Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33833937›Full record

ArticleAnalytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam)2021

Identification of a 5-Gene-Based Scoring System by WGCNA and LASSO to Predict Prognosis for Rectal Cancer Patients.

He Huang, Shilei Xu, Aidong Chen, Fen Li, Jiezhong Wu, Xusheng Tu, Kunpeng Hu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Prognostic Significance ofBiomedicines · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

He Huang *General Surgery Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, China.
Shilei Xu *General Surgery Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, China.
Aidong ChenDepartment of Physiology, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 211166, China.
Fen LiGeneral Surgery Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, China.
Jiezhong WuGeneral Surgery Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, China.
Xusheng TuDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2703-6818
Kunpeng HuGeneral Surgery Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510530, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5407-8135

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough accumulating evidence suggested that a molecular signature panel may be more effective for the prognosis prediction than routine clinical characteristics, current studies mainly focused on colorectal or colon cancers. No reports specifically focused on the signature panel for rectal cancers (RC). Our present study was aimed at developing a novel prognostic signature panel for RC.

methodsSequencing (or microarray) data and clinicopathological details of patients with RC were retrieved from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA-READ) or the Gene Expression Omnibus (GSE123390, GSE56699) database. A weighted gene coexpression network was used to identify RC-related modules. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator analysis was performed to screen the prognostic signature panel. The prognostic performance of the risk score was evaluated by survival curve analyses. Functions of prognostic genes were predicted based on the interaction proteins and the correlation with tumor-infiltrating immune cells. The Human Protein Atlas (HPA) tool was utilized to validate the protein expression levels.

resultsA total of 247 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were commonly identified using TCGA and GSE123390 datasets. Brown and yellow modules (including 77 DEGs) were identified to be preserved for RC. Five DEGs (ASB2, GPR15, PRPH, RNASE7, and TCL1A) in these two modules constituted the optimal prognosis signature panel. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis showed that patients in the high-risk group had a poorer prognosis than those in the low-risk group. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated that this risk score had high predictive accuracy for unfavorable prognosis, with the area under the ROC curve of 0.915 and 0.827 for TCGA and GSE56699 datasets, respectively. This five-mRNA classifier was an independent prognostic factor. Its predictive accuracy was also higher than all clinical factor models. A prognostic nomogram was developed by integrating the risk score and clinical factors, which showed the highest prognostic power. ASB2, PRPH, and GPR15/TCL1A were predicted to function by interacting with CASQ2/PDK4/EPHA67, PTN, and CXCL12, respectively. TCL1A and GPR15 influenced the infiltration levels of B cells and dendritic cells, while the expression of PRPH was positively associated with the abundance of macrophages. HPA analysis supported the downregulation of PRPH, RNASE7, CASQ2, EPHA6, and PDK4 in RC compared with normal controls.

conclusionOur immune-related signature panel may be a promising prognostic indicator for RC.

Indexed as

TranscriptomeBiomarkers, TumorGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksHumansPrognosisRectal NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID33833937
PMCPMC8012151

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.