Literature DB >> 30214306

Association between lncRNA CASC8 polymorphisms and the risk of cancer: a meta-analysis.

Zhigang Cui1,2,3, Min Gao3, Zhihua Yin3, Lei Yan1, Lei Cui1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in one of the long noncoding RNA (lncRNA), cancer susceptibility candidate 8 (CASC8) gene and the risk of cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted to summarize the relationship between common SNPs (rs10505477 and rs7837328) in the lncRNA CASC8 gene and the risk of cancer. The relevant references were retrieved from several authoritative databases. Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were adopted to ensure the credibility of the results. The fixed effects or random effects model was used to calculate the OR and 95% CI. We tested for publication bias.
RESULTS: Fifteen articles containing 20 datasets (24,504 cases and 22,969 controls) were finally included in the meta-analysis. Compared to the individuals carrying the rs10505477 TT genotype, those with the TC or CC genotype had a decreased risk of cancer (TC vs TT: OR 0.876, 95% CI 0.832-0.923, P<0.001; CC vs TT: OR 0.748, 95% CI 0.703-0.795, P<0.001). Allele C of rs10505477 might be a protective factor for decreasing susceptibility to cancer (OR 0.866, 95% CI 0.840-0.893, P<0.001). As for rs7837328, the GA and AA genotypes were associated with increased risks of cancer as compared to the GG genotype (ORs 1.209 and 1.336; 95% CIs 1.127-1.298 and 1.202-1.484, respectively); its A allele could significantly increase the risk of cancer compared with the G allele (OR 1.169, 95% CI 1.114-1.227, P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The rs10505477 and rs7837328 polymorphisms might be associated with risk of cancer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CASC8; cancer; lncRNA; meta-analysis; single-nucleotide polymorphism

Year:  2018        PMID: 30214306      PMCID: PMC6124472          DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S170783

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


Background

Long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) is a noncoding RNA class with a length of more than 200 nucleotides (nt). Previous studies have shown that lncRNA plays an important role in many cellular processes such as cell cycle, apoptosis, epigenetics, and regulation of gene expression; in addition, lncRNA has become a research hotspot in the genetic and molecular epidemiology fields.1,2 In recent years, it has been found that lncRNA expression or functional abnormalities are closely related to the occurrence of human diseases, including several serious diseases that harm human health such as cancer and degenerative neurological diseases; specific manifestations were presented in the abnormal expression of lncRNA in sequential and spatial structures. A previous study showed that lncRNAs could be regarded as noninvasive tumor biomarkers in urologic malignancies, and their alterations could promote tumor development in prostate, bladder, and kidney cancers.3 In fact, it is worth deeply studying not only tumors of the urinary system but also the relationship between lncRNA and other tumors. The focus of this study is to explore the association between the genetic variants located in one lncRNA (cancer susceptibility candidate 8 [CASC8]) and the risks of various types of cancer. The CASC8 gene is located in the 8q24 – a non-protein-coding region including plenty of genetic loci. Recent studies have revealed that the lncRNAs originating from the human 8q24 locus play important roles in MYC regulation, which is known to be a key contributor to the development of many human tumors.4 The expression of CASC8 is suggested to be significantly correlated with increased cancer susceptibility. Moreover, this study found that the MYC enhancer region physically interacts with the active regulatory region of the CASC8 promoter, suggesting that long-range interaction of the MYC enhancer with the CASC8 promoter regulates CASC8 expression. Finally, Kim et al demonstrated that CARLo-5 has a function in cell-cycle regulation and tumor development.5 Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and several case–control studies have proved that some particular variants in CASC8 had correlation with carcinomas such as breast cancer, colorectal cancer (CRC), prostate cancer (pCa), upper gastrointestinal cancer, lung cancer, and gastric cancer.6–10 The single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) of rs10505477 – located in the intron of the lncRNA of CASC8 gene – had an intimate correlation with CRC susceptibility,11–13 the risk of lung cancer, the prognosis for gastric cancer,14,6 and so on. Rs7837328 – another polymorphism in CASC8 – was associated with pCa and CRC susceptibility.7,15 Although the above studies have reported the association between polymorphisms in the CASC8 gene and risks of cancer, the results were not consistent. Thus, the effect of polymorphisms in the CASC8 gene on cancer is still unclear. Therefore, we conducted an updated meta-analysis on all available studies to assess the overall cancer risk with rs10505477 and rs7837328.

