2021
DOI: 10.5455/jabet.2021.d131
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Aberrant methylation of CDKN2A, RASSF1A and WIF1 in sporadic adenocarcinomatous colorectal cancer: Associations with clinicopathological features

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, an analysis of sporadic adenocarcinomatous CRC tissues from both the colon and rectum revealed a higher prevalence of CDKN2A methylation in stage II patients (p-value = 0.012) and those without lymph node metastasis (p-value = 0.011). Furthermore, this study also revealed that CDKN2A methylation was less frequent in stage III (p-value = 0.016) [59]. The discordant results in the literature describing the relationship between CDKN2A gene methylation and lymph node metastasis indicate that other variables such as sample variability, tumour heterogeneity, methodological differences in analysis, potential environmental influences, and variations in statistical approaches may need consideration and further analyses are required.…”
Section: Dna Hypermethylation Of Tumour Suppressor Genes As a Biomark...mentioning
confidence: 51%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, an analysis of sporadic adenocarcinomatous CRC tissues from both the colon and rectum revealed a higher prevalence of CDKN2A methylation in stage II patients (p-value = 0.012) and those without lymph node metastasis (p-value = 0.011). Furthermore, this study also revealed that CDKN2A methylation was less frequent in stage III (p-value = 0.016) [59]. The discordant results in the literature describing the relationship between CDKN2A gene methylation and lymph node metastasis indicate that other variables such as sample variability, tumour heterogeneity, methodological differences in analysis, potential environmental influences, and variations in statistical approaches may need consideration and further analyses are required.…”
Section: Dna Hypermethylation Of Tumour Suppressor Genes As a Biomark...mentioning
confidence: 51%
“…The identification of DNA methylation biomarkers involves the use of various methodologies, and their choice depends on whether global or regional methylation analysis is performed [54]. This includes a methylation-specific PCR (MSP), quantitative methylation-specific PCR (Q-MSP), microarray analysis, pyrosequencing, and reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) [42,[55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62]. MSP is a PCR-based technique that amplifies specific DNA regions after bisulfite conversion, identifying the methylation status at precise loci using primers targeting methylated or unmethylated sequences [63].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%