Open Access

Functional analysis of gene expression profiling‑based prediction in bladder cancer

  • Authors:
    • Ji‑Ping Wang
    • Ji‑Yan Leng
    • Rong‑Kui Zhang
    • Li Zhang
    • Bei Zhang
    • Wen‑Yan Jiang
    • Lan Tong
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: March 28, 2018     https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.8370
  • Pages: 8417-8423
  • Copyright: © Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

The present study aimed to analyze the modification of gene expression in bladder cancer (BC) by identifying significant differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and functionally assess them using bioinformatics analysis. To achieve this, two microarray datasets, GSE24152 (which included 10 fresh tumor tissue samples from urothelial bladder carcinoma patients and 7 benign mucosa samples from the bladder), and GSE42089 (which included 10 tissues samples from urothelial cell carcinoma patients and 8 tissues samples from the normal bladder), were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus database for further analysis. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were screened between benign the mucosa and control groups in GSE24152 and GSE42089 datasets. Gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (KEGG) analysis were performed on overlapping DEGs identified in GSE24152 and GSE42089. Protein‑protein interaction (PPI) networks and sub‑networks were then constructed to identify key genes and main pathways. GO terms analysis was also performed for the selected clusters. In total, 1,325 DEGs in GSE24152 and 647 DEGs in GSE42089 were screened, in which 619 common DEGs were identified. The DEGs were mainly enriched in pathways and GO terms associated with mitotic and chromosome assembly, including nucleosome assembly, spindle checkpoint and DNA replication. In the interaction network, progesterone receptor (PGR), MAF bZIP transcription factor G (MAFG), cell division cycle 6 (CDC6) and members of the minichromosome maintenance family (MCMs) were identified as key genes. Histones were also considered to be significant factors in BC. Nucleosome assembly and sequence‑specific DNA binding were the most significant clustered GO terms. In conclusion, the DEGs, including PGR, MAFG, CDC6 and MCMs, and those encoding the core histone family were closely associated with the development of BC via pathways associated with mitotic and chromosome assembly.

Introduction

Bladder cancer (BC) is a heterogeneous disease with a variable disease history and is one of the most common genitourinary malignancies worldwide (1). A total of 72,570 new cases of urinary BC were diagnosed in the United States and 15,210 patients succumbed to BC in 2013 (2). The most common pathological type of BC is urothelial cell carcinoma, and the 5-year survival rate of BC is ~77% in the United States (3). BC is a disease with multifactorial etiology; radical cystectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is considered to be standard therapy (4), although the use of radiotherapy is considered as an alternative, particularly in more frail patients (5). However, these therapies are limited in their effectiveness, as BC has high recurrence and mortality rates, meaning that greater understanding of the course of BC development is urgently required.

A previous study suggested that different mechanisms have evolved to respond to specific phenotypic alterations in genes and cellular pathways involved in BC, and certain genetic variations in major tumor-associated pathways were proven to induce BC (6). Shen et al (6) assessed the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and interacting pathways in BC using bioinformatics analysis, given that the genes encoding activator protein 1 (AP-1) and nuclear factor of activated T cells were key in BC. Zhou et al (7) analyzed the gene expression in human BC samples using the GSE42089 microarray dataset, identifying a set of genes associated with mitotic spindle checkpoint dysfunction as being key in BC. However, the fact that only one microarray dataset was used by each of the above studies may prove to be a limitation to the analysis described.

In the present study, the gene expression profiles examined had to use the same platform as GSE42089 (Affymetrix GeneChip Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array) and had to be samples composed of bladder cancer specimens and normal bladder tissue. The only other dataset that fit these criteria was GSE24152. Therefore, two microarray profiles, GSE24152 and GSE42089, were used for integrated analysis of gene expression modification in BC in the present study; the use of the two gene expression profiles enabled a more reliable conclusion to be drawn. DEGs were identified, and gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analyses were performed. Protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and sub-networks were also constructed to identify the key genes and main pathways involved in BC. Using the aforementioned bioinformatics methods, the modification of gene expression in BC was analyzed by identifying significant DEGs and pathways, which may provide novel insight for the etiology and treatment research of BC.