Materials and methods

Data collection

We searched related references from PubMed, Web of science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database, and the Chinese Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform. The search keywords were “LncRNA AND cancer”, “CASC8”, “rs10505477”, and “rs7837328”. A total of 164 references were retrieved. After examination by title and abstract, 119 articles were retrieved for further evaluation. One hundred studies were excluded because of the absence of detailed genotype frequency, reviews, and cell line or animal studies. Two studies were excluded because of no specified cancer risk. One paper was removed because its full text could not be obtained. One study did not accord with the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (P=0.015) and, then, was excluded from the study. Finally, 15 articles containing 20 datasets (24,504 cases and 22,969 controls) were included and used in quantitative synthesis for systematic review. A flowchart of the study selection process is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1

Flow diagram of study identification with criteria in the meta-analysis.

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

Studies included in this meta-analysis had to meet the following criteria: 1) cases were diagnosed with carcinomas at any stage; 2) a clinical case–control study; 3) published in Chinese or English language; and that 4) the distribution of genotype in controls was consistent with the Hardy–Wein-berg equilibrium (HWE). Exclusion criteria were as follows: 1) comprehensive data on one type of cancer with other cancers were excluded in the stratified analyses by cancer types; 2) no definite genotype or allele frequency; 3) case–control studies that were family based; and 4) the document type was a summary or a review.

Statistical analysis

This meta-analysis describes the relationship between lncRNA CASC8 SNPs and various type of cancers with ORs and 95% CIs. For each SNP, we estimated five genetic models of ORs and 95% CIs, involving additive model, dominant model, and recessive model as well as homozygous and heterozygous comparisons. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to ethnicity, source of controls, genotyping methods, and cancer types. The Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium test was conducted on the allele frequency of the control group. The study population were regarded as originating from the same Mendelian genetic group when P>0.05. The stability and effect of the results were assessed by the chi-square test as well as by calculating ORs and 95% CI. The combined ORs were calculated by the additive model (rs10505477 C vs T and rs7837328 A vs G), and the statistical significance was evaluated by the Z test. Cochran’s Q test and I2 were used to test the heterogeneity. If I2 <50% and P>0.1, the fixed effects model was used to calculate the ORs and the 95% CI; in contrast, the random effects model was applied. Publication bias was estimated by Begg funnel and Egger regression tests. All statistical analyses were conducted on STATA software (version 11.0), and P<0.05 of the two-tailed probability was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

Eligible studies

According to the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 15 articles containing 20 datasets (24,504 cases and 22,969 controls) were finally included in the meta-analysis. In these papers, nine articles including 14 records (16,238 cases and 16,594 controls) were related to rs10505477, and six studies including six datasets (8,266 cases and 6,375 controls) were con cerned with rs7837328. The characteristics of all studies are summarized in Table 1. The nine articles of rs10505477 were included in this meta-analysis.11,14,16–22 Among these, 11 records were Caucasian-based (13,652 cases and 14,221 controls), and three records were Asian-based (2,586 cases and 2,373 controls). In the same way, six articles about rs7837328 were selected in this study.15,23–27 Caucasians had two records (1,341cases and 1,260 controls), whereas Asians had four records (6,925 cases and 5,115 controls).
Table 1

Characteristics of the studies included in this meta-analysis

ReferencesYearEthnicitySourceCancerGenotying methodCase/controlGenotyping distribution
HWE
CaseControl
Rs10505477 (T>C)TTTCCCTTTCCC
Hashemi et al222016CaucasianPBALLPCR-RELP110/1204043273556290.481
Hu et al142016AsianHBLCMassARRAY484/2101522438963101460.645
Zhou et al192014AsianHBGCMassARRAY242/227521207045107750.542
Haerian et al202014CaucasianHBCRCTaqman380/3358818211058182950.555
Hutter et al162010CaucasianPBCRCMassARRAY1,453/1,7974057413074619124240.512
Hutter et al162010CaucasianPBCRCMassARRAY636/6461693231441563281620.692
Curtin et al212009CaucasianPBCRCSNPlex1,071/1,0403045442232735192480.965
Schafmayer et al172008CaucasianPBCRCSNPlex2,713/2,7187801,3595746381,3747060.543
Zanke et al112007CaucasianPBCRCTaqman761/7492223721671953651890.489
Zanke et al112007CaucasianPBCRCTaqman1,415/1,6563956963243848424300.472
Zanke et al112007CaucasianPBCRCTaqman2,809/2,9128361,4105637551,4447130.665
Zanke et al112007CaucasianPBCRCTaqman1,859/1,8825798903904879134820.197
Zanke et al112007CaucasianPBCRCTaqman445/366129213103105176850.499
Gruber et al182007AsianPBCRCGeneChip1,860/1,9365359363895319324730.110
Rs7837328 (G>A)GGGAAAGGGAAA
Yang et al272014AsianHBCRCTaqman90/1322637274961220.684
Zhang et al152014AsianPBPCaPCR388/34412221056115173560.501
San Francisco et al242013CaucasianHBpCaTaqman83/212945991020.743
Cui et al232010AsianPBCRCIllumina6,163/4,4942,4872,8867902,0401,9704840.796
Zheng et al262010AsianPBpCaMassARRAY284/14599133525964220.502
Salinas et al252008CaucasianPBpCaSNPlex1,258/1,2393876392324515901980.828

