in the guidelines. In cases of suspected recurrence, MRI or CT were included in the diagnostic imaging.19

Tissue microarrays and immunohistochemistry

Tissue microarrays were constructed from a representative core from each FFPE specimen. Tissue cylinders with a diameter of 1.5 mm were punched from marked areas of each sample and incorporated into a recipient paraffin block. Sections of 4 μm thickness were placed on slides coated with 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane. All H&E-stained slides were reviewed by experienced pathologists and the representative cores were pre-marked in the paraffin blocks.20 Paraffin sections were deparaffinized in xylene and rehydrated using decreasing concentrations of ethanol (100%, 95%, and 85% for 5 min each). Antigen retrieval was performed by microwave irradiation for 5 min in pH 6.0 citric buffer, after which the samples were cooled at room temperature for 60 min. Endogenous peroxidase activity was blocked by incubation of the slides in 3% H2O2/phosphate-buffered saline, and non-specific binding sites were blocked with goat serum.20 Mouse monoclonal antibody to ALDOA (H00000226-M02, Abnova, Taipei City, Taiwan; 1:200 dilution) and rabbit monoclonal antibody to DDX5 (ab126730, Abcam, Cambridge, UK; 1:400 dilution) were used as a primary antibody, and an EnVision Detection Kit (GK500705: Gene Tech, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China) was used to visualize tissue antigens. Tissue sections were counterstained with hematoxylin for 5 min. Negative control slides without primary antibody were prepared for all assays. Imaging was performed using a Leica CCD DFC420 camera connected to a Leica DM IRE2 microscope (Leica Microsystems Imaging Solutions Ltd, Cambridge, UK). Photographs of representative fields were captured under high-power magnification (×200) using Leica QWin Plus v3 software. The integrated optical density (IOD) of each image was measured using Image-Pro Plus v6.0 software (Media Cybernetics Inc, Bethesda, MD, USA).20 Expression levels of ALDOA and DDX5 were thus represented by IOD.20

Statistical analysis

X2 analyses, correlations between variables, Kaplan–Meier analyses, univariate survival analysis, and multiple Cox proportional hazards regression were performed using the SPSS statistical software package (SPSS Standard version 13.0; SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). The optimum cut-off points for ALDOA and DDX5 expression were obtained using X-tile software version 3.6.1 (Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA) to determine the relationship between protein expression and clinical outcomes (OS and DFS).21 A significant difference was considered if the p-value from a two-tailed test was <0.05.

Results

Expression levels of ALDOA and DDX5 in paired adjacent glandular epithelium, CRC tumor tissues, and liver metastatic CRC tissues

ALDOA expression in adjacent glandular epithelium was negative or low (Figure 1A), but high expression was observed in CRC tumor tissue (Figure 1B) and liver metastatic CRC tissue (Figure 1C). Significant statistical differences were observed between the paired adjacent normal glandular epithelium tissue and the CRC tumor tissue (n=18, p=0.0001, Figure 1D), and also between the paired adjacent normal glandular epithelium tissue and the liver metastatic CRC tissue (n=18, p<0.0001, Figure 1D). In addition, ALDOA was highly expressed in liver metastatic CRC tissue compared with paired primary CRC tissue (p=0.0769). In a parallel manner, DDX5 expression was significantly higher in CRC tumor tissue (Figure 1F; n=18, p=0.0034, Figure 1H) and liver metastatic CRC tissue (Figure 1G; n=18, p=0.0087, Figure 1H) compared with tissues of adjacent glandular epithelium (Figure 1E, H).
Figure 1

Expression of ALDOA and DDX5 in paired adjacent glandular epithelium, primary colorectal cancer, and liver metastatic colorectal cancer tissue.

Notes: Expression of ALDOA in (A) adjacent glandular epithelium (×200), (B) primary colorectal cancer tissue (×200), (C) liver metastatic colorectal cancer tissue (×200). (D) Box plot showing the staining intensity (mean with SEM) of ALDOA in paired adjacent glandular epithelium, primary colorectal cancer, and liver metastatic colorectal cancer tissues. Expression of DDX5 in (E) adjacent glandular epithelium (×200), (F) primary colorectal cancer tissue (×200), (G) liver metastatic colorectal cancer tissue (×200). (H) Box plot showing the staining intensity (mean with SEM) of ALDOA in paired adjacent glandular epithelium, primary colorectal cancer, and liver metastatic colorectal cancer tissues.

