Simultaneous resections of colorectal cancer primary lesions and hepatic metastases were safe and could serve as a primary option for selected SCRLM patients.
Obstruction is an independent indicator for the survival and postoperative recurrence for patients with colorectal cancer. Patients in the COC group have worse overall survival with high postoperative recurrence rate compared to those in the NOC group.
Genome-wide association studies have identified susceptibility loci for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). We conducted a meta-analysis of all single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that showed nominally significant P-values in two previously published genome-wide scans that included a total of 2961 ESCC cases and 3400 controls. The meta-analysis revealed five SNPs at 2q33 with P< 5 × 10(-8), and the strongest signal was rs13016963, with a combined odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of 1.29 (1.19-1.40) and P= 7.63 × 10(-10). An imputation analysis of 4304 SNPs at 2q33 suggested a single association signal, and the strongest imputed SNP associations were similar to those from the genotyped SNPs. We conducted an ancestral recombination graph analysis with 53 SNPs to identify one or more haplotypes that harbor the variants directly responsible for the detected association signal. This showed that the five SNPs exist in a single haplotype along with 45 imputed SNPs in strong linkage disequilibrium, and the strongest candidate was rs10201587, one of the genotyped SNPs. Our meta-analysis found genome-wide significant SNPs at 2q33 that map to the CASP8/ALS2CR12/TRAK2 gene region. Variants in CASP8 have been extensively studied across a spectrum of cancers with mixed results. The locus we identified appears to be distinct from the widely studied rs3834129 and rs1045485 SNPs in CASP8. Future studies of esophageal and other cancers should focus on comprehensive sequencing of this 2q33 locus and functional analysis of rs13016963 and rs10201587 and other strongly correlated variants.
BackgroundHuman replication factor C4 (RFC4) is involved in DNA replication as a clamp loader and is aberrantly regulated across a range of cancers. The current study aimed to investigate the function of RFC4 in colorectal cancer (CRC).MethodsThe mRNA levels of RFC4 were assessed in 30 paired primary CRC tissues and matched normal colonic tissues by quantitative PCR. The protein expression levels of RFC4 were evaluated by western blotting (n = 16) and immunohistochemistry (IHC; n = 49), respectively. Clinicopathological features and survival data were correlated with the expression of RFC4 by IHC analysis in a tissue microarray comprising 331 surgically resected CRC. The impact of RFC4 on cell proliferation and the cell cycle was assessed using CRC cell lines.ResultsRFC4 expression was significantly increased in CRC specimens as compared to adjacent normal colonic tissues (P <0.05). High levels of RFC4, determined on a tissue microarray, were significantly associated with differentiation, an advanced stage by the Tumor-Node-Metastasis (TNM) staging system, and a poor prognosis, as compared to low levels of expression (P <0.05). However, in multivariate analysis, RFC4 was not an independent predictor of poor survival for CRC. In vitro studies, the loss of RFC4 suppressed CRC cell proliferation and induced S-phase cell cycle arrest.ConclusionRFC4 is frequently overexpressed in CRC, and is associated with tumor progression and worse survival outcome. This might be attributed to the regulation of CRC cell proliferation and cell cycle arrest by RFC4.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12967-014-0320-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.