Literature DB >> 30286759

Molecular network-based identification of competing endogenous RNAs and mRNA signatures that predict survival in prostate cancer.

Ning Xu1,2, Yu-Peng Wu2, Hu-Bin Yin1, Xue-Yi Xue2, Xin Gou3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is described the regulatory mechanisms and prognostic values of differentially expressed RNAs in prostate cancer and construct an mRNA signature that predicts survival.
METHODS: The RNA profiles of 499 prostate cancer tissues and 52 non-prostate cancer tissues from TCGA were analyzed. The differential expression of RNAs was examined using the edgeR package. Survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. microRNA (miRNA), messenger RNA (mRNA), and long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) networks from the miRcode database were constructed, based on the differentially expressed RNAs between non-prostate and prostate cancer tissues.
RESULTS: A total of 773 lncRNAs, 1417 mRNAs, and 58 miRNAs were differentially expressed between non-prostate and prostate cancer samples. The newly constructed ceRNA network comprised 63 prostate cancer-specific lncRNAs, 13 miRNAs, and 18 mRNAs. Three of 63 differentially expressed lncRNAs and 1 of 18 differentially expressed mRNAs were significantly associated with overall survival in prostate cancer (P value < 0.05). After the univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, 4 mRNAs (HOXB5, GPC2, PGA5, and AMBN) were screened and used to establish a predictive model for the overall survival of patients. Our ROC curve analysis revealed that the 4-mRNA signature performed well.
CONCLUSION: These ceRNAs may play a critical role in the progression and metastasis of prostate cancer and are thus candidate therapeutic targets and potential prognostic biomarkers. A novel model that incorporated these candidates was established and might provide more powerful prognostic information in predicting survival in prostate cancer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  4-mRNA signature; Competing endogenous RNAs; Prostate cancer; Survival

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30286759      PMCID: PMC6172814          DOI: 10.1186/s12967-018-1637-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Transl Med        ISSN: 1479-5876            Impact factor:   5.531


Background

In men, prostate cancer remains the second leading cause of deaths due to cancer in the US [1]. Approximately 26,000 men were expected to die from prostate cancer in 2016 [2]. Siegel et al. [2] also estimated that many patients with advanced prostate cancer will develop castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Previous studies [3-6] have reported that there are several treatment options for CRPC, including chemotherapy, androgen receptor-targeted agents, and radiopharmaceuticals. Nevertheless, there are currently no effective biomarkers for the early diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. Morphological, immunological, and molecular features have been used to predict the progression and prognosis of prostate cancers [7, 8]. Over the past several decades, urologists have devoted much effort toward identifying prostate cancer-related protein-coding genes [9]. However, only approximately 2% of all transcripts in mammals are protein-coding RNAs [10]. Thus, the functions of non-coding RNAs should be examined [11]. Previous studies [12-16] proposed a competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) hypothesis, which described an intricate post-transcriptional regulatory network in which mRNAs, lncRNAs, and other RNAs act as natural miRNA sponges to weaken the function of miRNA via sharing one or more miRNA response elements. In this study, a ceRNA network was constructed to identify the ceRNAs that are involved in prostate cancer using data from the TCGA database. The RNA profiles of 499 prostate cancer tissues and 52 non-prostate cancer tissues were analyzed. Finally, a prostate cancer-associated ceRNA network was established, based on our bioinformatics prediction and correlation analysis, consisting of 63 lncRNAs, 13 miRNAs, and 18 mRNAs. We examined the functions of the differentially expressed miRNAs that we identified and developed a novel model using several candidates to predict survival in prostate cancer patients. This study aimed to identify prostate cancer-specific RNAs as ceRNAs that regulate target genes and are involved in the pathogenesis and prognosis of prostate cancer.

Methods

Data collection

RNA profiles of prostate cancer and control samples were downloaded from the genomic data commons (GDC) data portal and the cancer genome atlas (TCGA, https://tcga-data.nci.nih.gov/tcga/) database. A total of 551 samples were collected, comprising 499 primary prostate cancer samples and 52 normal solid tissue samples.

Differential gene expression analysis

mRNA, lncRNA, and miRNA expression in the prostate cancer samples were analyzed using the RNASeqV2 and Illumina HiSeq 2000 miRNA sequencing platforms. Samples were divided into prostate cancer tissues versus adjacent non-tumor tissues to identify differentially expressed RNAs using edgeR. Differences in the expression of each RNA between prostate cancer and adjacent non-tumor tissue were expressed as fold-change and the associated P value. Downregulated and upregulated RNAs were defined as those that decreased and increased by a fold-change of > 1.5, respectively, with an FDR-adjusted P of < 0.05.

Construction of the ceRNA network

The regulatory network was constructed using data on the mRNAs, lncRNAs, and miRNAs. First, prostate cancer-specific RNAs, including mRNAs, lncRNAs, and miRNAs, were filtered. Downregulated and upregulated RNAs were assigned fold-changes > 1.5 with FDR-adjusted P < 0.05. Then, the mRNAs that were targeted by miRNAs were predicted using Targetscan (http://www.targetscan.org/), miRTarBase (http://mirtarbase.mbc.nctu.edu.tw/), and miRDB (http://www.mirdb.org/). Next, miRanda Tools (http://www.microrna.org/microrna/home.do) was used to predict the interactions between lncRNAs and miRNAs. Finally, miRNAs that regulated the expression of both lncRNAs and mRNAs were selected for construction of the ceRNA network using Cytoscape v.3.8.5.

Survival analysis and definition of mRNA-related prognostic model

The association between differentially expressed mRNAs and overall survival was evaluated by univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis using the R survival package. Only mRNAs with P < 0.01 were considered to be candidates and selected for multivariate Cox regression analysis. The best explanatory and most informative predictive model was identified using Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), which assesses the goodness of fit of a statistical model.

Gene ontology and pathway analysis

To understand the underlying biological processes and pathways between differentially expressed genes in the ceRNA network, the database for annotation, visualization, and integrated discovery (DAVID) (http://david.abcc.ncifcrf.gov/) was used to perform functional enrichment analysis. Then, significantly differentially expressed mRNAs were analyzed in the gene ontology (GO) database (http://www.geneontology.org). Finally, significantly enriched GO terms were selected to analyze their biological function. The kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (KEGG; http://www.kegg.jp/) was used to perform the pathway enrichment analysis.

Survival analysis of key members in the ceRNA network

The clinical data on the patients were combined with prostate cancer data in TCGA to evaluate the prognostic value of differential RNAs in the ceRNA network. Survival curves were generated using the survival package in R for samples with differentially expressed mRNAs, lncRNAs, and miRNAs. Survival was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier method, and P values < 0.05 were considered to be significant.