Abbreviations: ALDOA, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A; CRC, colorectal cancer; DDX5, DEAD box p68 RNA helicase; IOD, integrated optical density.

High expression of ALDOA and DDX5 are associated with poor prognosis

According to the optimum cut-off point obtained from X-tile analyses, OS and DFS were estimated by Kaplan–Meier analyses. Forty-six patients were classified in the high ALDOA expression group and 59 were classified in the low ALDOA expression group; 83 patients were classified in the low DDX5 expression group and 22 in the high expression group. Kaplan–Meier analyses clearly showed that CRC patients with higher expression of ALDOA had worse OS and DFS compared with patients with lower expression of ALDOA (p<0.0001 for both OS and DFS; Figure 2A, B); higher expression of DDX5 had worse OS and DFS, compared with patients with lower expression of DDX5 (p=0.001 for OS and p=0.011 for DFS; Figure 2C, D). Notably, when combining ALDOA and DDX5, the prognostic values were more significant for predicting OS and DFS (Figure 2E, F).
Figure 2

Positive correlation of high ALDOA expression and DDX5 high expression with poor OS and DFS in colorectal cancer patients.

Notes: Probabilities of (A) OS (high ALDOA=46, low ALDOA=59, p<0.0001) and (B) DFS (p<0.0001) in colorectal cancer patients. Probabilities of (C) OS (high DDX5=22, low DDX5=83, p=0.001) and (D) DFS (p=0.011) in colorectal cancer patients. Probabilities of (E) OS (ALDOA and DDX5 all low, n=50, ALDOA and DDX5 at least one high, n=55, p<0.0001) and (F) DFS (p<0.0001) in colorectal cancer patients. Log-rank test was determined using Kaplan–Meier survival analyses.

Abbreviations: ALDOA, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A; DDX5, DEAD box p68 RNA helicase; DFS, disease-free survival; OS, overall survival.

Association of ALDOA and DDX5 expression with clinicopathological features of CRC patients

We further investigated the association between ALDOA and DDX5 expression and clinicopathological factors in the 105 CRC patients. X2 analyses showed that DDX5 was not associated with any clinicopathological factors, while ALDOA expression was associated with serum CA19-9 level in CRC patients (p=0.027) but was not associated with sex, age, tumor differentiation, T stage, N stage, M stage, TNM stage, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), liver metastasis, or postoperative chemotherapy (Table 1).
Table 1

Relationship between ALDOA and DDX5 expression levels, and the clinicopathological features of CRC

VariableALDOA
p-valueDDX5
p-value
LowHighLowHigh
Sex0.0600.915
 Male39224813
 Female2024359
Age0.3830.363
 ≤5932214013
 >592725439
Tumor differentiation0.7220.466
 Well128155
 Moderate45356515
 Poor2331
T stage0.3330.841
 T12020
 T25683
 T344305915
 T4810144
N stage0.4960.239
 N032284515
 N1-N22718387
M stage0.3640.084
 M03624519
 M123223213
TNM stage0.4200.436
 I4471
 II1713255
 III156183
 IV23233313
Serum CEA0.9520.861
 ≤5 ng/mL26203610
 >5 ng/mL33264712
Serum CA19-9*0.0270.737
 ≤37 U/mL39214812
 >37 U/mL19253410
Liver metastasis0.1590.704
 No40255510
 Yes19212812
Postoperative chemotherapy*0.4550.687
 No89143
 Yes31234212

Notes:

We failed to obtain some data. Statistically significant values are shown in bold (p<0.05).

Abbreviations: ALDOA, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A; CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CRC, colorectal cancer; DDX5, DEAD box p68 RNA helicase.

Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of risk factors for CRC patients after surgery

To determine independent prognostic factors for CRC patients after surgery, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed based on a Cox proportional hazard regression model. Clinical and pathological factors showing statistical significance in Cox univariate analyses were included in Cox multivariate analyses. Cox univariate analyses showed that M stage (p<0.0001 for both OS and DFS), TNM stage (p=0.005 for OS and p<0.0001 for DFS), serum CA19-9 (p<0.0001 for OS, p=0.001 for DFS), liver metastasis (p<0.0001 for both OS and DFS), ALDOA expression (p<0.0001 for OS, p=0.001 for DFS), DDX5 expression (p=0.002 for OS, p=0.015 for DFS), and ALDOA/DDX5 combination (p<0.0001 for both OS and DFS) were prognostic factors, and serum CA19-9 (p=0.004 for OS, p=0.005 for DFS), liver metastasis (p<0.0001 for both OS and DFS), and ALDOA/DDX5 combination (p<0.0001 for OS) and ALDOA expression (p=0.001 for DFS) were independent prognostic factors in CRC patients after surgery (Table 2).
Table 2

Univariate and multivariate analyses of factors associated with OS and DFS in CRC patients

FactorsUnivariate PHROS Multivariate 95% Clp-valueUnivariate PHRDFS Multivariate 95% Clp-value
Sex: male vs. female0.6270.624
Age: ≤59 vs. >59, years0.7120.572
Tumor differentiation:
Well vs. moderate vs. poor0.0790.097
T stage: T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 vs. T40.5300.889
N stage: N0 vs. N1-N20.8520.108
M stage: M0 vs. M1<0.0001<0.0001
TNM stage: I vs. II vs. III vs. IV0.005<0.0001
Serum CEA (ng/mL): ≤5 vs. >50.0620.073
Serum CA19-9 (U/mL): ≤37 vs. >37<0.00012.4661.325–4.5890.0040.0012.0901.243–3.5130.005
Liver metastasis: no vs. yes<0.00014.8072.398–9.635<0.0001<0.00018.0434.557–14.194<0.0001
Postoperative chemotherapy: no vs. yes0.6690.072
ALDOA: low vs. high<0.00010.0012.1451.291–3.5620.003
DDX5: low vs. high0.0020.015
ALDOA/DDX5 combination:
All low vs. at least one high<0.00015.3222.434–11.634<0.0001<0.0001

Note: Statistically significant values are shown in bold (p<0.05).

Abbreviations: ALDOA, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A; CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CRC, colorectal cancer; DDX5, DEAD box p68 RNA helicase; DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard radio; OS, overall survival.

Discussion

CRC is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and a major cause of global cancer death in both males and females.22 The TNM staging system is a conventional predictor of outcome among postoperative CRC patients. Despite continuous refinement of the system to indicate the extent of the disease and define prognosis, with the aim of guiding treatment, OS and DFS among postoperative CRC patients may vary considerably, even within the same tumor stage.23 Therefore, the need for novel biomarkers, especially those which might reflect tumor features to more precisely stratify patients into different risk categories, is clearly warranted.24 Although serum CEA and CA19-9 are elevated in patients with CRC, they have not have not been recommended as screening tests for CRC, due to their low sensitivity and specificity. Also, they were found to be significantly elevated in colorectal neoplasia.25–27 However, serum CEA and CA19-9 are recommended as a prognostic biomarker for monitoring recurrence of CRC following curative resection and predicting prognosis.25,28 Univariate analysis of the present study reveals that serum CEA had a tendency to predict prognosis and serum CA19-9 is an independent prognostic factor for both OS and DFS. Immunohistochemical staining is widely used for visualizing these tumor markers and is a routine tool in the department of pathology. Although several studies have reported diagnostic and prognostic markers of CRC for immunohistochemistry assays, few are routinely used in clinical pathology. Thus, identification of a new molecular marker for use in immunohistochemistry of tumor tissues from CRC patients would be beneficial for effective individualized therapy for this disease. In this present study, we initially evaluated the significance of ALDOA and DDX5 expressions in 18 paired normal glandular epithelium tissues, primary CRC tissues, and liver metastatic CRC tissues. The paired t-test revealed that ALDOA and DDX5 expression were significantly higher in primary CRC tissues and liver metastatic CRC tissues than in normal glandular epithelium tissues. Furthermore, ALDOA and DDX5 expression were slightly higher in liver metastatic CRC tissues than in primary tissues, although the small sample size meant that the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.0769 for ALDOA and p=0.1164 for DDX5). Further studies in a larger sample of paired liver metastatic CRC and primary tissues are therefore warranted. More importantly, Kaplan–Meier survival analyses clearly showed that patients with high ALDOA or high DDX5 in expression in primary CRC tissues had shorter OS and DFS than patients with low ALDOA or low DDX5 expressions. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that serum CA19-9, liver metastasis, and ALDOA/DDX5 combination was an independent prognostic factor for OS, and serum CA19-9, liver metastasis, ALDOA were independent prognostic factors for DFS. Notably, multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that hazard ratio and p-value from multivariate Cox regression analyses reveals that ALDOA/DDX5 combination was more effective for predicting postoperative OS of CCR patients. Of note, dynamic proteomic analysis has recently identified ALDOA as a novel biomarker of CRC prognosis29 and DDX5 was reported as a transcriptional co-activator in tumor development;30,31 however, detailed information on the prognostic value of ALDOA and DDX5 and its expression characteristics in liver metastatic CRC tissues has not been reported. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to demonstrate the prognostic value of ALDOA, DDX5, and ALDOA/DDX5 combination as an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS in CRC patients after surgery. Furthermore, ALDOA and or ALDOA/DDX 5 combined with serum CA19-9, liver metastasis may effectively predict outcome of CRC patients.

