4.3 Article

The clinicopathological and prognostic significances of CDC73 expression in cancers: a bioinformatics analysis

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 8, Issue 56, Pages 95270-95279

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.20446

Keywords

CDC73; bioinformatics analysis; cancers

Funding

  1. Liaoning BaiQianWan Talents Program
  2. Key Scientific and Technological Project of Liaoning Province [2015408001]
  3. National Natural Scientific Foundation of China [81472544, 81672700]
  4. Award for Liaoning Distinguished Professor

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CDC73 interacts with human PAF1 complex, histone methyltransferase complex and RNA polymerase II for transcription elongation and 3' end processing. Its down-regulated expression was immunohistochemically detected in gastric, colorectal, ovarian and head and neck cancers, and positively correlated with aggressive behaviors and unfavorable prognosis of malignancies. We performed a bioinformatics analysis by using Oncomine, TCGA and KM plotter databases. It was found that CDC73 mRNA was overexpressed in gastric, lung, breast and ovarian cancers, even stratified by histological subtypes (p<0.05). CDC73 mRNA expression was stronger in gastric intestinal-than diffuse-type carcinomas (p<0.05), and positively correlated with distant metastasis and TNM staging of lung cancer (p<0.05). CDC73 mRNA expression was positively related to both overall and progression-free survival rates of the patients with gastric cancer, even stratified by gender, lymph node involvement, or treatment (p<0.05), while versa for breast cancer (p<0.05). The prognostic significance of CDC73 mRNA was dependent on the datasets and pathological grouping in lung and ovarian cancers. These findings indicated the CDC73 mRNA overexpression was positively linked to carcinogenesis. It is cautious to employ CDC73 mRNA to evaluate the clinicopathological behaviors and prognosis of cancers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available