Results

Identification of significantly differentially expressed lncRNAs

In this study, 551 samples were obtained from the TCGA database. Differential expression was analyzed by comparing the expression of 14,254 lncRNAs in prostate cancer and adjacent normal prostate tissues in the TCGA database. Fold-change > 1.5 and P value < 0.05 were set as cutoffs to identify significantly differentially expressed lncRNAs. As a result, 773 differentially expressed lncRNAs between prostate cancer and adjacent normal prostate tissue were obtained—of which 414 were upregulated and 359 were downregulated (Fig. 1; Table 1).
Fig. 1

Heat maps of differentially expressed messenger RNAs (mRNAs) in prostate cancer

Table 1

Top differential mRNAs for prostate cancer

logFClogCPMP valueFDR
SERPINA5− 6.789544.39256800
MFSD2A− 5.970253.45148500
ACSL6− 4.995972.4040131.15E−2996.83E−296
MCF2− 5.268550.9261995.45E−2642.43E−260
EMX2− 6.790592.242423.15E−2611.12E−257
HOXB8− 6.249651.0442488.97E−2522.67E−248
CLDN2− 7.918873.2175251.31E−2483.34E−245
AKR1B1− 3.877365.7103261.39E−2393.11E−236
SPINK2− 7.419922.6754299.55E−2381.89E−234
CYP19A1− 5.40444− 1.228838.73E−2361.56E−232
Heat maps of differentially expressed messenger RNAs (mRNAs) in prostate cancer Top differential mRNAs for prostate cancer

Identification of significantly differentially expressed mRNAs and miRNAs

A total of 19,660 mRNAs and 1881 miRNAs were identified from the TCGA database. Using fold-change > 1.5 and P value < 0.05 as cutoffs, we identified 1417 differentially expressed mRNAs (744 downregulated and 673 upregulated) (Fig. 2; Table 2) and 58 differentially expressed miRNAs (16 downregulated and 42 upregulated) (Fig. 3; Table 3).
Fig. 2

Heat maps of differential long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in prostate cancer

Table 2

Top differential lncRNAs for prostate cancer

lncRNAslogFClogCPMP valueFDR
EMX2OS− 5.981429.0233933.19E−2142.45E−210
LINC02137− 5.286234.2281843.37E−1641.30E−160
LINC01116− 3.595946.4255973.66E−1539.36E−150
LINC00839− 4.306165.9073861.92E−1523.69E−149
AL161645.1− 4.95434.2779513.17E−1524.87E−149
AC012123.1− 4.638264.0536667.30E−1509.35E−147
AL354793.1− 5.458763.3748453.31E−1393.63E−136
LINC02385− 5.34653.1722875.10E−1194.90E−116
HOXB-AS3− 5.229435.1543661.02E−1098.72E−107
AC005674.1− 3.989913.538961.86E−991.43E−96
Fig. 3

Heat maps of differential micro RNAs (miRNAs) in prostate cancer

Table 3

Top differential miRNAs for prostate cancer

miRNAslogFClogCPMP valueFDR
hsa-mir-891a− 4.854318794.0021765791.55E−1757.68E−173
hsa-mir-892a− 5.149514076− 0.2572151783.34E−878.31E−85
hsa-mir-1224− 3.6611416060.1258080011.07E−551.78E−53
hsa-mir-931.79780050611.663614712.95E−553.67E−53
hsa-mir-23c− 2.9637690321.2703900088.13E−537.72E−51
hsa-mir-1251− 2.7638161121.7335256519.33E−537.72E−51
hsa-mir-204− 1.842934454.584077291.85E−501.31E−48
hsa-mir-323b− 2.3185791190.5395673348.77E−424.36E−40
hsa-mir-200c1.58456662813.504468432.04E−409.21E−39
hsa-mir-961.9878727254.7145520692.35E−399.75E−38
Heat maps of differential long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in prostate cancer Top differential lncRNAs for prostate cancer Heat maps of differential micro RNAs (miRNAs) in prostate cancer Top differential miRNAs for prostate cancer

Predictions of mRNAs and lncRNAs targeted by miRNAs

Next, we predicted the mRNAs and lncRNAs that were targeted by miRNAs, focusing on the relationship between the 58 differentially expressed miRNAs and 773 differentially expressed lncRNAs above. Only 13 of 58 differentially expressed miRNAs were predicted to target 63 of 773 differentially expressed lncRNAs. The relationships between these 13 differentially expressed lncRNA-targeting miRNAs were used to predict the targeted mRNAs using Targetscan, miRTarBase, and miRDB. Then, 13 prostate cancer-specific miRNAs were predicted to target the 644 mRNAs. After 644 mRNAs were found, the intersection of 644 mRNAs and 19,660 differentially expressed mRNAs between prostate cancer and adjacent normal prostate tissue were performed. Finally, 18 mRNAs were obtained from the 644 mRNAs. Overall, 63 lncRNAs, 13 miRNAs, and 18 mRNAs were selected to construct the lncRNA-miRNA-mRNA ceRNA network using Cytoscape 3.8.5 (Fig. 4; Tables 4 and 5).
Fig. 4

CeRNA network in prostate cancer. The blue nodes represent decreased expression, and the red nodes represent increased expression. Rectangles represent miRNAs, ellipses represent protein-coding genes, and diamonds represent lncRNAs; gray edges indicate lncRNA-miRNA-mRNA interactions

Table 4

Representative interactions between lncRNAs and miRNAs for prostate cancer

lncRNAmiRNA
KIAA0087hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-183, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-375
SHANK2-AS3hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-187, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-122
FAM87Ahsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-506, hsa-mir-375
LINC00313hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-372, hsa-mir-187, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-122, hsa-mir-375
AC092811.1hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-204
UCA1hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-184, hsa-mir-122, hsa-mir-506
AP001652.1hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-137, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-183, hsa-mir-204
ATP11A-AS1hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-372, hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-187, hsa-mir-122
NALCN-AS1hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-372, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-508, hsa-mir-506
ERVH48-1hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-137, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-184, hsa-mir-187, hsa-mir-508
MAGI2-AS3hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-372, hsa-mir-137, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-508, hsa-mir-122
PCAT1hsa-mir-93, hsa-mir-372, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-122, hsa-mir-506, hsa-mir-375
FRMD6-AS2hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-184, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-375
LINC00261hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-183, hsa-mir-204, hsa-mir-508, hsa-mir-506, hsa-mir-375
Table 5

