4.7 Article

Expression and Clinical Utility of Transcription Factors Involved in Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition during Thyroid Cancer Progression

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 18, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10184076

关键词

thyroid cancers; epithelial-mesenchymal transition; transcription factors; Twist1; Snail; Zeb; E-cadherin; vimentin; prognosis

资金

  1. Sapienza University of Rome [RM11715C3465FB63]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed that during thyroid cancer progression, the role of EMT-TFs is incomplete, with Twist1 possibly playing a key role in EMT but lacking significant prognostic value.
The transcription factors involved in epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT-TFs) silence the genes expressed in epithelial cells (e.g., E-cadherin) while inducing those typical of mesenchymal cells (e.g., vimentin). The core set of EMT-TFs comprises Zeb1, Zeb2, Snail1, Snail2, and Twist1. To date, information concerning their expression profile and clinical utility during thyroid cancer (TC) progression is still incomplete. We evaluated the EMT-TF, E-cadherin, and vimentin mRNA levels in 95 papillary TC (PTC) and 12 anaplastic TC (ATC) tissues and correlated them with patients' clinicopathological parameters. Afterwards, we corroborated our findings by analyzing the data provided by a case study of the TGCA network. Compared with normal tissues, the expression of E-cadherin was found reduced in PTC and more strongly in ATC, while the vimentin expression did not vary. Among the EMT-TFs analyzed, Twist1 seems to exert a prominent role in EMT, being significantly associated with a number of PTC high-risk clinicopathological features and upregulated in ATC. Nonetheless, in the multivariate analysis, none of the EMT-TFs displayed a prognostic value. These data suggest that TC progression is characterized by an incomplete EMT and that Twist1 may represent a valuable therapeutic target warranting further investigation for the treatment of more aggressive thyroid cancers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据