ArticleHeliyon2024
Identification of necroptosis-related diagnostic biomarkers in coronary heart disease.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association and Toxic Mechanism Between Foodborne OTA Exposure and Embryonic Development.Journal of applied toxicology : JAT · 2026Article
- Identification and validation of mitochondrial metabolism-ralated biomarkers in coronary heart disease.Medicine · 2026Article
- Epigenome-Wide Association Studies of Proteasome Inhibitor-Related Cardiotoxicity in Patients with Multiple Myeloma.Cancers · 2026Article
- Myocardium miRNA Analysis Reveals Potential Biomarkers of Sudden Coronary Death in Rats.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The implication of necroptosis in cardiovascular disease was already recognized. However, the molecular mechanism of necroptosis has not been extensively studied in coronary heart disease (CHD). Methods: The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between CHD and control samples were acquired in the GSE20681 dataset downloaded from the GEO database. Key necroptosis-related DEGs were captured and ascertained by bioinformatics analysis techniques, including weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) and two machine learning algorithms, while single-gene gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) revealed their molecular mechanisms. The diagnostic biomarkers were selected via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Moreover, an analysis of immune elements infiltration degree was carried out. Authentication of pivotal gene expression at the mRNA level was investigated in vitro utilizing quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). Results: A total of 94 DE-NRGs were recognized here, among which, FAM166B, NEFL, POLDIP3, PRSS37, and ZNF594 were authenticated as necroptosis-related biomarkers, and the linear regression model based on them presented an acceptable ability to different sample types. Following regulatory analysis, the ascertained biomarkers were markedly abundant in functions pertinent to blood circulation, calcium ion homeostasis, and the MAPK/cAMP/Ras signaling pathway. Single-sample GSEA exhibited that APC co-stimulation and CCR were more abundant, and aDCs and B cells were relatively scarce in CHD patients. Consistent findings from bioinformatics and qRT-PCR analyses confirmed the upregulation of NEFL and the downregulation of FAM166B, POLDIP3, and PRSS37 in CHD. Conclusion: Our current investigation identified 5 necroptosis-related genes that could be diagnostic markers for CHD and brought a novel comprehension of the latent molecular mechanisms of necroptosis in CHD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.