Materials and methods

Microarray data

Two gene expression profiles, GSE24152 (8) and GSE42089 (7), were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus database in National Center for Biotechnology Information (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/), based on the GPL6791 and GPL9828 platforms in the Affymetrix GeneChip Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array, respectively. The GSE24152 dataset included 17 samples, of which 10 were fresh tumor tissue samples collected from patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and 7 were benign mucosa samples from the bladder. The microarray GSE42089 dataset consisted of 18 samples, of which 10 samples were tissues from urothelial cell carcinoma and 8 were normal bladder tissue.

Data preprocessing and DEGs analysis

The robust multiple average algorithm in the affy package (9) was used to normalize the microarray data and box plots were then generated. The microarray data from GSE24152 and GSE42089 were divided into two groups, a bladder carcinoma group and a normal group. Using the Limma package (10), the probe-level data of two sets were converted into expression measures and DEGs were identified in the bladder carcinoma group compared with the control group in GSE24152 and GSE42089. A Venn diagram was generated using VennDiagram package (11) to screen common DEGs in GSE24152 and GSE42089 for further analysis. A false discovery rate <0.01 and a |log2FC (fold-change) |>0.5 was used as the threshold. Heat maps were generated using the heatmap.2 function in ggplot 2 (12) to display the relative expression differences of DEGs. In addition, the cor.test function was used to evaluate the correlation coefficient of two groups of DEGs.

GO and pathway enrichment analysis

GO terms analysis is a widely used approach for studying large-scale genomic or transcriptomic data in function that consists of three terms: Biological process, cellular component and molecular function categories (13). KEGG is a widely used collection of online databases that deals with genomes, enzymatic pathways, and biological chemicals (14). In the present study, GO analysis and KEGG pathway enrichment were performed on the three categories of the screened DEGs using the DAVID (15) analysis tool, with a statistically significant cut-off of P<0.01.

PPI network and sub-network construction

Cytoscape (16) is an open-source bioinformatics software platform used for the visualization of molecular interaction networks and integrating with gene expression profiles and other state data. In the present study, Biosgenet in Cytoscape (17) was used to predict and visualize the interactions between selected DEGs and proteins using the BIND database (18) with a statistically significant cut-off of P<0.05. Significant sub-networks (clusters) were extracted from the PPI network using ClusterOne in Cytoscape (19) with a statistically significant cut-off of P<0.01. GO terms analysis was also performed for the selected clusters.

Results

DEGs selection

The variations in raw expression data were normalized following preprocessing (Fig. 1). A total of 1,325 DEGs were screened from the GSE24152 dataset and 637 DEGs were screened from the GSE42089 dataset (Fig. 2A and B depicts volcano plots of the two microarrays). A total of 619 common DEGs were identified by a Venn diagram, including 313 upregulated genes and 306 downregulated genes. From the heat maps of the 619 common DEGs generated (Fig. 2C and D), the DEGs could significantly distinguish the bladder carcinoma dataset from normal dataset.

GO and KEGG enrichment analysis of DEGs

GO and KEGG enrichment analysis were performed with a cut-off of P<0.01, obtaining 74 GO terms and 4 KEGG pathways were obtained. The main GO terms and KEGG pathways of 619 common DEGs are listed in Table I. According to the results, DEGs were mainly enriched in chromosomal assembly and cell cycle pathways, including DNA replication, and the main GO terms were also associated with mitosis, including mitotic sister chromatid segregation and spindle checkpoint.

Table I.

Functional enrichment of differentially expressed genes.

Table I.

Functional enrichment of differentially expressed genes.