Representative interactions between miRNAs and mRNAs for prostate cancer

miRNAmRNA
hsa-mir-122-5pHECW2, DUSP2, ORC2, CLIC4, SLC7A1, BROX, SLC52A2, PKM, NFX1, ANKRD13C, PRKRA, GNPDA2, GYS1, CCNG1, PIP4K2A, RBL1, RBM43, CCDC43, TNRC6A, ALDOA, FAM117B, G6PC3, NPEPPS, TGFBRAP1, HECTD3, SLC9A1, AKT3, PHF14, GALNT3, NT5C3A, P4HA1, FUNDC2
hsa-mir-137CTBP1, MITF, HNRNPDL, SLC1A5, EOGT, PTGS2, NCOA3, GLO1, YTHDF3, GLIPR1, FMNL2, RREB1, SNRK, E2F6, KIT, DR1, YBX1, GIGYF1, SFT2D3, RORA, AGO4, NCOA2, CSE1L, LIMCH1, PXN, PAPD7, KDM1A, ESRRA, ZNF326
hsa-mir-182-5pFLOT1, SESN2, BDNF, PLEKHA8, MTSS1, CITED2, CLOCK, MITF, NR3C1, TCEAL7, FBXW7, THBS1, EVI5, FGF9, FOXO3, KDM5A, CHL1, NPTX1, ADCY6, ULBP2, HOXA9, LSM14A, NUFIP2, PRKAA2, RARG, BRWD1, CYLD, TP53INP1, FOXF2, RECK
hsa-mir-183-5pGLUL, ARHGAP21, FOXN2, LRP6, SRSF2, KIF2A, RCN2, TMED7, NR3C1, FOXO1, SH3D19, PPP2CB, KLHL24, EZR, RALGDS, SUCO, AKAP12, FAM217B, ZEB1, CTDSPL, KLRD1, ARFGAP2, KIF5C, CCNB1, NUFIP2, DAP, ITGB1, KLHL23, PDCD4, FAM175B, CELF1, IDH2, GNG5, PRRC1, PDCD6
hsa-mir-184LRRC8A
hsa-mir-187-3pDYRK2
hsa-mir-204-5pZFHX3, CREB5, CCNT2, RAB22A, CAPRIN1, M6PR, USP47, TGFBR2, ARAP2, AKAP1, MAPRE2, HAS2, HNRNPA2B1, JARID2, KLHL40, ANGPTL2, PHF13, SH3PXD2A, SAMD5, AP1S2, HOXC8, MAP1LC3B, SP1, RAB40B, RUNX2, FOXC1, COL5A3, MBNL1, SIRT1, CHRDL1, PPP3R1, IKZF2, FARP1, SGPL1, ARHGAP29, PRLR, ZCCHC24, PRDM2, AP1S1, TPPP, ANKFY1, CDH2, ITPR1, SERINC3, SLC43A1, RAB10, WWC3, ANKRD13A, EDEM1, ZBTB22, NPTX1, SLC22A6, ALPL, SYNJ2BP, TMTC2, NTRK2, BCL2, PTPRT, THRB, ELOVL6, SPOP, TCF12, EZR, CHORDC1, HCAR2, IL11, SLC39A9, BIRC2
hsa-mir-372-3pZNF532, WEE1, LATS2, SLC22A23, DUSP2, RAB11FIP1, TMEM100, FAM102B, SLAIN2, NR2C2, FEM1C, KLF3, MED17, DPP8, HABP4, MBNL2, ARID4B, PLA2G12A, ATAD2, PFKP, ULK1, CLIP4, TGFBR2, MKNK2, CUL3, ZNF385A, UNK, SERF1B, YOD1, TFAP4, SAR1B, PSD3, CADM2, DAZAP2, ZFYVE26, SIK1, IGF1R, TAOK1, IRF2, MIXL1, SBNO1, SUZ12, TXNIP, SUCO, ELAVL2, INO80D, GALNT3, LEFTY1, BTG1, MPP5, TMEM19, ELK4, HIP1, CREBRF, REST, TIMM17A, FOXJ2, OSTM1, MINK1, RHOC, RAB22A, IRAK4, LIMA1, HMBOX1, SH3GLB1, GNB5, SLC7A11, CCSAP, TNKS2, TRPS1, PAK2, KREMEN1, PTPDC1, NFIB, SERF1A, FBXL7, CPT1A, TNFAIP1, KPNA2
hsa-mir-375ELAVL4, RLF
hsa-mir-506-3pCD151, PI4K2B, NUFIP2, TMEM41A, SLC16A1, PARP16, PRR14L, CHSY1, SFT2D3, PTBP3, LRRC1, NEK9, GXYLT1, SNX18, AMOTL1, VIM, MYO10, SCAMP4, PTBP1, ZWINT, CREBRF, LRRC58, SNAI2
hsa-mir-93-5pMKNK2, KLF3, CDKN1A, GID4, SCAMP2, MAP3K2, BRMS1L, EPS15L1, SAMD12, ZNF800, PANK3, HEG1, CEP97, PPP3R1, TMEM167A, ZNF280B, ORMDL3, ZBTB18, CAPRIN2, RB1, PAFAH1B1, FBXO21, DNAJC27, FCHO2, CCDC71L, PRRG1, KLHL20, PARD6B, HAUS8, MASTL, FNBP1L, NIPA1, NRIP3, CENPQ, BMP8B, SERF1B, POLQ, RCCD1, NETO2, JAK1, NR2C2, RBBP7, PURA, MTF1, DDHD1, NKIRAS1, TET3, FRS2, MED12L, PTPN4, ADARB1, NAGK, SMAD5, AGO1, PTGFRN, HSPA8, FBXO48, PIP4K2A, TMEM64, FJX1, SOWAHC, ANKH, RRAGD, PGP, CAMTA1, DUSP2, ZBTB9, FAM57A, ZADH2, KLHL28, C9orf40, ARHGAP12, SQSTM1, RABEP1, REST, RUNX3, ARHGAP1, SLAIN2, SGTB, BTBD7, SERF1A, F3, STK17B, SFXN5, RAP2C, ZBTB41, ITCH, SEMA4B, KATNAL1, UBE2Q2, RAB10, SALL3, TMEM242, CYBRD1, RAB11FIP1, LYSMD3, TRIP10, GINS4, FAM210A, SEMA7A, STX6, KAT2B, DAB2, STAT3, ENPP5, KLF10, PPP6C, PFKP, OSTM1, RBM12B, IKZF4, DENND5B, FAM102A, CEP170, KIAA0513, TBC1D20, CEP57, CNOT6L, SACS, ZBTB4, ABHD2, POLR3G, ZFP91, FBXO31, KPNA2, FIGNL1, C3orf38, E2F5, TMEM168, RAB22A, KIAA1191, ITGB8, CRK, ZNFX1, CNOT4, GBF1, PLXNA1, TNFAIP1, MAPRE3, SHOC2, HIP1, PIP4K2C, ASF1A, LASP1, EZH1, NABP1, ANKRD33B, HBP1, BMPR2, ZNF107, USP3, RRM2, MFN2, TFAM, HMGB3, LIMA1, RHOC, EPHA4, PLEKHO2, SMOC1, RPS6KA5, ZFYVE9, UXS1, EIF5A2, OXR1, UNKL, KMT2B, FYCO1, MAP3K3, PRR14L, FOXJ2, CNOT7, TANC1, PGM2L1, VPS26A, MCL1, RAPGEF4, KIAA0922, GNB5, VPS13C, EGR2, GPATCH2, ARHGAP35, FAXC, KLF9, EPHA7, SYBU, REEP3, ATL3, CLOCK, ANKRD13C, CAPN15, SOX4, SKIL, NPAT, ATAD2, U2SURP, SESN3, RPF2, FAM126B, FAM46C, KIF23, AKTIP, MIDN, TMEM123, ATG16L1, TOPORS, EGLN3, RAB5B, ABCA1, FOXQ1, NRBP1, TGFBR2, TNKS1BP1, PITPNA, GOLGA1, MORF4L1, SCAMP5, SERTAD2, HAS2, SPOPL, ELK4, RGMB, TMEM127, RNF145, NIN, TNKS2, SLC2A4, CHAF1A, CASP2, TMEM138, WDR37, FAM117B, USP32, CERCAM, WAC, TOLLIP, CFL2, SPRED1, ARAP2, DNM1L, TXLNA, RPA2, MTMR3, SGMS1, TWF1, TP53INP1, C7orf43, CDC37L1, TXNIP, E2F1, GPR137C, TRIM37, YOD1, CSNK1G1, PPP6R3, GNS, FRMD6, PHF6, ZNF202, PLS1, BICD2, CCSER2, CMPK1, SRSF2, CIT, CRY2, SNX16, HIF1A, EIF4H, RUNDC1, C14orf28, LPGAT1, CCND1, 2-Sep, PXK, RORA, NDEL1, VLDLR, LYST, TNFRSF21, UNK, ANKIB1, CREB1, STK11, ATG14, SLC16A9, MLXIP, SIKE1, FOXJ3, GOLGA2, PPP1R3B, ZFYVE26, MYO19, IRF1, BTG3, KIAA1147, BNIP2, FEM1C, PKD2, ZNF217, MINK1, PHTF2, GIGYF1, ZNF148, ANKRD50, IRAK4, ARID4B, SLK, ERAP1, NFAT5, ANKRD12, ULK1, ZC3H12C, PPP1R15B, FBXL5, PAPOLA, TMEM245, CCNG2, DNAJB9, RLIM, DPYSL2, TADA2B, ANKRD52, PTPDC1, KLF11, PDZD11, SASH1, CHIC1, ANKRD29, IFNAR1, EFCAB14, CHD9, OCRL, OSR1, NUP35, ACSL4, RUFY2, ZNF532, MAPK1, SSX2IP, HMBOX1, DDX5, UBXN2A, PKNOX1, NCOA3, LDLR, SNTB2, GAB1, USP28, UBE2J1, DUSP8, MCC, BTBD10, FAM129A, E2F2, ELAVL2, PDE3B, SLC29A2, GPAM, MAPK9, TUSC2, SH3PXD2A, SSH2, NACC2, APBB2, ZBTB7A, CLIP4, TMBIM6, NHLRC3, MFSD8, PTP4A1, SIK1, TSG101, PBX3, SUCO, DYNC1LI2, BBX, PHC3, LAPTM4A, NPAS2, STYX, EEA1, SLC22A23, NAA30
hsa-mir-96-5pJAZF1, SLC25A25, KRAS, CNNM3, MAP3K3, EDEM1, SLC1A1, SNX7, STK17B, FOXO1, TMEM170B, APPL1, PRKAR1A, MBD4, PRDM16, ADCY6, ZEB1, EIF4EBP2, SCARB1, REV1, TSKU, ABCD1, SNX16, PPP1R9B, TRIB3, NHLRC3, PRKCE, DDIT3, MED1, CASP2, SIN3B, CCNG1, FRS2, PROK2, DDAH1, ALK, ASH1L, MORF4L1, SLC39A1
CeRNA network in prostate cancer. The blue nodes represent decreased expression, and the red nodes represent increased expression. Rectangles represent miRNAs, ellipses represent protein-coding genes, and diamonds represent lncRNAs; gray edges indicate lncRNA-miRNA-mRNA interactions Representative interactions between lncRNAs and miRNAs for prostate cancer Representative interactions between miRNAs and mRNAs for prostate cancer

