Literature DB >> 32235821

An Integrated Microarray Analysis Reveals Significant Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers in Pancreatic Cancer.

Zhi-Qiang Yang1, Yu-Jian Liu1, Xiao-Lei Zhou1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND Pancreatic cancer (PAC) is a lethal cancer and it is essential to develop accurate diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for PAC. MATERIAL AND METHODS An integrated microarray analysis of PAC was conducted to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between PAC and non-tumor controls. Expression of DEGs were further confirmed by The Cancer Genome Atlas and the Genotype-Tissue Expression. Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes enrichment analysis, and protein-protein integration network construction were performed to further research the biological functions of DEGs. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis and survival analysis were used to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of DEGs for PAC. RESULTS Seventeen microarray datasets were downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus to conduct the integrated microarray analysis. A total of 1136 DEGs (596 upregulated and 540 downregulated DEGs) in PAC tissues compared with non-tumor controls were identified. Pancreatic secretion (Kegg: 04972), insulin signaling pathway (Kegg: 04910), and several cancer-related pathways including pathways in cancer (Kegg: 05200), MAPK signaling pathway (Kegg: 04010), and pancreatic cancer (Kegg: 05212) were enriched for DEGs in PAC. Seven DEGs (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SLC6A14, and TMPRSS4) were found to have both great diagnostic and prognostic value for PAC. High expression of these 7 DEGs were significantly associated with poor prognosis of patients with PAC. CONCLUSIONS These 7 DEGs might be potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for PAC and help uncovering the mechanism of PAC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32235821      PMCID: PMC7148424          DOI: 10.12659/MSM.921769

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Sci Monit        ISSN: 1234-1010


Background

Pancreatic cancer (PAC) is an aggressive cancer and its incidence rate has alarmingly increased worldwide. Moreover, PAC is one of the most lethal cancers, with a 5-year survival rate of less than 9% [1]. PAC was the 7th leading cause of cancer death in both males and females worldwide in 2018 [2]. Despite intensive efforts, the prognosis of PAC remains poor mainly due to the absence of early detection biomarkers and limited effective therapeutic strategies [1,2]. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop accurate diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers so that the optimal treatments can be selected for patients with PAC and thus offer the best hope for cure or extension of lifespan. Since clinical and pathological characteristics have limited value in early detection and predicting prognosis for PAC, great effort has been made to explore gene biomarkers for PAC. In recent years, accumulated microarray analysis of PAC have been used to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between PAC and non-tumor controls [3-8]; these studies have made a contribution to discovering the underlying mechanism of PAC and developing biomarkers. Integrated analysis of multiple microarray analysis can help obtain a more accurate profiles of DEGs by using increased sample sizes and avoiding biases induced by different platforms. Hence, this present study performed an integrated analysis of multiple PAC microarray analyses derived from the GEO to identify accurate DEGs between PAC tissues and non-tumor control tissues. Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis, and protein–protein integration (PPI) network construction were performed to further research the biological functions of DEGs and the underlying mechanism of PAC. Moreover, the diagnostic and prognostic value of DEGs for PAC was evaluated, which contributes to developing potential biomarkers for PAC.

Material and Methods

Microarray expression profiling of PAC

The Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) is the largest database of high-throughput gene expression data; it is developed and maintained by the National Center for Biotechnology Information. In this present study, datasets of PAC were searched and downloaded from the GEO (). The inclusion criteria for this study were as follows. First, microarray datasets were expression profiled by array. Second, samples used for microarray datasets were PAC tissues and non-tumor control tissues which included adjacent non-tumor tissues and normal pancreatic tissues.

Identification of DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls

Background correction and normalization were conducted to minimize the heterogeneity among different datasets enrolled in this integrated analysis. By using metaMA in R [9], we calculated effect sizes from unpaired data either from classical or moderated t-tests (Limma, SMVar) for each study and combined these effect sizes. P-values were corrected separately for multiple test using the false discovery method proposed by Benjamini and Hochberg and the false discovery rate (FDR) was obtained. DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls were identified with FDR <0.05 and |diff| >0.5. Hierarchical clustering analysis of DEGs was conducted by using R package “pheatmap” (scale=”row”, clustering_method=”complete” and clustering_distance_rows=” euclidean”).

