Candidate genes in gastric cancer identified by constructing a weighted gene co-expression network.

Jian Chen, Xiuwen Wang, Bing Hu, Yifu He, Xiaojun Qian, Wei Wang
Author Information
  1. Jian Chen: Department of Chemotherapy, Qilu Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
  2. Xiuwen Wang: Department of Chemotherapy, Qilu Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
  3. Bing Hu: Department of Chemotherapy, Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei, Anhui, China.
  4. Yifu He: Department of Chemotherapy, Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei, Anhui, China.
  5. Xiaojun Qian: Department of Chemotherapy, Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei, Anhui, China.
  6. Wei Wang: Department of Chemotherapy, Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei, Anhui, China.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common cancers with high mortality globally. However, the molecular mechanisms of GC are unclear, and the prognosis of GC is poor. Therefore, it is important to explore the underlying mechanisms and screen for novel prognostic markers and treatment targets.
METHODS: The genetic and clinical data of GC patients in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) was analyzed by weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA). Modules with clinical significance and preservation were distinguished, and gene ontology and pathway enrichment analysis were performed. Hub genes of these modules were validated in the TCGA dataset and another independent dataset from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database by -test. Furthermore, the significance of these genes was confirmed via survival analysis.
RESULTS: We found a preserved module consisting of 506 genes was associated with clinical traits including pathologic T stage and histologic grade. PDGFRB, COL8A1, EFEMP2, FBN1, EMILIN1, FSTL1 and KIRREL were identified as candidate genes in the module. Their expression levels were correlated with pathologic T stage and histologic grade, also affected overall survival of GC patients.
CONCLUSION: These candidate genes may be involved in proliferation and differentiation of GC cells. They may serve as novel prognostic markers and treatment targets. Moreover, most of them were first reported in GC and deserved further research.

Keywords

References

  1. Science. 2016 Aug 5;353(6299):603-8 [PMID: 27493188]
  2. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015 Sep 01;8(9):10385-93 [PMID: 26617746]
  3. Eur J Cancer. 2013 May;49(7):1565-77 [PMID: 23352439]
  4. JAMA Oncol. 2017 Apr 1;3(4):524-548 [PMID: 27918777]
  5. Hum Pathol. 2013 May;44(5):725-33 [PMID: 23063503]
  6. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016 Nov;142(11):2397-402 [PMID: 27581738]
  7. Cell. 2008 Jul 25;134(2):215-30 [PMID: 18662538]
  8. Lancet. 2014 Jan 4;383(9911):31-39 [PMID: 24094768]
  9. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011 Jan 20;7(1):e1001057 [PMID: 21283776]
  10. Genome Res. 2003 Nov;13(11):2498-504 [PMID: 14597658]
  11. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2015;19(1A):A68-77 [PMID: 25691825]
  12. OMICS. 2012 May;16(5):284-7 [PMID: 22455463]
  13. Int J Cancer. 2012 Nov 15;131(10 ):2264-73 [PMID: 22392539]
  14. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Oct;15(11):1224-35 [PMID: 25240821]
  15. BMC Bioinformatics. 2012 Dec 09;13:328 [PMID: 23217028]
  16. Clin Biochem. 2016 Aug;49(12 ):903-8 [PMID: 27234597]
  17. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008 Dec 29;9:559 [PMID: 19114008]
  18. J Proteome Res. 2012 Jun 1;11(6):3281-94 [PMID: 22506683]
  19. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2015 Oct 30;466(4):711-6 [PMID: 26365350]
  20. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Mar-Apr;19(2):241-8 [PMID: 22190040]
  21. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29348 [PMID: 22272232]
  22. Oncotarget. 2016 Apr 5;7(14 ):18076-84 [PMID: 26716515]
  23. Carcinogenesis. 2009 Jan;30(1):114-21 [PMID: 18796737]
  24. Curr Genomics. 2015 Feb;16(1):3-22 [PMID: 25937810]
  25. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2007 Apr;26(2):141-6 [PMID: 17413980]
  26. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Dec;160(3):439-446 [PMID: 27744485]
  27. Genes Dev. 2008 May 15;22(10):1276-312 [PMID: 18483217]
  28. Oncogene. 1999 Jun 17;18(24):3608-16 [PMID: 10380882]
  29. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2013;17(2):150-5 [PMID: 23788982]
  30. BMC Cancer. 2016 Aug 04;16:597 [PMID: 27487789]
  31. Neoplasma. 2016;63(2):239-45 [PMID: 26774142]
  32. Biomed Pharmacother. 2016 May;80:220-226 [PMID: 27133060]
  33. Cell. 2016 Jul 28;166(3):755-765 [PMID: 27372738]
  34. Biomark Med. 2016 Jun;10 (6):633-50 [PMID: 26786840]
  35. J Biol Chem. 2008 Apr 4;283(14):9177-86 [PMID: 18258597]
  36. BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Mar 20;7 Suppl 1:S7 [PMID: 16723010]
  37. Lancet. 2010 Aug 28;376(9742):687-97 [PMID: 20728210]
  38. Nature. 2015 Jul 30;523(7562):612-6 [PMID: 26123020]
  39. PLoS Genet. 2009 Oct;5(10):e1000676 [PMID: 19798449]
  40. Lancet. 2003 Jul 26;362(9380):305-15 [PMID: 12892963]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0GCgenesgeneanalysiscancerclinicalco-expressionnetworksurvivalTstagegradeGastricmechanismsnovelprognosticmarkerstreatmenttargetspatientsTCGAweightedsignificancedatasetmodulepathologichistologicidentifiedcandidatemayCandidateBACKGROUND:onecommoncancershighmortalitygloballyHowevermolecularunclearprognosispoorThereforeimportantexploreunderlyingscreenMETHODS:geneticdataCancerGenomeAtlasanalyzedWGCNAModulespreservationdistinguishedontologypathwayenrichmentperformedHubmodulesvalidatedanotherindependentGeneExpressionOmnibusGEOdatabase-testFurthermoreconfirmedviaRESULTS:foundpreservedconsisting506associatedtraitsincludingPDGFRBCOL8A1EFEMP2FBN1EMILIN1FSTL1KIRRELexpressionlevelscorrelatedalsoaffectedoverallCONCLUSION:involvedproliferationdifferentiationcellsserveMoreoverfirstreporteddeservedresearchgastricconstructingHistologicOverallPathologicWeighted

Similar Articles

Cited By