Fei Li1,2, Yong Xu1, Ran-Lu Liu3. 1. Department of Urology, National Key Clinical Specialty of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300211, China. 2. Department of Urology, Rugao City People's Hospital, Rugao City, Jiangsu Province, China. 3. Department of Urology, National Key Clinical Specialty of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300211, China. ranlu_liu@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify a novel biomarker that can predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: The gene expression profile of SAMD5 in prostate cancer was explored based on the oncomine database and The Cancer Genomic Atlas (TCGA). The follow-up information and clinical pathologic variables were extracted from the following cohort study: TCGA_prostate carcinoma. And then, survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier plot and Cox's proportional hazard regression model. Furthermore, another independent cohort study: Taylor prostate, was also acquired to validate the predictive effect of SAMD5 on BCR. In addition, the expression profile of SAMD5 in other cancer types was investigated using TCGA dataset. RESULTS: SAMD5 mRNA was shown to be up-regulated in multiple microarray datasets of prostate cancer with the strict statistic criteria: p < 0.01 and fold change ≥ 2. In TCGA_PCa cohort study, high expression of SAMD5 was a risk factor for patients on post-operative BCR (HR 2.181, 95%CI 1.199-3.966, p = 0.011) and this predictive ability was independent of Gleason score and pathologic T stage (HR 2.018, 95%CI 1.102-3.698, p = 0.023). In another validating cohort study, the statistic trend was similar, and the pooled analysis by combining the two cohort study further confirmed its prognostic effect. CONCLUSION: SAMD5 mRNA was overexpressed in prostate cancer and had powerful prognostic ability on predicting post-operative BCR, independent of Gleason score and pathologic T stage. Its high expression was associated with poor prognosis after RP.
PURPOSE: To identify a novel biomarker that can predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: The gene expression profile of SAMD5 in prostate cancer was explored based on the oncomine database and The Cancer Genomic Atlas (TCGA). The follow-up information and clinical pathologic variables were extracted from the following cohort study: TCGA_prostate carcinoma. And then, survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier plot and Cox's proportional hazard regression model. Furthermore, another independent cohort study: Taylor prostate, was also acquired to validate the predictive effect of SAMD5 on BCR. In addition, the expression profile of SAMD5 in other cancer types was investigated using TCGA dataset. RESULTS:SAMD5 mRNA was shown to be up-regulated in multiple microarray datasets of prostate cancer with the strict statistic criteria: p < 0.01 and fold change ≥ 2. In TCGA_PCa cohort study, high expression of SAMD5 was a risk factor for patients on post-operative BCR (HR 2.181, 95%CI 1.199-3.966, p = 0.011) and this predictive ability was independent of Gleason score and pathologic T stage (HR 2.018, 95%CI 1.102-3.698, p = 0.023). In another validating cohort study, the statistic trend was similar, and the pooled analysis by combining the two cohort study further confirmed its prognostic effect. CONCLUSION:SAMD5 mRNA was overexpressed in prostate cancer and had powerful prognostic ability on predicting post-operative BCR, independent of Gleason score and pathologic T stage. Its high expression was associated with poor prognosis after RP.
Authors: Scott A Tomlins; Rohit Mehra; Daniel R Rhodes; Xuhong Cao; Lei Wang; Saravana M Dhanasekaran; Shanker Kalyana-Sundaram; John T Wei; Mark A Rubin; Kenneth J Pienta; Rajal B Shah; Arul M Chinnaiyan Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-12-17 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Barry S Taylor; Nikolaus Schultz; Haley Hieronymus; Anuradha Gopalan; Yonghong Xiao; Brett S Carver; Vivek K Arora; Poorvi Kaushik; Ethan Cerami; Boris Reva; Yevgeniy Antipin; Nicholas Mitsiades; Thomas Landers; Igor Dolgalev; John E Major; Manda Wilson; Nicholas D Socci; Alex E Lash; Adriana Heguy; James A Eastham; Howard I Scher; Victor E Reuter; Peter T Scardino; Chris Sander; Charles L Sawyers; William L Gerald Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2010-06-24 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Sooryanarayana Varambally; Jianjun Yu; Bharathi Laxman; Daniel R Rhodes; Rohit Mehra; Scott A Tomlins; Rajal B Shah; Uma Chandran; Federico A Monzon; Michael J Becich; John T Wei; Kenneth J Pienta; Debashis Ghosh; Mark A Rubin; Arul M Chinnaiyan Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Mohamed S Arredouani; Bin Lu; Manoj Bhasin; Miriam Eljanne; Wen Yue; Juan-Miguel Mosquera; Glenn J Bubley; Vivian Li; Mark A Rubin; Towia A Libermann; Martin G Sanda Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-09-08 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jacques Lapointe; Chunde Li; John P Higgins; Matt van de Rijn; Eric Bair; Kelli Montgomery; Michelle Ferrari; Lars Egevad; Walter Rayford; Ulf Bergerheim; Peter Ekman; Angelo M DeMarzo; Robert Tibshirani; David Botstein; Patrick O Brown; James D Brooks; Jonathan R Pollack Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-01-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ethan Cerami; Jianjiong Gao; Ugur Dogrusoz; Benjamin E Gross; Selcuk Onur Sumer; Bülent Arman Aksoy; Anders Jacobsen; Caitlin J Byrne; Michael L Heuer; Erik Larsson; Yevgeniy Antipin; Boris Reva; Arthur P Goldberg; Chris Sander; Nikolaus Schultz Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 39.397