Functional annotation of DEGs

We used the online-based software GeneCoDis3 (), GO, and KEGG molecular pathway enrichment analysis for DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls. P-values were adjusted for multiple test using the Benjamini-Hochberg method and the FDR was obtained. Statistical significance was defined as FDR <0.05.

Protein–protein interaction (PPI) network

To determine the PAC-associated pathways and explore functions of proteins at the molecular level, the top 100 upregulated and downregulated DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls were applied to construct the PPI network based on the STRING database () and Cytoscape 3.3.0. Proteins with a degree of ≥20 were defined as hub proteins of the PPI network.

Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis

To access the diagnostic value of DEGs for PAC, receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) of DEGs and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) were calculated by using the “pROC” package. DEGs with AUC >0.85 were considered to have great diagnostic value for PAC with excellent specificity and sensitivity.

Cross-validation of DEGs

The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project () is a public-funded project sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and the National Human Genome Research Institute which stores genomic datasets covering various cancers. The Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project is a resource database and associated tissue bank for exploring the relationship between genetic variation and gene expression in human tissues [10]. Using R package TCGAbiolinks, the clinical data and gene expression data of 176 pancreatic adenocarcinoma and 167 normal control tissues were downloaded from TCGA and GTEx, respectively. Then, this TCGA-GTEx processed data was used to validate the expression of DEGs identified by this integrated analysis.

Survival analysis

The prognostic value of DEGs for PAC patients was further analyzed based on these 176 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma in TCGA by using multivariate Cox regression analyses (adjusted for age, sex, grade and stage).

Results

A total of 17 GEO microarray datasets [3-8,11-20] including 512 PAC tissues and 206 non-tumor control tissues were enrolled in this present study (Table 1). Compared with non-tumor controls, 1136 DEGs including 596 upregulated DEGs and 540 downregulated DEGs were identified in PAC. Hierarchical cluster result of DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls was displayed in Figure 1. Table 2 showed the top 20 upregulated and downregulated DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls (sorted by FDR).
Table 1

Gene expression datasets used in this study.

GEO accessionControlCasePlatformYearCountryAuthor
GSE107610239GPL15207[PrimeView] Affymetrix Human Gene Expression Array2018JapanShimokawa M. [4]
GSE1014481924GPL10558Illumina HumanHT-12 V4.0 expression beadchip2018GermanyBusch H. [5]
GSE4623444GPL570[HG-U133_Plus_2] Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array2017NorwayRæder H. [12]
GSE63111728GPL5188[HuEx-1_0-st] Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST Array [probe set (exon) version]2017United KingdomWang J. [6]
GSE6216513118GPL13667[HG-U219] Affymetrix Human Genome U219 Array2016BelgiumJanky R. [7]
GSE624526169GPL6244[HuGene-1_0-st] Affymetrix Human Gene 1.0 ST Array [transcript (gene) version]2016USAHussain P.S. [8]
GSE71989813GPL570[HG-U133_Plus_2] Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array2015USASchmittgen T. [13]
GSE2789044GPL570[HG-U133_Plus_2] Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array2014USABowen N.J. [14]
GSE56560728GPL5175[HuEx-1_0-st] Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST Array [transcript (gene) version]2014United KingdomWang J. [9]
GSE5856123GPL14550Agilent-028004 SurePrint G3 Human GE 8x60K Microarray (Probe Name Version)2014NorwaySandhu V. [15]
GSE55643845GPL6480Agilent-014850 Whole Human Genome Microarray 4x44K G4112F (Probe Name version)2014United KingdomJamieson N.B. [16]
GSE23397615GPL5188[HuEx-1_0-st] Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST Array [probe set (exon) version]2013GermanyHolzmann K.
GSE4136866GPL6244[HuGene-1_0-st] Affymetrix Human Gene 1.0 ST Array [transcript (gene) version]2013ItalyColombo T. [17]
GSE4379557GPL10558Illumina HumanHT-12 V4.0 expression beadchip2013South KoreaPark N. [18]
GSE287354545GPL6244[HuGene-1_0-st] Affymetrix Human Gene 1.0 ST Array [transcript (gene) version]2012USAHussain P. [19]
GSE32676725GPL570[HG-U133_Plus_2] Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array2011USATran L.M. [20]
GSE154713939GPL570[HG-U133_Plus_2] Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array2009RomaniaBadea L. [21]
Figure 1

Hierarchical clustering analysis of DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls. Row and column represented DEGs and tissue samples, respectively. The color scale indicated the expression of DEGs while red and green color represented upregulation and downregulation, respectively. DEGs – differentially expressed genes; PAC – pancreatic cancer.