Notes: Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium test was conducted on the allele frequency of the control group. The study population were regarded as coming from the same Mendelian genetic group when P>0.05.

Abbreviations: HB, hospital-based; PB, population-based; LC, lung cancer; GC, gastric cancer; CRC, colorectal cancer; EOC, epithelial ovarian cancer; pCa, prostate cancer.

Meta-analysis

Rs10505477 and cancer susceptibility

The relationship between the rs10505477 locus in the lncRNA CASC8 gene and the risk of all cancers is shown in Table 2. Compared to individuals carrying the TT genotype, those with the TC or CC genotype were at decreased risk of developing cancer (TC vs TT: OR 0.876, 95% CI 0.832–0.923, P<0.001; CC vs TT: OR 0.748, 95% CI 0.703–0.795, P<0.001). The same results were suggested in the dominant model (TC+CC vs TT: OR 0.834, 95% CI 0.794–0.875, P<0.001) and the recessive model (CC vs TC+TT: OR 0.817, 95% CI 0.776–0.860, P<0.001). In the additive model (C vs T), allele C might be a protective factor for decreasing the susceptibility to cancer (OR 0.866, 95% CI 0.840–0.893, P<0.001). The heterogeneity test is shown in Table 2 (I2>50% and P>0.10), and the fixed effects model was used for the analyses.
Table 2

Relationship between SNP of rs10505477 and cancer susceptibility

SNPNo.Pooled OR (95% CI)P valuePhet*I2Model#
TC vs TT140.876 (0.832–0.923)<0.0010.6170.0F
CC vs TT140.748 (0.703–0.795)<0.0010.8010.0F
TC+CC vs TT140.834 (0.794–0.875)<0.0010.6090.0F
CC vs TC+TT140.817 (0.776–0.860)<0.0010.8880.0F
C vs T140.866 (0.840–0.893)<0.0010.7630.0F

Notes:

P-value of the heterogeneity test.

The fixed effects model was used.

The results of subgroup analysis are summarized in Table 3. In the ethnicity analysis, decreased cancer risk was found in either the Caucasian or Asian population. According to the source of controls, all the five models based on population-based studies showed statistical significance with regard to decreasing the risk of cancers (OR<1, P<0.001), whereas no significant difference was found in hospital-based studies (P>0.05). In studies using Taqman as the genotyping method, all models had a marked association with lower cancer susceptibility. For studies using the MassARRAY method, a significant relationship was found in homozygote comparison – recessive model and additive model. Significant correlations with decreased CRC risk were observed in all the models. Subject to the amount of included studies, other types of cancer have not been analyzed.
Table 3