Survival analysis with differentially expressed lncRNAs

To examine the relationship between the differentially expressed lncRNAs and the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer, the link between overall survival and the 63 differentially expressed lncRNAs in prostate cancer patients was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier method. Three of 63 differentially expressed lncRNAs were linked to the prognosis in prostate cancer: LINC00355 and lncRNA OSTN-AS1 were positively associated with overall survival, whereas LINC00308 correlated negatively with it (log-rank P < 0.05) (Fig. 5).
Fig. 5

Kaplan–Meier survival curves for 1 protein-coding gene RRM2 (a) and 3 lncRNAs LINC00308 (b), OSTN-AS1 (c) and LINC00355 (d) associated with overall survival in prostate cancer. P < 0.05

Kaplan–Meier survival curves for 1 protein-coding gene RRM2 (a) and 3 lncRNAs LINC00308 (b), OSTN-AS1 (c) and LINC00355 (d) associated with overall survival in prostate cancer. P < 0.05

Establishment of a 4-mRNA signature associated with overall survival in prostate cancer patients

Univariate Cox regression analysis was first used to identify prognosis-related mRNAs, identifying 21 mRNAs that were significantly related to overall survival (P < 0.01). Then, multivariate Cox regression was performed, and 4 mRNAs were ultimately selected to establish a predictive model. The predictive model was defined as the linear combination of the expression levels of the 4 mRNAs, which were weighted using the corresponding relative coefficient in the multivariate Cox regression as follows: survival risk score = (0.420 × expression value of HOXB5 + 0.794 × expression value of GPC2 + 0.947 × PGA5 + 0.473 × AMBN). All 4 mRNAs had positive coefficients in the Cox regression analysis, indicating that their high expression was associated with shorter overall survival in prostate cancer patients.