Table 2

Top 20 up- and down-regulated DEGs between pancreatic cancer and non-tumor controls.

Gene IDGene symbolDiffRegulationGene idGene symbolDiffRegulation
6286S100P1.851675Up5407PNLIPRP1−2.52947Down
4680CEACAM61.809022Up1358CPA2−2.44332Down
1048CEACAM51.74063Up1208CLPS−2.30786Down
3918LAMC21.619369Up5408PNLIPRP2−2.29361Down
10103TSPAN11.592894Up5319PLA2G1B−2.27519Down
11254SLC6A141.51112Up5406PNLIP−2.26446Down
11199ANXA101.504241Up1357CPA1−2.24956Down
6364CCL201.491776Up11330CTRC−2.10615Down
3429IFI271.47296Up2813GP2−2.10261Down
56649TMPRSS41.455704Up440387CTRB2−2.10088Down
3880KRT191.44997Up1360CPB1−2.09227Down
1728NQO11.398528Up5968REG1B−2.01307Down
10874NMU1.39464Up50624CUZD1−1.98905Down
22943DKK11.347667Up1506CTRL−1.98238Down
51208CLDN181.343661Up121506ERP27−1.87554Down
195814SDR16C51.342804Up5276SERPINI2−1.80644Down
2877GPX21.326222Up213ALB−1.73523Down
7031TFF11.298329Up8671SLC4A4−1.73172Down
4312MMP11.296652Up2494NR5A2−1.64221Down
29089UBE2T1.289073Up5166PDK4−1.62103Down

Diff – mean expression of pancreatic cancer minus mean expression of non-tumor controls.

Functional annotation

Cell proliferation (GO: 0008283, FDR=1.60E-12), Apoptotic process (GO: 0006915, FDR=9.49E-11), Cytoplasm (GO: 0005737, FDR=1.14E-62), Protein binding (GO: 0005515, FDR=1.16E-59), and Microtubule motor activity (GO: 0003777, FDR=7.65E-06) were significantly enriched GO terms for DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls. The top 20 most significantly enriched GO terms including “biological process”, “molecular function”, and “cellular component” were displayed in Figure 2A–2C.
Figure 2

Significantly enriched GO terms and KEGG pathways in PAC. (A–D) The top 20 significantly biological process, molecular function, cellular component and KEGG pathways enriched for DEGs in PAC are displayed. The y-axis shows GO terms or KEGG pathways and the x-axis represents -logFDR. (E) Shows pancreatic cancer (Kegg: 05212). Pink and green rectangles represented the particles that regulated by the upregulated and downregulated DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls, respectively. DEGs – differentially expressed genes; PAC – pancreatic cancer; GO – Gene Ontology; KEGG – Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes.

After KEGG enrichment analysis, pancreatic secretion (Kegg: 04972, FDR=7.12E-12), pathways in cancer (Kegg: 05200, FDR=1.63E-07), p53 signaling pathway (Kegg: 04115, FDR=1.19E-06), MAPK signaling pathway (Kegg: 04010, FDR=5.13E-06), Insulin signaling pathway (Kegg: 04910, FDR=0.0076) and pancreatic cancer (Kegg: 05212, FDR=0.0264) were significantly enriched pathways for DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls (Figure 2D). Three upregulated DEGs (RALGDS, E2F3, and RAC1) and 4 downregulated DEGs (EGF, SMAD4, MAPK9, and AKT1) were enriched in pancreatic cancer (Kegg: 05212, Figure 2E).

PPI network

The PPI network of top 100 upregulated and downregulated DEGs consisted of 174 nodes and 612 edges (Figure 3). Two hub proteins, ALB (degree=34) and BGF (degree=33), were identified based on this PPI network.
Figure 3

PPI network. Rosy and green rectangles represent proteins encoded by upregulated and downregulated DEGs, respectively. Edges indicate integrations between proteins. PPI – protein–protein integration; DEGs – differentially expressed genes.

