ArticleScientific reports2025
Integrated singlecell and bulk RNA-seq analysis identifies a prognostic signature related to inflammation in colorectal cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and verification of a lipotoxicity-related gene signature for predicting prognosis and immune landscape in colorectal cancer.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Enhanced IGFL1 translation in response to IL-1β is controlled by distinct 3'UTR elements.PloS one · 2026Article
- Integrative single-cell and bulk transcriptomic analyses identify DRAM1 as a candidate gene from fibroblast-associated transcriptional programs in colorectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Cholesterol metabolism and cancer: Molecular mechanisms, immune regulation and an epidemiological perspective (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Identification and tissue-level validation of ferroptosis-related genes in small intestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms based on machine learning.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Cancer therapy and cachexia.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2025Review
- Research progress of colorectal cancer in genomic and transcriptomic at multi-level.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Inflammation can influence the development of CRC as well as immunotherapy and plays a key role in CRC. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the potential of inflammation-related genes in CRC risk prediction. Inflammation gene models were constructed and validated by combining transcriptomic and single-cell data from TCGA and GEO databases, and the expression of inflammation-related genes was verified by RT-qPCR. We identified two molecular subtypes and three genetic subtypes, two risk subgroups according to median risk values, constructed a prognostic model including thirteen genes (TIMP1, GDF15, UCN, KRT4, POU4F1, NXPH1, SIX2, NPC1L1, KLK12, IGFL1, FOXD1, ASPG, and CYP4F8), and validated the performance of each aspect of the model in an external database. Patients in the high-risk group had worse survival with reduced immune cell infiltration and a greater tumor mutational load. The risk score correlated strongly with the immune checkpoints PD1, PDL1, PDL2, and CTLA4, and it is possible that high-risk patients are more sensitive to treatment involving immune checkpoints. In the single-cell data, GDF15 was most significantly expressed in cancer cell populations. Therefore, we further validated their expression in cells and tissues using qPCR. In summary, we developed a prognostic marker associated with inflammatory genes to provide new directions for subsequent studies and to help clinicians assess the prognosis of CRC patients as well as to develop personalized treatment strategies.
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.