Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31788113›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2019

Identification of hub genes and key pathways associated with the progression of gynecological cancer.

Xi Zhang, Yudong Wang

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xi ZhangDepartment of Gynecology, Changning Maternity and Infant Health Hospital, Shanghai 200051, P.R. China.
Yudong WangDepartment of Gynecology, International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, P.R. China.
International Peace Maternity & Child Health Hospital · CNShanghai Changning Maternity and Infant Health Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gynecological cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in women. However, the mechanisms underlying gynecological cancer progression have remained largely unclear. In the present study, 799 dysregulated genes were identified in ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma (OV), 488 dysregulated genes in cervical squamous cell carcinoma and endocervical adenocarcinoma (CESC), and 621 dysregulated genes in uterine corpus endometrial carcinoma (UCEC). Bioinformatics analysis revealed that mRNA splicing and cell proliferation-associated biological processes served important roles in OV progression. Metabolism-associated biological processes played important roles in CESC progression, and protein phosphorylation and small GTPase-mediated signal transduction served important roles in UCEC progression. The present study also constructed OV, CESC and UCEC progression-associated protein-protein interaction networks to reveal the associations among these genes. Furthermore, Kaplan-Meier curve analysis showed that progression-related genes were associated with the duration of overall survival. Finally,

Indexed as

biomarkercervical squamous cell carcinoma and endocervical adenocarcinomaovarian serous cystadenocarcinomaprotein-protein interaction analysisuterine corpus endometrial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID31788113
PMCPMC6865827
OpenAlexW2981127557

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.