4.4 Article

Overexpression of chemokine receptor lymphotactin receptor 1 has prognostic value in clear cell renal cell carcinoma

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.1551

关键词

ccRCC; prognosis; STAT; TCGA; XCR1

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81602591, 81672653, 81972519]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, higher XCR1 expression in ccRCC compared to normal tissues was associated with longer overall survival in patients with ccRCC. XCR1 knockdown significantly increased RCC cell proliferation and migration, and decreased apoptosis. XCR1 may serve as a potential prognostic biomarker in ccRCC.
Background: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is an aggressive subtype of renal cell carcinoma. X-C motif chemokine receptor 1 (XCR1) exerts important roles in tumor progression; however, its role in ccRCC is unclear. Methods: We utilized publicly available data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) to assess the role of XCR1 in ccRCC and validated the results in 36 samples from patients with ccRCC who underwent curative resection in Xinqiao Hospital Chongqing. XCR1 overexpression was identified in ccRCC, which was confirmed by qRT-PCR assay and immunohistochemical staining of ccRCC samples. Results: For the TCGA and clinical data, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that higher XCR1 expression in ccRCC was related to longer overall survival. Cox regression analysis suggested that XCR1 is an independent risk factor for ccRCC. GSEA analysis suggested that XCR1 is associated with the JAK/STAT signaling pathway. XCR1 knockdown by small interfering RNA (siRNA) significantly increased ccRCC cell proliferation and migration, and decreased cell apoptosis. Conclusion: We found higher XCR1 expression in ccRCC compared with that in normal tissues is related to longer overall survival in patients with ccRCC. XCR1 knockdown significantly increased RCC cells proliferation and migration, and decreased apoptosis. XCR1 might be used as a prognostic biomarker in ccRCC in the future.

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

4.4
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