The subgroup analysis of rs10505477 and cancer susceptibility

SubgroupNo.Homozygote
Heterozygote
Dominant model
Recessive model
Additive model
OR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)P
Ethnicity14
Caucasian110.737 (0.689–0.788)<0.0010.857 (0.810–0.906)<0.0010.817 (0.775–0.862)<0.0010.817 (0.772–0.864)<0.0010.859 (0.831–0.888)<0.001
Asian30.814 (0.694–0.954)0.0110.995 (0.870–1.137)0.9380.933 (0.823–1.059)0.2840.817 (0.715–0.934)0.0030.905 (0.836–0.981)0.015
Source14
PB110.746 (0.700–0.794)<0.0010.877 (0.832–0.925)0.0010.834 (0.793–0.877)<0.0010.812 (0.770–0.856)<0.0010.864 (0.837–0.892)<0.001
HB30.788 (0.602–1.031)0.0820.852 (0.674–1.077)0.1790.833 (0.668–1.040)0.1070.900 (0.728–1.113)0.3330.899 (0.787–1.026)0.115
Method14
Taqman60.729 (0.667–0.797)<0.0010.848 (0.787–0.914)<0.0010.809 (0.753–0.868)<0.0010.815 (0.757–0.878)<0.0010.854 (0.817–0.893)<0.001
MassARRAY40.820 (0.705–0.953)0.0100.932 (0.821–1.058)0.2790.896 (0.896–1.009)0.0710.858 (0.757–0.973)0.0170.907 (0.842–0.978)0.011
tagSNP1----------
SNPlex20.702 (0.617–0.799)<0.0010.845 (0.758–0.942)0.0020.812 (0.692–0.953)0.0110.785 (0.705–0.873)0.9470.840 (0.788–0.895)<0.001
Genechip1----------
Cancer14
CRC110.745 (0.700–0.794)<0.0010.875 (0.829–0.922)<0.0010.832 (0.791–0.875)<0.0010.816 (0.774–0.860)<0.0010.865 (0.838–0.892)<0.001
ALL1----------
LC1----------
GC1----------

Rs7837328 and cancer susceptibility

Rs7837328 – another locus on lncRNA CASC8 – is associated with the risk of cancer susceptibility as shown in Table 4. Compared to the wild genotype (GG), the heterozygote genotype (GA) and the homozygote genotype (AA) were associated with increased risks of cancer (ORs were 1.209 and 1.336, 95% CIs were 1.127–1.298 and 1.202–1.484, respectively). Moreover, we drew the same conclusion in a dominant model (OR 1.236, 95% CI 1.156–1.322, P<0.001) and a recessive model (OR 1.204, 95% CI 1.092–1.328, P<0.001). In an additive model, allele A could significantly increase the risk of cancer as compared with allele G (OR 1.169, 95% CI 1.114–1.227, P<0.001). Heterogeneity test results are listed in Table 4; owing to I2<50% and P>0.1, the fixed effects models were used.
Table 4

Relationship between SNP of rs7837328 and cancer susceptibility

SNPNo.Pooled OR (95% CI)P valuePhetaI2Model
GA vs GG61.209 (1.127–1.298)<0.0010.9930.0F
AA vs GG61.336 (1.202–1.484)<0.0010.4780.0F
GA+AA vs GG61.236 (1.156–1.322)<0.0010.9410.0F
AA vs GA+GG61.204 (1.092–1.328)<0.0010.33512.5F
A vs G61.169 (1.114–1.227)<0.0010.5140.0Fb

Note:

Heterogeneity test;

the fixed effects model.

Subgroup analysis was conducted by means of ethnicity, source of controls, genotyping methods, and cancer types. The results were revealed in Table 5. In different ethnicities, the additive, dominant, and genetic models of the Caucasian population had statistical significance in increasing cancer susceptibility (P<0.05). All models in the Asian population obtained a significant result in increasing the cancer risk (P<0.001). Significant results were found in all the genetic models for population-based studies (P<0.001). For the pooled results in hospital-based studies, in addition to a dominant model (P=0.151) and heterozygote comparison (P=0.489), other models showed a statistically significant effect on the cancer risk (P<0.05). In a subgroup analysis of cancer types, dominant models in CRC and pCa had a statistical association with increasing cancer susceptibility (P< 0.05). The additive model of pCa suggested a similar result (OR 1.147, 95% CI 1.045–1.258, P=0.004).
Table 5