Risk stratification and ROC curve analysis

The 4-mRNA expression-based survival risk score was used to assign patients into a low-risk or high-risk group using a median risk score of 0.9558 as the cutoff. Ultimately, a total of 247 patients were assigned to the high-risk group, versus 248 in the low-risk group (Fig. 6a). The Kaplan–Meier curves for overall survival demonstrated that there was a significant difference between the 2 groups, based on the 4 mRNAs (Fig. 6b). The 5-year and 10-year overall survival rates were 96.0% and 46.3% in the high-risk group, respectively. The prognostic power of the 4-mRNA signature was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve. In this study, the area under the ROC curve was 0.904, indicating good sensitivity and specificity of the 4-mRNA signature in predicting survival in prostate cancer patients (Fig. 6c; Table 6).
Fig. 6

Prognostic evaluation of the 4-mRNA signature in prostate cancer patients. a The distribution of mRNA-related survival risk scores and heatmap of the 4 prognostic mRNAs. b Kaplan–Meier analysis of overall survival in prostate cancer patients with the 4-mRNA signature. c ROC curve analysis of the 4-mRNA signature

Table 6

Multivariate Cox regression analysis of 4 prognostic mRNAs associated with overall survival in prostate cancer patients

mRNAcoefexp(coef)se(coef)zP
HOXB50.421.5220.1552.70.00688
GPC20.7942.2130.3822.080.03735
ADCYAP1R1− 0.3960.6730.249− 1.590.11195
PGA50.9472.5770.2863.310.00094
AMBN0.4731.6050.1872.530.01139
Prognostic evaluation of the 4-mRNA signature in prostate cancer patients. a The distribution of mRNA-related survival risk scores and heatmap of the 4 prognostic mRNAs. b Kaplan–Meier analysis of overall survival in prostate cancer patients with the 4-mRNA signature. c ROC curve analysis of the 4-mRNA signature Multivariate Cox regression analysis of 4 prognostic mRNAs associated with overall survival in prostate cancer patients

Functional assessment

The functions of the differentially expressed mRNAs in the ceRNA network were determined using DAVID bioinformatics resources. The results demonstrated that 7 GO terms and 19 enriched KEGG pathways were involved in the ceRNA network (Fig. 7; Table 7).
Fig. 7

Plot of enriched GO and KEGG terms for the differentially expressed genes. a Plot of enriched GO terms for differentially expressed mRNAs. b, c Plot of enriched KEGG pathways for differentially expressed mRNAs. GO gene ontology, KEGG kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes, FDR false discovery rate

Table 7

KEEG pathways enriched by mRNAs

Pathway IDDescriptionP-valueCount
hsa04970Salivary secretion1.38E−0614
hsa05204Chemical carcinogenesis2.65E−0613
hsa00982Drug metabolism—cytochrome P4502.77E−0612
hsa00980Metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P4505.08E−0612
hsa04972Pancreatic secretion1.58E−0513
hsa04918Thyroid hormone synthesis0.00015610
hsa04971Gastric acid secretion0.00017510
hsa00053Ascorbate and aldarate metabolism0.0002136
hsa04610Complement and coagulation cascades0.0002710
hsa04924Renin secretion0.0002769
hsa00830Retinol metabolism0.0003119
hsa00140Steroid hormone biosynthesis0.0006968
hsa00040Pentose and glucuronate interconversions0.0007956
hsa00590Arachidonic acid metabolism0.0009748
hsa00983Drug metabolism—other enzymes0.0011859
hsa04979Cholesterol metabolism0.0012387
hsa04966Collecting duct acid secretion0.0017545
hsa04923Regulation of lipolysis in adipocytes0.001967
hsa04974Protein digestion and absorption0.0029619
Plot of enriched GO and KEGG terms for the differentially expressed genes. a Plot of enriched GO terms for differentially expressed mRNAs. b, c Plot of enriched KEGG pathways for differentially expressed mRNAs. GO gene ontology, KEGG kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes, FDR false discovery rate KEEG pathways enriched by mRNAs

