4.7 Article

Intercohort Gene Expression Co-Analysis Reveals Chemokine Receptors as Prognostic Indicators in Ewing's Sarcoma

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 16, 期 14, 页码 3769-3778

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0558

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NIH [1U01CA114757-04]
  2. European Community [037260]
  3. National Austrian Bank [OeNB-12765]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We report a novel analytic method, named intercohort co-analysis or Ican, which aids in the discovery of genes with predictive value for the progression or outcome of diseases from small-size cohorts. We tested this premise in Ewing's sarcoma (ES), a highly metastatic cancer of bone and soft tissues that lacks validated molecular metastasis and prognostic indicators. Experimental Design: To uncover genes significantly expressed in ES patient subsets, we first determined a nonarbitrary gene expression significance cutoff based on expression levels in validated expressing and nonexpressing tissues. We next searched for genes that were consistently significantly expressed in several ES cohort and cell line datasets. Significantly expressed genes were independently validated by quantitative reverse transcription-PCR in an additional ES cohort. Results: Analysis of ES cohorts revealed marked intercohort gene expression variability. After filtering out the intercohort variability, CXCR4 and CXCR7 were found to be consistently associated with specific ES subsets. Pairwise analyses showed CXCR4 to correlate with ES metastases, and CXCR4 and CXCR7 to patient survival, but not with several other clinicopathological variables. Conclusion: Ican is a powerful novel method to identifying genes consistently associated with particular disease states in cancers for which large cohorts are not available, currently the case of most cancers. We report for the first time that high CXCR4 expression preferentially associates with metastatic ES, and that of CXCR7 with poor patient survival. Clin Cancer Res; 16(14); 3769-78. ((C))2010 AACR.

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