The subgroup analysis of rs7837328 and cancer susceptibility

SubgroupNo.Homozygote
Heterozygote
Dominant model
Recessive model
Additive model
OR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)POR (95% CI)P
Ethnicity6
Caucasian21.366 (1.084–1.721)0.0081.266 (1.064–1.506)0.0081.291 (1.096–1.521)0.0021.188 (0.966–1.461)0.1021.182 (1.058–1.321)0.003
Asian41.328 (1.180–1.495)<0.0011.199 (1.109–1.295)<0.0011.226 (1.139–1.319)<0.0011.209 (1.082–1.351)0.0011.166 (1.105–1.230)<0.001
Source6
Population-based41.320 (1.187–1.469)<0.0011.210 (1.126–1.299)<0.0011.233 (1.152–1.319)<0.0011.188 (1.076–1.312)0.0011.163 (1.108–1.222)<0.001
Hospital-based22.126 (1.077–4.195)0.0301.207 (0.708–2.059)0.4891.439 (0.876–2.363)0.1511.960 (1.073–3.577)0.0281.468 (1.047–2.057)0.026
Method6
Taqman22.126 (1.077–4.195)0.0301.207 (0.708–2.059)0.4891.439 (0.876–2.363)0.1511.960 (1.073–1.073)0.0281.468 (1.047–2.057)0.026
Illumina1----------
PCR1----------
SNPlex1----------
MassARRAY1----------
Cancer6
CRC21.360 (1.200–1.542)<0.0011.201 (1.107–1.302)<0.0011.232 (1.141–1.331)<0.0011.474 (0.873–2.488)0.1461.260 (0.989–1.604)0.061
pCa41.279 (1.054–1.553)0.0131.238 (1.071–1.430)0.0041.249 (1.090–1.432)0.0011.127 (0.947–1.341)0.1781.147 (1.045–1.258)0.004

Influential analysis

In this study, we used the “influence analysis-metaninf ” method as a sensitivity analysis method to assess the reliability of this meta-analysis. After individually excluding studies, the combined effect of the OR value revealed no significant change; therefore, the results of this analysis are reliable.

Publication bias

Both Begg’s and Egger’s tests were used to estimate publication bias of rs10505477 and rs7837328 in this meta-analysis. Begg’s funnel plots of both polymorphisms were basically symmetrical; therefore, no publication bias was found in both loci. By Egger’ test, P-values were 0.061 and 0.746 for rs10505477 and rs7837328, respectively, but none of them had statistical significance.

Discussion

This is an updated meta-analysis on all available studies to assess the overall cancer risk with rs10505477 and rs7837328 polymorphisms in the CASC8 gene. The results showed that rs10505477 (T>C) and rs7837328 (G>A) polymorphisms were related to the risk of all kinds of cancers. In a subgroup analysis of cancer types, significant correlations of rs10505477 with decreased CRC risk were observed. Rs7837328 was suggested to be associated with the risks of CRC and pCa. A malignant tumor that develops between the dentate line of the digestive tract and the sigmoid colon, CRC is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in males and the second in females, with more than 1.2 million new patients and 608,700 deaths evaluated to have occurred in 2008.28 pCa refers to epithelial malignancies that occur in the prostate. It was reported that pCa was the second most common cause of cancer in US men among non-cutaneous cancers.29 Molecular epidemiology has increasingly shown that SNPs play a crucial role in the progression of cancer, including CRC and pCa. In recent years, GWAS have authenticated five SNPs (rs6983267, rs10505477, rs7837328, rs10505477, and rs16892766) located in the 8q23–8q24 chromosome region, which had a strong correlation with the development of CRC.13,30–32 SNPs, as third-generation genetic biomarkers, are widely distributed in the human genome and have good stability and high density. They can effectively reflect the differences of individuals to a certain extent, which has gradually become an important tool for medical research and molecular biology studies. The mechanism by which the CASC8 gene modifies cancer susceptibility is still unknown. The possible role of CASC8 in cancer development is as follows: CASC8 is located near the MYC gene in the region of 8q24.1 – a known gene desert containing multiple enhancer elements in the proximity of the MYC gene, associated with several cancers, including pCa and CRC.33 These enhancers regulate transcription of the MYC gene through an interaction with the CASC8 promoter.5 The pathogenesis is speculated to be as follows: First, the rs10505477 allele could disrupt the correlation between CASC8 and the cognate gene POU5F1B (POU class 5 homeobox 1 pseudogene 1), whose carcinoma susceptibility is well known.34 Thus, the mutant allele suppresses some transcription elements to act as the promoter of the POU5F1B gene.14 Second, it was reported that a strong linkage disequilibrium (LD) was found between several loci (rs10505477,35 rs7837328,27 and rs701434636) and rs6983267, which is located at 8q24 and has confirmed to be related to CRC, pCa, and kidney cancer susceptibility, among others.13,37,38 Resequencing and detailed determination of the regional LD indicated that rs6983267 could be a casual variation in disease. However, the variant is located in a gene desert.39 The oncogene MYC, the proximal gene, is ~335 kb telomeres from the risk region, which is abnormally expressed in several cancers, including CRC.40 Therefore, the rs10505477 and rs7837328 loci might indirectly affect the risk of CRC through their LD link with the cancer susceptibility-related rs6983267 locus. Multiple polymorphisms in the 8q24 region have been proved to have a significant association with pCa risk that could be drawn in both case–control association and genetic linkage studies. Salinas et al confirmed that several 8q24 SNPs of western European descent and the centromeric- specific boundary of the 8q24 region are significantly associated with the risk of pCa, including rs6983267.25 In an ethnicity subgroup analysis, we validated positive results in both Caucasian and Asian populations, wherein the aberrant expression of the mutant allele of rs10505477 indeed increased the risk of cancers. The ethnicity analysis of rs7837328 drew a significant conclusion in the Caucasian population, but negative results in the Asian population. The reason may be that although rs7837328 and the risk of CRC had been confirmed by GWAS, its correlation with pCa is still uncertain in Asians, particularly the Chinese. In southern Chinese, rs7837328 was reported to not be associated with PCa.26 Interestingly, a statistically significant result was found in the northern Chinese Han population, for both of the alleles (P=0.004) and genotypes (P=0.008).15 This discrepancy may be explained by daily lifestyle, dietary habits, geographic climate, ethnic diversity, and so on. According to the relevant literature so far, in addition to another meta-analysis of 8q23-24-related loci and CRC in 2015,41 this is the first study on the relationship between these loci and cancer susceptibility. Besides, our data are relatively new, with the latest data from 2016. In addition, we conducted a detailed subgroup analysis of ethnicity, source, genotyping, and cancer types, with high reliability. The limitations of this study are as follows: first, the sample size was not large, and unpublished studies may exist that could introduce a potential publication bias; second, the research only studied the relationship between gene polymorphisms and cancer risks, ignoring environmental factors and the interaction of gene–environment; and third, due to data limitations, no tumor staging was discussed. In conclusion, our meta-analysis showed that the rs10505477 (T>C) and rs7837328 (G>A) polymorphisms were related to the risk of cancer. Although limitations exist, future more rigorous studies are warranted to confirm this result.
  41 in total