Discussion

Differentially expressed lncRNAs that correlated significantly with OS were identified by constructing an lncRNA-miRNA-mRNA ceRNA network, based on specific criteria in a large sample of prostate cancer patients in the TCGA database. Thus, there are potential interactions between mRNAs, lncRNAs, and miRNAs in the progression and metastasis of prostate cancer. In this study, ceRNA networks for prostate cancer were built by bioinformatics prediction and correlation analysis of data on significantly differentially expressed mRNAs, lncRNAs, and miRNAs. Further, considering the associations between cancer-specific ceRNAs and clinical characteristics, 3 lncRNAs (LINC00308, OSTN-AS1 and LINC00355) were related to the clinical prognosis. Moreover, 4 mRNAs (HOXB5, GPC2, PGA5, and AMBN) which screened to establish a predictive model were also associated with the clinical prognosis. Both 3 lncRNAs and 4 mRNAs are important because these RNAs are associated with overall survival of patients. These RNAs might provide more powerful prognostic information in predicting survival in prostate cancer. The mechanisms that underlie the progression and metastasis of prostate cancer remain unknown. However, our understanding of the genesis and characteristics of prostate cancer has grown because of the development of high-throughput sequencing and bioinformatics. Recently, Liu et al. [17] revealed that miRNA genes can be considered tumor suppressor genes and novel oncogenes that are involved in the progression and metastasis of carcinomas. Liu et al. [17] also demonstrated that miR-141 employs several mechanisms to reduce the growth and metastasis of prostate cancer. Liu et al. [18] reported that the microRNA miR-34a inhibits the regeneration and metastasis of prostate cancer by repressing CD44 directly. Tinay et al. [19] demonstrated that 3 miRNAs are significantly overexpressed in serum from prostate cancer patients versus those without cancer. In this study, 58 miRNAs were significantly differentially expressed in prostate cancer compared with adjacent non-tumorous tissues. lncRNAs are potential biomarkers in carcinogenesis and have significant advantages as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers [20]. Previous research has confirmed that differentially expressed lncRNAs correlate with the progression and metastasis of carcinomas [21, 22]. Ramnarine et al. [23] reported that the lncRNAs FENDRR, H19, LINC00514, LINC00617, and SSTR5-AS1 are involved in the development of neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Zhang et al. [24] found that cell proliferation in hormone-refractory prostate cancer is promoted by the lncRNA PCGEM1. In this study, 773 lncRNAs were identified. LINC00355 and OSTN-AS1 were positively associated with overall survival, whereas LINC00308 correlated negatively with overall survival. LINC00355, OSTN-AS1, and LINC00308 were included in the ceRNA network, suggesting that these lncRNAs play an important role in the progression and prognosis of prostate cancer. Only 1 of 18 differentially expressed mRNAs (RRM2), which constructed of ceRNA networks, were significantly associated with overall survival in prostate cancer. Although RRM2 has been studied in colorectal cancer [25], non-small cell lung cancer [26], pancreatic cancer [27], adrenocortical cancer [28], and cervical cancer [29]. However, the role of RRM2 in prostate cancer has not been established yet. In this study, the higher expression of RRM2 was associated with worse survival outcome in prostate cancer. Chang et al. [25] demonstrated that overexpression of RRM2 was associated with survival and recurrence in colorectal cancer patients with k-ras mutation. Yoshida et al. [30] found that the upregulation of RRM2 was essential for the proliferation of colorectal cancer cell lines. Rahman et al. [26] indicated that knockdown of RRM2 was associated with apoptosis of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and non-small cell lung cancer. These finds mentioned above suggested that RRM2 may be a potential prognostic targets in prostate cancer. However, there are no reports on the correlation between LINC00308 and disease. Moreover, the function of LINC00308 has not been examined. Thus, the genes that are related to LINC00308 were predicted by constructing an lncRNA-miRNA-mRNA network. The results demonstrated that 2 miRNAs (has-mir-137 and has-mir-93-5p) are associated with LINC00308. The target genes of these 2 miRNAs were then predicted, resulting in 29 has-mir-137 target genes and 385 has-mir-93-5p target genes. We found three common hits between the target genes of these 2 miRNAs: RORA, GIGYF1, and NCOA3. Mocellin et al. [31] reported that RORA is significantly associated with the risk of breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, and lung carcinoma. Zhu et al. [32] also found that RORA is a common fragile site gene that is inactivated in several carcinomas and is involved in responses to cellular stress. Moretti et al. [33] reported that RORA is a molecular target for the development of chemotherapeutic strategies for prostate carcinoma. Ajiro et al. [34] demonstrated that the phosphorylation of Akt at Ser 473 is significantly reduced after GIGYF1 knockdown in breast cancer cell lines. Tong et al. [35] revealed that NCOA3 is overexpressed in human hepatocellular carcinoma specimens and promotes the proliferation of human hepatocellular carcinoma. Ngollo et al. [36] showed that NCOA3 is upregulated in prostate cancer compared with normal prostate tissues. Moreover, the expression of NCOA3 also correlates with Gleason score, clinical stage, and PSA levels. Conventional prognostic systems generally make insufficient predictions for risk stratification and estimations of clinical outcome because of the heterogeneity between patients. Thus, in recent decades, much effort has been made to establish a novel prognostic model to improve the prediction of survival in prostate cancer patients [37-39]. In this study, we generated a 4-mRNA signature that predicted the clinical outcome of prostate cancer. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first mRNA-related predictive model that is based on TCGA RNA-seq data from 495 prostate cancer patients. These 4 mRNAs were identified to establish a predictive model that is based on their linear combination. A significant difference of survival rate was observed between the high-risk and low-risk groups. In the ROC analysis, the AUC was 0.904, indicating high sensitivity and specificity of the mRNA signature. The GCP2 has been explored in several studies [40-42]. However, the role of GCP2 in prostate cancer has not been elucidated yet. Dráberová et al. [41] reported that the immunoreactivity of GCP2 was significantly increased in glioblastoma cells than that in normal brains cells. The GCP2 was also related to the progress of the microvascular proliferation. The dysregulation of GCP2 in glioblastomas may also associated with the alteration of transcriptional checkpoint activity. The GO term analysis demonstrated that the differentially expressed mRNAs were involved primarily in sequence-specific DNA binding, negative regulation of endopeptidase activity, anterior/posterior pattern specification, extracellular space, extracellular region, cysteine-type endopeptidase inhibitor activity, and serine-type endopeptidase inhibitor activity. Furthermore, the enriched KEGG pathways of the differentially expressed mRNAs included salivary secretion, pancreatic secretion, chemical carcinogenesis, metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450, drug metabolism-cytochrome P450, complement and coagulation cascades, gastric acid secretion, thyroid hormone synthesis, renin secretion, and ascorbate and aldarate metabolism. This study has some limitations. Although the data obtained from TCGA database represent an important tool for complex analyzes of biomarkers, it is known that they are produced by extremely heterogeneous samples. All data obtained and statistically analyzed in this study were not validated on representative samples subsequently in this study. Following are some reasons. On the one hand, the original design of this study was using varieties of bioinformatics tools and databases to dig useful and potential targeted mRNAs, miRNAs, and lncRNAs which associated with the prognostic outcomes. On the other hand, we aimed to explore mRNA signatures that predict survival in prostate cancer. To the best of our knowledge, some mRNAs are not transcriptable, which means some mRNAs-related proteins cannot be detected in the immunohistochemistry assay. Third, the prostate cancer tissue and health prostate tissue are difficult to distinguish in the fresh pathological specimens. Thus, it is very difficult for us to do further validation based on the fresh pathological specimens assay of prostate cancer.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we identified three differentially expressed lncRNAs that potentially predict overall survival in prostate cancer patients by analyzing the lncRNA, mRNA, and miRNA profiles in the TCGA database using a ceRNA network. The underlying mechanisms of these lncRNAs in prostate cancer should be determined.
  42 in total

1.  MicroRNA sponges: competitive inhibitors of small RNAs in mammalian cells.

Authors:  Margaret S Ebert; Joel R Neilson; Phillip A Sharp
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2007-08-12       Impact factor: 28.547

2.  Functional replacement of fission yeast γ-tubulin small complex proteins Alp4 and Alp6 by human GCP2 and GCP3.

Authors:  Timothy D Riehlman; Zachary T Olmsted; Carmen N Branca; Adam M Winnie; Lan Seo; Leilani O Cruz; Janet L Paluh
Journal:  J Cell Sci       Date:  2013-07-25       Impact factor: 5.285

3.  Overexpression and Nucleolar Localization of γ-Tubulin Small Complex Proteins GCP2 and GCP3 in Glioblastoma.

Authors:  Eduarda Dráberová; Luca D'Agostino; Valentina Caracciolo; Vladimíra Sládková; Tetyana Sulimenko; Vadym Sulimenko; Margaryta Sobol; Nicoletta F Maounis; Elias Tzelepis; Eleni Mahera; Leoš Křen; Agustin Legido; Antonio Giordano; Sverre Mörk; Pavel Hozák; Pavel Dráber; Christos D Katsetos
Journal:  J Neuropathol Exp Neurol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.685

4.  KRAS-mediated up-regulation of RRM2 expression is essential for the proliferation of colorectal cancer cell lines.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Yoshida; Toshiyuki Tsunoda; Keiko Doi; Yoko Tanaka; Takahiro Fujimoto; Takashi Machida; Takeharu Ota; Midori Koyanagi; Yasuo Takashima; Takehiko Sasazuki; Masahide Kuroki; Akinori Iwasaki; Senji Shirasawa
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.480

5.  Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project.