Conclusion

The present study clearly demonstrates that ALDOA and DDX5 protein are highly expressed in CRC tumor and liver metastatic CRC tissues compared with normal glandular epithelium tissues, and that increased expression of ALDOA and DDX5 in CRC tissues may indicate poor prognosis in patients after surgery. Therefore, our findings indicate that ALDOA and DDX5 are potential biomarkers for CRC, and may represent a useful approach to the prediction of OS and DFS in CRC patients after surgery.
  31 in total

1.  Overexpression of RNA helicase p68 protein in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  S J Wang; C Zhang; Y You; C M Shi
Journal:  Clin Exp Dermatol       Date:  2012-04-30       Impact factor: 3.470

Review 2.  TNM staging system of colorectal carcinoma: a critical appraisal of challenging issues.

Authors:  Giacomo Puppa; Angelica Sonzogni; Romano Colombari; Giuseppe Pelosi
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.534

3.  Global cancer statistics, 2002.

Authors:  D Max Parkin; Freddie Bray; J Ferlay; Paola Pisani
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

4.  SERPINA4 is a novel independent prognostic indicator and a potential therapeutic target for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Hui-Min Sun; Yu-Shuai Mi; Fu-Dong Yu; Yang Han; Xi-Sheng Liu; Su Lu; Yu Zhang; Sen-Lin Zhao; Ling Ye; Ting-Ting Liu; Dao-Hua Yang; Xiao-Feng Sun; Xue-Bin Qin; Zong-Guang Zhou; Hua-Mei Tang; Zhi-Hai Peng
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 6.166

5.  Bevacizumab in combination with fluorouracil and leucovorin: an active regimen for first-line metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Herbert I Hurwitz; Louis Fehrenbacher; John D Hainsworth; William Heim; Jordan Berlin; Eric Holmgren; Julie Hambleton; William F Novotny; Fairooz Kabbinavar
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-05-20       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  New prognosis biomarkers identified by dynamic proteomic analysis of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Ya Peng; Xiayu Li; Minghua Wu; Jing Yang; Minji Liu; Wengling Zhang; Bo Xiang; Xiaoyan Wang; Xiaoling Li; Guiyuan Li; Shourong Shen
Journal:  Mol Biosyst       Date:  2012-09-20

7.  X-tile: a new bio-informatics tool for biomarker assessment and outcome-based cut-point optimization.

Authors:  Robert L Camp; Marisa Dolled-Filhart; David L Rimm
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2004-11-01       Impact factor: 12.531

8.  The small chromatin-binding protein p8 coordinates the association of anti-proliferative and pro-myogenic proteins at the myogenin promoter.