CategoryTermP-valueFold enrichment
BPMitotic sister chromatid segregation 1.90×10−49.8
BPNegative regulation of cell cycle process 1.90×10−311.0
BPSpindle checkpoint 9.70×10−316.3
CCCondensed chromosome, centromeric region 1.70×10−99.8
CCCondensed chromosome kinetochore 2.90×10−910.5
CCMidbody 1.20×10−313.5
MFChromatin binding 4.50×10−33.8
MFMicrotubule motor activity 5.30×10−35.2
MFDamaged DNA binding 1.70×10−37.3
KEGG Progesterone-mediated oocyte maturation 1.80×10−45.5
KEGGCell cycle 1.10×10−86.1
KEGGDNA replication 1.70×10−49.1

[i] BP, biological process; CC, cellular component; MF, molecular function; KEGG, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes.

PPI network and sub-network construction

A PPI network was constructed for all DEGs (Fig. 3) and clustering analysis was performed based on this PPI network. In total, 6 sub-networks (clusters) were obtained (Table II and Fig. 4). Progesterone receptor (PGR) was a key gene in cluster 1 and the proteins enriched in cluster 1 were all histone proteins. In cluster 2, MAF bZIP transcription factor G (MAFG) was identified as a key gene and it was also detected in cluster 5. Cell division cycle 6 (CDC6) was a key gene in clusters 3 and 4. Minichromosome maintenance complex component (MCM) family members, including MCM2, MCM4, MCM7 and MCM10, were also key genes in clusters 3 and 4. Nucleosome assembly and sequence-specific DNA binding were significant GO terms in cluster 1 and cluster 2, respectively. No GO terms were obtained for clusters 3–6.

Table II.

Sub-networks obtained by clustering analysis.

Table II.

Sub-networks obtained by clustering analysis.

ClusterNodesDensityQualityP-valueDEGsSignificant GO term
1290.6080.946<0.001PGR, CHAF1B, ASF1B,Nucleosome assembly
2160.6530.842 9.18×10−5HLF, MAFGSequence-specific DNA binding
3150.5140.635 4.41×10−5CDC6, MCM2, MCM7, MCM10None found
4130.5130.494 2.00×10−3CDC6, MCM2, MCM10, MCM7, MCM4None found
5120.5150.576 3.00×10−3MAFGNone found
6  40.5001.000 1.00×10−2EFNA4None found

[i] DEGs, differentially expressed genes; GO, gene ontology.

Discussion

BC is a common malignancy that requires a high degree of surveillance, owing to the frequency of recurrence and the poor clinical outcome of invasive disease (20). Bioinformatic analysis of BC cells at the gene level can provide novel insights into this disease. In the present study, using the microarray datasets GSE24152 and GSE42089, significant DEGs in BC were identified. In the significant extracted sub-networks, PGR, MAFG, CDC6 and members of the MCM family were identified as key genes in BC; histones were also considered to have major functions in BC. The main GO terms and pathways were those associated with the cell cycle and chromosome assembly, including nucleosome assembly, spindle checkpoint and DNA replication.

PGR encodes a member of the steroid receptor superfamily, which mediates the physiological effects of progesterone (21). In the present study, PGR was an important gene in a cluster that was regulated by a set of transcription factors, revealing the potential significance of PGR in BC. Men are more frequently affected by BC than women, indicating that hormones and their receptors may function as regulatory factors (6). Miyamoto et al (22) clarified that the androgen receptor (AR) was involved in BC. As AR and PGR are determinant modulators of gonadal sex hormones, PGR may perform similar functions in BC with AR, via the progesterone-mediated oocyte maturation pathway, which was enriched in this study (23).

Histones are the main structural proteins associated with DNA in eukaryotic cells. Histones are divided into two groups, core histones and the nucleosomal histones (24). Core histones are some of the most highly conserved proteins in eukaryotes and have key roles in the organization of DNA folding (25). The altered patterns of histone modifications in various human cancer types have been studied extensively in recent years (26). Schneider et al (27) demonstrated that global histone modification levels were lower in BC than in normal urinary tissue. The conserved histone H2A has been reported to be overexpressed in BC cells and contributes to the activation of cancer-associated transcription pathways (28). In the present study, a set of core histones was clustered in cluster 1, the main GO term of which was associated with nucleosome assembly. Considering the function of histones in mitosis, it was concluded that the nucleosome and chromatin assembly may be modified in BC.