ROC analysis

Based on the ROC analysis, a total of 11 DEGs (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SFN, SLC6A14, TMPRSS4, LAMC2, CEACAM6, and S100P) had great diagnostic value for PAC with AUC more than 0.85 (Figure 4).
Figure 4

ROC curves of DEGs with great diagnostic value for PAC. Gene symbols was on the top of the ROC curves. The x-axis shows 1-specificity and y-axis shows sensitivity, respectively. ROC – receiver-operating characteristic; DEGs – differentially expressed genes.

Cross-validation

By using TCGA-GTEx processed data, expression of these 11 DEGs with AUC >0.85 were validated. All these DEGs were significantly upregulated in pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared with normal controls which was generally consistent with our integrated analysis (Figure 5).
Figure 5

Cross-validation of DEGs by TCGA and GTEx Box-plot displayed the expression levels of DEGs between PAAD and non-tumor tissues. (A) AHNAK2; (B) CDH3; (C) IFI27; (D) ITGA2; (E) LAMB3; (F) SFN; (G) SLC6A14; (H) TMPRSS4; (I) CEACAM6; (J) LAMC2; (K) S100P. The x-axis represents PAAD and normal groups. The y-axis represents relative gene expression levels. DEGs – differentially expressed genes; TCGA – The Cancer Genome Atlas; GTEx – Genotype-Tissue Expression; PAAD – pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Multivariate Cox regression analyses (adjusted for age, sex, grade, and stage) were performed to evaluate the impact of these 11 above-mentioned DEGs on overall survival of PAC patients. A total of 7 DEGs (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SLC6A14, and TMPRSS4) with great prognostic value for PAC were identified (Figure 6). Increased expression of these 7 DEGs were significantly associated with poor prognosis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Furthermore, these 7 DEGs were dual-functional biomarkers which have both great diagnostic and prognostic value for PAC.
Figure 6

Survival analysis of DEGs with great prognostic value for PAC. (A) AHNAK2; (B) CDH3; (C) IFI27; (D) ITGA2; (E) LAMB3; (F) SLC6A14; (G) TMPRSS4. The x-axis indicates times (days) and y-axis indicates survival rate. High expression of these eight DEGs was significantly associated with lower survival rate in patients with PAC. DEGs – differentially expressed genes; PAC – pancreatic cancer.