1.  Genetic variation in 8q24 associated with risk of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Stephen B Gruber; Victor Moreno; Laura S Rozek; Hedy S Rennerts; Flavio Lejbkowicz; Joseph D Bonner; Joel K Greenson; Thomas J Giordano; Eric R Fearson; Gad Rennert
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.742

2.  Effect of rs6983267 polymorphism in the 8q24 region and rs4444903 polymorphism in EGF gene on the risk of sporadic colorectal cancer in Iranian population.

Authors:  A Daraei; R Salehi; M Salehi; M H Emami; M Janghorbani; M Jonghorbani; F Mohamadhashem; H Tavakoli
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 3.064

3.  Genetic heterogeneity in colorectal cancer associations between African and European americans.

Authors:  Sonia S Kupfer; Jeffrey R Anderson; Stanley Hooker; Andrew Skol; Rick A Kittles; Temitope O Keku; Robert S Sandler; Nathan A Ellis
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-07-24       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 4.  The long noncoding RNA regulation at the MYC locus.

Authors:  Jian-Feng Xiang; Li Yang; Ling-Ling Chen
Journal:  Curr Opin Genet Dev       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 5.578

5.  A range of cancers is associated with the rs6983267 marker on chromosome 8.

Authors:  Dominika Wokolorczyk; Bartlomiej Gliniewicz; Andrzej Sikorski; Elzbieta Zlowocka; Bartlomiej Masojc; Tadeusz Debniak; Joanna Matyjasik; Marek Mierzejewski; Krzysztof Medrek; Dorota Oszutowska; Janina Suchy; Jacek Gronwald; Urszula Teodorczyk; Tomasz Huzarski; Tomasz Byrski; Anna Jakubowska; Bohdan Górski; Thierry van de Wetering; Swietlana Walczak; Steven A Narod; Jan Lubinski; Cezary Cybulski
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 12.701

6.  Association of 17 prostate cancer susceptibility loci with prostate cancer risk in Chinese men.

Authors:  Siqun Lilly Zheng; Ann W Hsing; Jielin Sun; Lisa W Chu; Kai Yu; Ge Li; Zhengrong Gao; Seong-Tae Kim; William B Isaacs; Ming-Chang Shen; Yu-Tang Gao; Robert N Hoover; Jianfeng Xu
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 4.104

7.  Investigation of the colorectal cancer susceptibility region on chromosome 8q24.21 in a large German case-control sample.