Authors:  Ewan Birney; John A Stamatoyannopoulos; Anindya Dutta; Roderic Guigó; Thomas R Gingeras; Elliott H Margulies; Zhiping Weng; Michael Snyder; Emmanouil T Dermitzakis; Robert E Thurman; Michael S Kuehn; Christopher M Taylor; Shane Neph; Christoph M Koch; Saurabh Asthana; Ankit Malhotra; Ivan Adzhubei; Jason A Greenbaum; Robert M Andrews; Paul Flicek; Patrick J Boyle; Hua Cao; Nigel P Carter; Gayle K Clelland; Sean Davis; Nathan Day; Pawandeep Dhami; Shane C Dillon; Michael O Dorschner; Heike Fiegler; Paul G Giresi; Jeff Goldy; Michael Hawrylycz; Andrew Haydock; Richard Humbert; Keith D James; Brett E Johnson; Ericka M Johnson; Tristan T Frum; Elizabeth R Rosenzweig; Neerja Karnani; Kirsten Lee; Gregory C Lefebvre; Patrick A Navas; Fidencio Neri; Stephen C J Parker; Peter J Sabo; Richard Sandstrom; Anthony Shafer; David Vetrie; Molly Weaver; Sarah Wilcox; Man Yu; Francis S Collins; Job Dekker; Jason D Lieb; Thomas D Tullius; Gregory E Crawford; Shamil Sunyaev; William S Noble; Ian Dunham; France Denoeud; Alexandre Reymond; Philipp Kapranov; Joel Rozowsky; Deyou Zheng; Robert Castelo; Adam Frankish; Jennifer Harrow; Srinka Ghosh; Albin Sandelin; Ivo L Hofacker; Robert Baertsch; Damian Keefe; Sujit Dike; Jill Cheng; Heather A Hirsch; Edward A Sekinger; Julien Lagarde; Josep F Abril; Atif Shahab; Christoph Flamm; Claudia Fried; Jörg Hackermüller; Jana Hertel; Manja Lindemeyer; Kristin Missal; Andrea Tanzer; Stefan Washietl; Jan Korbel; Olof Emanuelsson; Jakob S Pedersen; Nancy Holroyd; Ruth Taylor; David Swarbreck; Nicholas Matthews; Mark C Dickson; Daryl J Thomas; Matthew T Weirauch; James Gilbert; Jorg Drenkow; Ian Bell; XiaoDong Zhao; K G Srinivasan; Wing-Kin Sung; Hong Sain Ooi; Kuo Ping Chiu; Sylvain Foissac; Tyler Alioto; Michael Brent; Lior Pachter; Michael L Tress; Alfonso Valencia; Siew Woh Choo; Chiou Yu Choo; Catherine Ucla; Caroline Manzano; Carine Wyss; Evelyn Cheung; Taane G Clark; James B Brown; Madhavan Ganesh; Sandeep Patel; Hari Tammana; Jacqueline Chrast; Charlotte N Henrichsen; Chikatoshi Kai; Jun Kawai; Ugrappa Nagalakshmi; Jiaqian Wu; Zheng Lian; Jin Lian; Peter Newburger; Xueqing Zhang; Peter Bickel; John S Mattick; Piero Carninci; Yoshihide Hayashizaki; Sherman Weissman; Tim Hubbard; Richard M Myers; Jane Rogers; Peter F Stadler; Todd M Lowe; Chia-Lin Wei; Yijun Ruan; Kevin Struhl; Mark Gerstein; Stylianos E Antonarakis; Yutao Fu; Eric D Green; Ulaş Karaöz; Adam Siepel; James Taylor; Laura A Liefer; Kris A Wetterstrand; Peter J Good; Elise A Feingold; Mark S Guyer; Gregory M Cooper; George Asimenos; Colin N Dewey; Minmei Hou; Sergey Nikolaev; Juan I Montoya-Burgos; Ari Löytynoja; Simon Whelan; Fabio Pardi; Tim Massingham; Haiyan Huang; Nancy R Zhang; Ian Holmes; James C Mullikin; Abel Ureta-Vidal; Benedict Paten; Michael Seringhaus; Deanna Church; Kate Rosenbloom; W James Kent; Eric A Stone; Serafim Batzoglou; Nick Goldman; Ross C Hardison; David Haussler; Webb Miller; Arend Sidow; Nathan D Trinklein; Zhengdong D Zhang; Leah Barrera; Rhona Stuart; David C King; Adam Ameur; Stefan Enroth; Mark C Bieda; Jonghwan Kim; Akshay A Bhinge; Nan Jiang; Jun Liu; Fei Yao; Vinsensius B Vega; Charlie W H Lee; Patrick Ng; Atif Shahab; Annie Yang; Zarmik Moqtaderi; Zhou Zhu; Xiaoqin Xu; Sharon Squazzo; Matthew J Oberley; David Inman; Michael A Singer; Todd A Richmond; Kyle J Munn; Alvaro Rada-Iglesias; Ola Wallerman; Jan Komorowski; Joanna C Fowler; Phillippe Couttet; Alexander W Bruce; Oliver M Dovey; Peter D Ellis; Cordelia F Langford; David A Nix; Ghia Euskirchen; Stephen Hartman; Alexander E Urban; Peter Kraus; Sara Van Calcar; Nate Heintzman; Tae Hoon Kim; Kun Wang; Chunxu Qu; Gary Hon; Rosa Luna; Christopher K Glass; M Geoff Rosenfeld; Shelley Force Aldred; Sara J Cooper; Anason Halees; Jane M Lin; Hennady P Shulha; Xiaoling Zhang; Mousheng Xu; Jaafar N S Haidar; Yong Yu; Yijun Ruan; Vishwanath R Iyer; Roland D Green; Claes Wadelius; Peggy J Farnham; Bing Ren; Rachel A Harte; Angie S Hinrichs; Heather Trumbower; Hiram Clawson; Jennifer Hillman-Jackson; Ann S Zweig; Kayla Smith; Archana Thakkapallayil; Galt Barber; Robert M Kuhn; Donna Karolchik; Lluis Armengol; Christine P Bird; Paul I W de Bakker; Andrew D Kern; Nuria Lopez-Bigas; Joel D Martin; Barbara E Stranger; Abigail Woodroffe; Eugene Davydov; Antigone Dimas; Eduardo Eyras; Ingileif B Hallgrímsdóttir; Julian Huppert; Michael C Zody; Gonçalo R Abecasis; Xavier Estivill; Gerard G Bouffard; Xiaobin Guan; Nancy F Hansen; Jacquelyn R Idol; Valerie V B Maduro; Baishali Maskeri; Jennifer C McDowell; Morgan Park; Pamela J Thomas; Alice C Young; Robert W Blakesley; Donna M Muzny; Erica Sodergren; David A Wheeler; Kim C Worley; Huaiyang Jiang; George M Weinstock; Richard A Gibbs; Tina Graves; Robert Fulton; Elaine R Mardis; Richard K Wilson; Michele Clamp; James Cuff; Sante Gnerre; David B Jaffe; Jean L Chang; Kerstin Lindblad-Toh; Eric S Lander; Maxim Koriabine; Mikhail Nefedov; Kazutoyo Osoegawa; Yuko Yoshinaga; Baoli Zhu; Pieter J de Jong
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2007-06-14       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Prognostic Utility of a New mRNA Expression Signature of Gleason Score.