Discussion

Low detection rate in the early stage, and systemic dissemination and insufficient effective treatment contribute to the invariably poor prognosis of patients with PAC. Therefore, development of diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets are essential to improve diagnosis accuracy and outcome of PAC patients in the clinic. After integrated 17 microarray analysis of PAC, a total of 1136 DEGs including 596 upregulated DEGs and 540 downregulated DEGs between PAC and non-tumor controls were identified. Expression of DEGs were confirmed by the TCGA and GTEx. DEGs were significantly enriched in pancreatic secretion (Kegg: 04972), insulin signaling pathway (Kegg: 04910) and several cancer-related pathways including pathways in cancer (Kegg: 05200), MAPK signaling pathway (Kegg: 04010), and pancreatic cancer (Kegg: 05212), which increased the credibility of our integrated analysis. Eleven upregulated DEGs including (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SFN, SLC6A14, TMPRSS4, CEACAM6, LAMC2, and S100P) were found to have great ability in discriminating PAC from non-tumor control tissues. These results have been validated by the TCGA-GTEx processed data. Literature-based validation also provided support for our study. Increased expression of 10 DEGs (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SLC6A14, TMPRSS4, CEACAM6, LAMC2, and S100P) in PAC tissues was confirmed by another microarray analysis in PAC [21]. Lu et al. [22] reported that AHNAK2 is highly expressed in PAC compared to normal tissues by immunohistochemistry. Long et al. [23] found that increased LACM2, ITGA2, and CDH3 were upregulated in PAC at mRNA and protein level using an integrative analysis utilizing next-generation sequencing, transcriptome meta-analysis and immunohistochemistry. Zhang et al. [24] found the upregulation of LAMB3 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma tissues and 7 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cell lines. SLC6A14 was found to be upregulated in pancreatic cancer tissues, cancer cell lines at both mRNA and protein levels [25]. Furthermore, 7 of these 11 DEGs (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SLC6A14, and TMPRSS4) were found to have great diagnosis and prognostic value for patients with PAC. Among them, AHNAK2 is a large protein (>600 kDa) with a PDZ domain that belongs to AHNAK protein family [26,27]. AHNAK2 is a known prognostic biomarker for PAC and increased AHNAK2 was closely associated with the poor prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) [22] which supports this present study. ITGA2, CDH3, SLC6A14, LAMB3, and TMPRSS4 were all PAC-regulators. Integrin, alpha 2 (ITGA2) was reported to play migrating roles various cancers including pancreas, nasopharyngeal carcinoma [28], colon cancer and gastric cancer. Cadherin-3 (CDH3) is a novel and useful tumor-associated antigen for immunotherapy against a broad spectrum of cancers such as pancreatic, gastric, and colorectal cancers [29]. SLC6A14 is a neutral and basic amino acid transporter that upregulated in both primary PAC tissues and pancreatic cancer cells lines [25,30] and inhibition of SLC6A14 could decrease pancreatic cell growth and proliferation due to amino acid starvation [25]. LAMB3 involve in the invasion and metastases of multiple cancers such as head and neck squamous cell carcinoma [31], thyroid [32], liver [33], and prostate cancer [34]. Expression of LAMB3 was progressively elevated from tumor initiation to progression [35]. Moreover, LAMB3 play roles in apoptotic, proliferative, invasive, and metastatic in pancreatic cancer via regulating the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway [24]. TMPRSS4 is novel type II transmembrane serine protease that overexpressed in some types of cancers including pancreatic, thyroid, colon, breast, cervical, gastric, and non-small-cell lung cancer [36-42]. As an important tumor regulator, TMPRSS4 play roles in tumor cell invasion, migration, and metastasis by mediating multiple downstream signaling pathways including focal adhesion kinase (FAK)/MAPK, extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), Akt, Src, Rac1, and JNK signaling pathway [38,42-44]. Knockdown of TMPRSS4 was found to decrease PDAC cell migration, invasion, and anchorage-independent growth [27]. This present study provided support for these previous studies and emphasized the importance of ITGA2, CDH3, SLC6A14, LAMB3, and TMPRSS in PAC. Moreover, we indicated that these 5 genes could accurately discriminated PAC from non-tumor controls and revealed the association between upregulation of these 5 genes and poor prognosis of patients with PAC. Notably, the association between IFI27 and PAC has never been reported. IFI27 (interferon alpha inducible protein 27) is an interferon-α (IFN-α) inducible gene that was reported to involve in innate immunity and intervene in cell proliferation. Increased expression of IFI27 has been detected in various other cancers with underlying mechanism not fully understood [45]. IFI27 knockdown induced cholangiocarcinoma cell proliferative rate decreased in vitro and in vivo and attenuated cholangiocarcinoma cell migration and invasion through inhibition of epithelial-mesenchymal transition [46]. The same phenomenon was observed in oral squamous cell carcinoma as well [47]. In this study, increased expression of IFI27 was found to serve as a poor prognostic biomarker in PAC which providing clues that IFI27 may elicit similar features in PAC. However, this study had 2 limitations. First, due to restrictions of GEO, the clinical data of datasets used in this study was not detailed enough. This study compared expression profile between PAC tissues and non-tumor controls without classification of normal controls and adjacent non-tumor tissues in PAC patients. Second, wet-lab evidence and larger clinical data sets are needed to confirm our results.

Conclusions

Taken together, our integrated analysis identified 7 dual-function cancer biomarkers (AHNAK2, CDH3, IFI27, ITGA2, LAMB3, SLC6A14, and TMPRSS4) that have both great diagnostic and prognostic value for PAC and it provided clues for the underlying mechanism and therapeutic targets for PAC. Further research is needed to explore their biological function in PAC.
  47 in total

1.  LAMB3 is associated with disease progression and cisplatin cytotoxic sensitivity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Lihua Liu; Seung-Nam Jung; Chan Oh; Kyungmin Lee; Ho-Ryun Won; Jae Won Chang; Jin Man Kim; Bon Seok Koo
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 4.424

2.  Characterization of gene expression and activated signaling pathways in solid-pseudopapillary neoplasm of pancreas.

Authors:  Minhee Park; Minhyung Kim; Daehee Hwang; Misun Park; Won Kyu Kim; Sang Kyum Kim; Jihye Shin; Eun Sung Park; Chang Moo Kang; Young-Ki Paik; Hoguen Kim
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2013-09-27       Impact factor: 7.842

