IntroductionExtra spindle pole bodies like 1 (ESPL1) are required to continue the cell cycle, and its primary role is to initiate the final segregation of sister chromatids. Although prior research has revealed a link between ESPL1 and the development of cancer, no systematic pan-cancer analysis has been conducted. Combining multi-omics data with bioinformatics, we have thoroughly described the function of ESPL1 in cancer. In addition, we examined the impact of ESPL1 on the proliferation of numerous cancer cell lines. In addition, the connection between ESPL1 and medication sensitivity was verified using organoids obtained from colorectal cancer patients. All these results confirm the oncogene nature of ESPL1.MethodsHerein, we downloaded raw data from numerous publicly available databases and then applied R software and online tools to explore the association of ESPL1 expression with prognosis, survival, tumor microenvironment, tumor heterogeneity, and mutational profiles. To validate the oncogene nature of ESPL1, we have performed a knockdown of the target gene in various cancer cell lines to verify the effect of ESPL1 on proliferation and migration. In addition, patients’ derived organoids were used to verify drug sensitivity.ResultsThe study found that ESPL1 expression was markedly upregulated in tumorous tissues compared to normal tissues, and high expression of ESPL1 was significantly associated with poor prognosis in a range of cancers. Furthermore, the study revealed that tumors with high ESPL1 expression tended to be more heterogeneous based on various tumor heterogeneity indicators. Enrichment analysis showed that ESPL1 is involved in mediating multiple cancer-related pathways. Notably, the study found that interference with ESPL1 expression significantly inhibited the proliferation of tumor cells. Additionally, the higher the expression of ESPL1 in organoids, the greater the sensitivity to PHA-793887, PAC-1, and AZD7762.DiscussionTaken together, our study provides evidence that ESPL1 may implicate tumorigenesis and disease progression across multiple cancer types, highlighting its potential utility as both a prognostic indicator and therapeutic target.

Background: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgeries (NOSES) have been applied to colorectal cancer (CRC). Different types of NOSES have been proposed. Traditional laparoscopic CRC surgeries (non-NOSES) have been widely adopted in clinical practice. Therefore, the safety and feasibility of NOSES could be clarified by comparing with non-NOSES.Methods: Consecutive cases who underwent NOSE or non-NOSE rectal surgeries were retrospectively collected at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018. Other inclusion criteria included patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum within 15 cm of the anal verge, over the age of 18 and undergoing primary laparoscopic rectal resection. Patients who were lost to follow-up or had incomplete information were excluded. Basic characteristics including gender, tumor location, age, staging, treatment, and Body Mass Index (BMI) were analyzed. Short-term outcomes including comorbidities, intra-operative blood loss, hospital stay, gas exhaust time were compared between different NOSES and non-NOSES groups. Long-term outcomes including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were also analyzed. Patients were followed-up during the inpatient period, at an outpatient clinic, or by phone call. Results: A total of 196 NOSES cases and 243 non-NOSES cases were included. There was a sex difference between the two groups and other factors were comparable. Cases were divided into NOSES groups [including extra-abdominal resection (EVER), specimen extraction and extra-abdominal resection (EXER), and intra-abdominal resection and specimen extraction (IREX)] and non-NOSES groups. Differences in sex (P=0.016), BMI (with mean of 22.08, 22.00, 22.53, and 23.26 kg/m2, P=0.003), and staging (P=0.008)were observed between the four groups. There was a difference in the intra-operative blood loss between NOSES and non-NOSES groups (57.05±62. 78, 52.65±68.19, 36.52±43.99 vs. 76.12±90.11 mL, P=0.002), in which NOSES groups had less blood loss. Furthermore, NOSES groups showed a better post-operative gas exhaust time (54.68±37.80, 45.06±24.69, 47.91±28.93 vs. 56.94±27.69 hours, P=0.012). NOSES groups also had fewer ileostomies (17 vs. 37, P=0.003). There was no difference in the long-term DFS and OS between the two groups.Conclusions: NOSES in rectal cancer showed better short-term outcomes and had comparable long-term outcomes compared with non-NOSE surgeries.