Authors:  Jennifer A Sinnott; Sam F Peisch; Svitlana Tyekucheva; Travis Gerke; Rosina Lis; Jennifer R Rider; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Meir J Stampfer; Lorelei A Mucci; Massimo Loda; Kathryn L Penney
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  RORA, a large common fragile site gene, is involved in cellular stress response.

Authors:  Y Zhu; S McAvoy; R Kuhn; D I Smith
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2006-05-11       Impact factor: 9.867

8.  The microRNA miR-34a inhibits prostate cancer stem cells and metastasis by directly repressing CD44.

Authors:  Can Liu; Kevin Kelnar; Bigang Liu; Xin Chen; Tammy Calhoun-Davis; Hangwen Li; Lubna Patrawala; Hong Yan; Collene Jeter; Sofia Honorio; Jason F Wiggins; Andreas G Bader; Randy Fagin; David Brown; Dean G Tang
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2011-01-16       Impact factor: 53.440

9.  Circadian pathway genetic variation and cancer risk: evidence from genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Simone Mocellin; Saveria Tropea; Clara Benna; Carlo Riccardo Rossi
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  The long noncoding RNA landscape of neuroendocrine prostate cancer and its clinical implications.

Authors:  Varune Rohan Ramnarine; Mohammed Alshalalfa; Fan Mo; Noushin Nabavi; Nicholas Erho; Mandeep Takhar; Robert Shukin; Sonal Brahmbhatt; Alexander Gawronski; Maxim Kobelev; Mannan Nouri; Dong Lin; Harrison Tsai; Tamara L Lotan; R Jefferey Karnes; Mark A Rubin; Amina Zoubeidi; Martin E Gleave; Cenk Sahinalp; Alexander W Wyatt; Stanislav V Volik; Himisha Beltran; Elai Davicioni; Yuzhuo Wang; Colin C Collins
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 6.524

View more
  17 in total

1.  LINC00839 promotes colorectal cancer progression by recruiting RUVBL1/Tip60 complexes to activate NRF1.

Authors:  Xiaoting Liu; Jianxiong Chen; Sijing Zhang; Xunhua Liu; Xiaoli Long; Jiawen Lan; Miao Zhou; Lin Zheng; Jun Zhou
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2022-07-25       Impact factor: 9.071

2.  LncRNA EMX2OS, Regulated by TCF12, Interacts with FUS to Regulate the Proliferation, Migration and Invasion of Prostate Cancer Cells Through the cGMP-PKG Signaling Pathway.

Authors:  Zhiqiang Wang; Chaowei Zhang; Junkai Chang; Xin Tian; Chaoyang Zhu; Weibo Xu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  High copy number variations, particular transcription factors, and low immunity contribute to the stemness of prostate cancer cells.

Authors:  Zao Dai; Ping Liu
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 5.531

4.  A novel mRNA-miRNA-lncRNA competing endogenous RNA triple sub-network associated with prognosis of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Wenlong Wang; Weiyang Lou; Bisha Ding; Beng Yang; Hongda Lu; Qingzhi Kong; Weimin Fan
Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)       Date:  2019-05-06       Impact factor: 5.682

5.  Identification of Potential Biomarkers Associated with Basal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Yong Liu; Hui Liu; Queqiao Bian
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Identification of a Robust Five-Gene Risk Model in Prostate Cancer: A Robust Likelihood-Based Survival Analysis.

Authors:  Yutao Wang; Jiaxing Lin; Kexin Yan; Jianfeng Wang
Journal:  Int J Genomics       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 2.326

7.  Identification of a five-mRNA signature as a novel potential prognostic biomarker in pediatric Wilms tumor.

Authors:  Xiao-Dan Lin; Yu-Peng Wu; Shao-Hao Chen; Xiong-Lin Sun; Zhi-Bin Ke; Dong-Ning Chen; Xiao-Dong Li; Yun-Zhi Lin; Yong Wei; Qing-Shui Zheng; Ning Xu; Xue-Yi Xue
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 2.183

8.  Identification of marker genes and cell subtypes in castration-resistant prostate cancer cells.

Authors:  Xiao-Dan Lin; Ning Lin; Ting-Ting Lin; Yu-Peng Wu; Peng Huang; Zhi-Bin Ke; Yun-Zhi Lin; Shao-Hao Chen; Qing-Shui Zheng; Yong Wei; Xue-Yi Xue; Rong-Jin Lin; Ning Xu
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 4.207

Review 9.  Coordinated AR and microRNA regulation in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ieva Eringyte; Joanna N Zamarbide Losada; Sue M Powell; Charlotte L Bevan; Claire E Fletcher
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2020-06-19

10.  Coexpression Network Analysis Identifies a Novel Nine-RNA Signature to Improve Prognostic Prediction for Prostate Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Jiarong Cai; Zheng Chen; Xuelian Chen; He Huang; Xia Lin; Bin Miao
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.