Authors:  Ramkumar Sambasivan; Sirisha Cheedipudi; NagaRekha Pasupuleti; Amena Saleh; Grace K Pavlath; Jyotsna Dhawan
Journal:  J Cell Sci       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 5.285

9.  Prognostic value of pretreatment serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level in patients with colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhan Yu; Zhen Chen; Jian Wu; Zhong Li; Yugang Wu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Serum CEA and CA 19-9 Levels are Associated with the Presence and Severity of Colorectal Neoplasia.

Authors:  Nam Hee Kim; Mi Yeon Lee; Jung Ho Park; Dong Il Park; Chong Il Sohn; Kyuyong Choi; Yoon Suk Jung
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.759

View more
  12 in total

1.  Identifying Molecular Subtypes and 6-Gene Prognostic Signature Based on Hypoxia for Optimizing Targeted Therapies in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Jingrong Lin; Shujiao Chen; Linling Xiao; Ziyan Wang; Yanqing Lin; Shungui Xu
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2022-04-26

2.  DEAD-Box Helicase 5 Interacts With Transcription Factor 12 and Promotes the Progression of Osteosarcoma by Stimulating Cell Cycle Progression.

Authors:  Yanchun Chen; Qiaozhen Wang; Qing Wang; Jinmeng Liu; Xin Jiang; Yawen Zhang; Yongxin Liu; Fenghua Zhou; Huancai Liu
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 5.810

3.  Plasma Inter-Alpha-Trypsin Inhibitor Heavy Chains H3 and H4 Serve as Novel Diagnostic Biomarkers in Human Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Xiao Jiang; Xiao-Yan Bai; Bowen Li; Yanan Li; Kangkai Xia; Miao Wang; Shujing Li; Huijian Wu
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 3.434

4.  MicroRNA Biogenesis Pathway Genes Are Deregulated in Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Petra Vychytilova-Faltejskova; Alena Svobodova Kovarikova; Tomas Grolich; Vladimir Prochazka; Katerina Slaba; Tana Machackova; Jana Halamkova; Marek Svoboda; Zdenek Kala; Igor Kiss; Ondrej Slaby
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Enrichment of Aldolase C Correlates with Low Non-Mutated IDH1 Expression and Predicts a Favorable Prognosis in Glioblastomas.

Authors:  Yu-Chan Chang; Hsing-Fang Tsai; Shang-Pen Huang; Chi-Long Chen; Michael Hsiao; Wen-Chiuan Tsai
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 6.  Perspectives on the Role of Isoliquiritigenin in Cancer.

Authors:  Kai-Lee Wang; Ying-Chun Yu; Shih-Min Hsia
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 6.639

7.  Long non-coding RNA AC122108.1 promotes lung adenocarcinoma brain metastasis and progression through the Wnt/β-catenin pathway by directly binding to aldolase A.

Authors:  Shaobin Feng; Huiling Liu; Peng Du; Xushuai Dong; Qi Pang; Hua Guo
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-12

8.  The POU2F1-ALDOA axis promotes the proliferation and chemoresistance of colon cancer cells by enhancing glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway activity.

Authors:  Jinguan Lin; Longzheng Xia; Linda Oyang; Jiaxin Liang; Shiming Tan; Nayiyuan Wu; Pin Yi; Qing Pan; Shan Rao; Yaqian Han; Yanyan Tang; Min Su; Xia Luo; Yiqing Yang; Xiaohui Chen; Lixia Yang; Yujuan Zhou; Qianjin Liao
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2022-01-08       Impact factor: 9.867

9.  Prognostic Implications and Immune Infiltration Analysis of ALDOA in Lung Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Guojun Lu; Wen Shi; Yu Zhang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 10.  DDX5 and DDX17-multifaceted proteins in the regulation of tumorigenesis and tumor progression.

Authors:  Kun Xu; Shenghui Sun; Mingjing Yan; Ju Cui; Yao Yang; Wenlin Li; Xiuqing Huang; Lin Dou; Beidong Chen; Weiqing Tang; Ming Lan; Jian Li; Tao Shen
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 5.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.