Authors:  Clemens Schafmayer; Stephan Buch; Henry Völzke; Witigo von Schönfels; Jan Hendrik Egberts; Bodo Schniewind; Mario Brosch; Andreas Ruether; Andre Franke; Micaela Mathiak; Bence Sipos; Tobias Henopp; Jasmin Catalcali; Stephan Hellmig; Abdou ElSharawy; Alexander Katalinic; Markus M Lerch; Ulrich John; Ulrich R Fölsch; Fred Fändrich; Holger Kalthoff; Stefan Schreiber; Michael Krawczak; Jürgen Tepel; Jochen Hampe
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 7.396

8.  Association of chromosome 8q variants with prostate cancer risk in Caucasian and Hispanic men.

Authors:  Joke Beuten; Jonathan A L Gelfond; Margarita L Martinez-Fierro; Korri S Weldon; AnaLisa C Crandall; Augusto Rojas-Martinez; Ian M Thompson; Robin J Leach
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 4.944

9.  Common variant in 6q26-q27 is associated with distal colon cancer in an Asian population.

Authors:  R Cui; Y Okada; S G Jang; J L Ku; J G Park; Y Kamatani; N Hosono; T Tsunoda; V Kumar; C Tanikawa; N Kamatani; R Yamada; M Kubo; Y Nakamura; K Matsuda
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2011-01-17       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  Risk of eighteen genome-wide association study-identified genetic variants for colorectal cancer and colorectal adenoma in Han Chinese.

Authors:  Chunwen Tan; Wangxiong Hu; Yanqin Huang; Jiaojiao Zhou; Shu Zheng
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-11-22
View more
  9 in total

1.  Correlation between Genomic Variants and Worldwide Epidemiology of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Giovana Miranda Vieira; Laura Patrícia Albarello Gellen; Diana Feio da Veiga Borges Leal; Lucas Favacho Pastana; Lui Wallacy Morikawa Souza Vinagre; Vitória Teixeira Aquino; Marianne Rodrigues Fernandes; Paulo Pimentel de Assumpção; Rommel Mario Rodríguez Burbano; Sidney Emanuel Batista Dos Santos; Ney Pereira Carneiro Dos Santos
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 4.141

2.  Association between genetic variations at 8q24 and prostate cancer risk in Mexican Men.

Authors:  B Silva-Ramirez; E J Macías-González; O S Frausto-Valdes; M B Calao-Pérez; D I Ibarra-Pérez; J E Torres-García; A R Aragón-Tovar; K Peñuelas-Urquides; L A González-Escalante; M Bermúdez de León
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 5.455

3.  High Cancer Susceptibility Candidate 8 Expression Is Associated With Poor Prognosis of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Validated Analysis Based on Four Cancer Databases.

Authors:  Yingyi Wang; Yuemei Yang; Yanfeng Wang; Xiaoou Li; Yu Xiao; Wenze Wang
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2020-06-04

4.  Identification and Development of Long Non-coding RNA Associated Regulatory Network in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Wenjuan Zhu; Wenzhe Gao; Yanyao Deng; Xiao Yu; Hongwei Zhu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  CASC8 lncRNA Promotes the Proliferation of Retinoblastoma Cells Through Downregulating miR34a Methylation.

Authors:  Bo Yang; Baoyu Gu; Jing Zhang; Long Xu; Yong Sun
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 3.989

6.  Comprehensive analysis of an immune infiltrate-related competitive endogenous RNA network reveals potential prognostic biomarkers for non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Cai-Zhi Yang; Lei-Hao Hu; Zhong-Yu Huang; Li Deng; Wei Guo; Shan Liu; Xi Xiao; Hong-Xing Yang; Jie-Tao Lin; Ling-Ling Sun; Li-Zhu Lin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Development of epithelial-mesenchymal transition-related lncRNA signature for predicting survival and immune microenvironment in pancreatic cancerwithexperiment validation.

Authors:  Yong Gao; Jinhui Liu; Baobao Cai; Qun Chen; Guangfu Wang; Zipeng Lu; Kuirong Jiang; Yi Miao
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 3.269

8.  The combined prognostic model of copper-dependent to predict the prognosis of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Xiao Guan; Na Lu; Jianping Zhang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 4.772

9.  Supervariants identification for breast cancer.

Authors:  Jianchang Hu; Ting Li; Shiying Wang; Heping Zhang
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2020-08-17       Impact factor: 2.344

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.