4.6 Article

COL5A1 may contribute the metastasis of lung adenocarcinoma

期刊

GENE
卷 665, 期 -, 页码 57-66

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2018.04.066

关键词

Lung adenocarcinoma; Metastasis; Differentially expressed genes; COL5A1; Invasion; Apoptosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Lung cancer leads to the largest number of cancer-related deaths worldwide and is usually accompanied with metastasis which is the primary cause of those death and correlated with poor prognosis. However, the mechanism of lung cancer metastasis is still lack of definition. Methods: We compared the primary lung adenocarcinoma (AD) and its metastasis tissues induced by overexpression of Kras(G12D) and inactivation of P53 in mouse lungs by analyzing GSE40222 about the differentially expressed genes (DEGs), pathways and hub genes. And human lung AD databases are used to verify the conversed changes of identified key gene and then followed functional studies are performed to explore the functions of key gene. Results: We identified 165 genes differentially expressed in lung AD metastasis compared to primary AD. Pathway analysis identified 649 GO biological processes and 8 KEGG pathways, such as ECM-receptor interaction. Biological network interaction identified the hub genes during lung adenocarcinoma metastasis, such as the up-regulated COL5A1, a novel gene in AD metastasis. We found it's also increased in human AD and advanced stage. Knockdown of COL5A1 in human AD metastatic cells inhibited cell growth and invasion, and induced cell apoptosis. Notably, higher expression of COL5A1 was observed in the lung AD patients with recurrence and short survive. Conclusion: By analyzing mouse lung AD and its metastases, we identified the potential key genes and pathways regulating lung AD metastasis, such as COL5A1. The following analysis of COL5A1 in human AD database and cells explores its functions, holding the implications of target therapy in AD metastasis and also providing more clues for future studies.

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

4.6
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