2020
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12040800
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Nine-Gene Signature for Predicting the Response to Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Abstract: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) and subsequent surgery is the standard multimodal treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), albeit PCRT response varies among the individuals. This creates a dire necessity to identify a predictive model to forecast treatment response outcomes and identify patients who would benefit from PCRT. In this study, we performed a gene expression study using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor biopsy samples from 156 LARC patients (training cohort n = 60; vali… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of note, none of the previously proposed predictive gene lists [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 28 ] were able to classify good and poor responders with reasonable specificity or sensitivity when applied to our cohort ( Supplementary Figure S2 ). Recently, the largest and most recent LARC cohort was published (Park et al [ 28 ]). Unfortunately, the small number of genes evaluated by the cohort prevented most of our inferential analyses to perform properly and could not be adequately evaluated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Of note, none of the previously proposed predictive gene lists [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 28 ] were able to classify good and poor responders with reasonable specificity or sensitivity when applied to our cohort ( Supplementary Figure S2 ). Recently, the largest and most recent LARC cohort was published (Park et al [ 28 ]). Unfortunately, the small number of genes evaluated by the cohort prevented most of our inferential analyses to perform properly and could not be adequately evaluated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Although the present study again demonstrated that the gene expression signatures derived from microarray technologies were not capable of discriminating non-responders from responders, most recent studies have extensively searched for promising candidates to predict nCRT response in LARC using more robust expression assays and platforms. For instance, multi-gene expression assays developed on the NanoString nCounter system may provide more accurate prediction to nCRT response in LARC [ 39 , 40 ]. DNA-based molecular markers, including mutations in KRAS or TP53 and microsatellite instability (MSI), may also be associated with responses to neoadjuvant treatment in LARC [ 41 , 42 , 43 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Protein–protein interactions were analyzed using CBS probe PINGS TM (Protein Interaction Network Generation System, KR100957386B1; Daejon, Korea) to identify the genes interacting with TERT . CBS probe PINGS TM uses five modules (protein–protein interactions, Path-finder, Path-linker, Path-maker, and Path-lister) to identify interacting genes, interaction distance, and interaction frequency [ 23 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%