3.  A Novel MIF Signaling Pathway Drives the Malignant Character of Pancreatic Cancer by Targeting NR3C2.

Authors:  Shouhui Yang; Peijun He; Jian Wang; Aaron Schetter; Wei Tang; Naotake Funamizu; Katsuhiko Yanaga; Tadashi Uwagawa; Abhay R Satoskar; Jochen Gaedcke; Markus Bernhardt; B Michael Ghadimi; Matthias M Gaida; Frank Bergmann; Jens Werner; Thomas Ried; Nader Hanna; H Richard Alexander; S Perwez Hussain
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 12.701

4.  Combined gene expression analysis of whole-tissue and microdissected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma identifies genes specifically overexpressed in tumor epithelia.

Authors:  Liviu Badea; Vlad Herlea; Simona Olimpia Dima; Traian Dumitrascu; Irinel Popescu
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec

5.  Human Pancreatic Tumor Organoids Reveal Loss of Stem Cell Niche Factor Dependence during Disease Progression.

Authors:  Takashi Seino; Shintaro Kawasaki; Mariko Shimokawa; Hiroki Tamagawa; Kohta Toshimitsu; Masayuki Fujii; Yuki Ohta; Mami Matano; Kosaku Nanki; Kenta Kawasaki; Sirirat Takahashi; Shinya Sugimoto; Eisuke Iwasaki; Junichi Takagi; Takao Itoi; Minoru Kitago; Yuko Kitagawa; Takanori Kanai; Toshiro Sato
Journal:  Cell Stem Cell       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 24.633

6.  MicroRNAs cooperatively inhibit a network of tumor suppressor genes to promote pancreatic tumor growth and progression.

Authors:  Adam E Frampton; Leandro Castellano; Teresa Colombo; Elisa Giovannetti; Jonathan Krell; Jimmy Jacob; Loredana Pellegrino; Laura Roca-Alonso; Niccola Funel; Tamara M H Gall; Alexander De Giorgio; Filipa G Pinho; Valerio Fulci; David J Britton; Raida Ahmad; Nagy A Habib; R Charles Coombes; Victoria Harding; Thomas Knösel; Justin Stebbing; Long R Jiao
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2013-10-09       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  TMPRSS4 as a poor prognostic factor for triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Daye Cheng; Hong Kong; Yunhui Li
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2013-07-12       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  Prognostic relevance of molecular subtypes and master regulators in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Rekin's Janky; Maria Mercedes Binda; Joke Allemeersch; Anke Van den Broeck; Olivier Govaere; Johannes V Swinnen; Tania Roskams; Stein Aerts; Baki Topal
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Overexpression of BUB1B, CCNA2, CDC20, and CDK1 in tumor tissues predicts poor survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Shu Dong; Fei Huang; Hao Zhang; Qiwen Chen
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 3.840

10.  LAMB3 mediates apoptotic, proliferative, invasive, and metastatic behaviors in pancreatic cancer by regulating the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway.

Authors:  Hong Zhang; Yao-Zhen Pan; May Cheung; Mary Cao; Chao Yu; Ling Chen; Lei Zhan; Zhi-Wei He; Cheng-Yi Sun
Journal:  Cell Death Dis       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 8.469

View more
  4 in total

1.  NREP is a Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker, and Promotes Gastric Cancer Cell Proliferation and Angiogenesis.

Authors:  Qian Li; Lei Fu; Daoyuan Wu; Jufeng Wang
Journal:  Biochem Genet       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 2.220

Review 2.  The Obscure Potential of AHNAK2.

Authors:  Mohamed Zardab; Konstantinos Stasinos; Richard P Grose; Hemant M Kocher
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 6.639

3.  Construction of a Redox-Related Prognostic Model with Predictive Value in Survival and Therapeutic Response for Patients with Lung Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Lingyan Xiao; Qian Li; Yongbiao Huang; Zhijie Fan; Li Ma; Bo Liu; Xianglin Yuan
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 2.682

Review 4.  Amino Acid Transporter SLC6A14 (ATB0,+) - A Target in Combined Anti-cancer Therapy.

Authors:  Katarzyna A Nałęcz
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2020-10-21
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.