MAF encodes a nuclear transcription-regulating protein characterized by a basic region and leucine zipper domain; it has crucial roles in a variety of cellular processes (29). MAFG is a small member of the MAF protein family that consists of little more than the DNA binding and dimerization motif (30), which is able to partially co-localize with FBJ murine osteosarcoma viral oncogene homolog (FOS) in the nucleus and heterodimize with it (31). Members of the AP-1 family of transcription factors are dimeric complexes involved in cellular proliferation, transformation and death (32), and contains the FOS, jun proto-oncogene (JUN) and activating transcription factor (ATF) protein families, of which FOS is a major member. AP-1 family members are immediate early genes induced by a variety of stress signals and control the stress response including cell proliferation, apoptosis and tumorigenesis (33). By forming heterodimers, FOS proteins aid the binding of AP-1 to DNA and exert oncogene activity, leading to tumorigenesis (34). Previous reports demonstrated that the genes encoding AP-1 participate in the cancer-associated immune and inflammation pathways in BC (6). The data from the present study revealed that the expression of MAFG in BC was upregulated, which may increase tumorigenesis by promoting the formation of FOS dimers and the AP-1 complex.

CDC6 is an essential regulator of DNA replication in eukaryotic cells that assembles pre-replicative complexes at origins of replication during the G1 phase of the cell division cycle (35). MCM family members encode highly conserved proteins that act as enzymatically active helicases (36). MCMs drive the formation of pre-replicative complexes (PRCs), the formation of which is the first key event during the G1 phase of the cell cycle (37). MCMs and CDC6 are key proteins in the mechanism of DNA replication and are functionally associated with each other during the cell cycle (38). CDC6 is responsible for the loading of MCM proteins onto origins of replication and, with the presence of CDC6, MCMs bind to the chromatin specifically during the G1 phase of the cell cycle (35). The increased expression of CDC6 and MCM has been observed in dysplastic cells and CDC6 and MCM are consequently considered to be specific biomarkers of proliferating cells (38). Recent studies have revealed the proto-oncogenic activity of CDC6, with its overexpression interfering with the expression of certain tumor suppressor genes and potentially promoting DNA hyper-replication, inducing a senescence response similar to that caused by oncogene activation (39,40). Some members of the MCM family, such as MCM7, were also overexpressed and amplified in a variety of human malignancies (41). In the present study, the expression of CDC6 was found to be upregulated, revealing that in BC cells, DNA replication is aberrant.

In conclusion, the present study reveals that the genes PGR, MAFG, CDC6 and MCMs, and a set of histones are important factors in BC and have key roles in mitotic processes, including nucleosome assembly, spindle checkpoint and DNA replication. However, the small size of the microarray sample and the lack of experimental variation are limitations. Thus, further studies with larger sample size and experimental verification should be performed to confirm the conclusions of the current study.

References

1 

Ploeg M, Aben KK and Kiemeney LA: The present and future burden of urinary bladder cancer in the world. World J Urol. 27:289–293. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

2 

Siegel R, Naishadham D and Jemal A: Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 63:11–30. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Karavitakis M, Msaouel P, Michalopoulos V and Koutsilieris M: Pattern of somatostatin receptors expression in normal and bladder cancer tissue samples. Anticancer Res. 34:2937–2942. 2014.PubMed/NCBI

4 

Eisenberg MS, Boorjian SA, Cheville JC, Thompson RH, Thapa P, Kaushik D and Frank I: The SPARC score: A multifactorial outcome prediction model for patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol. 190:2005–2010. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

5 

James ND, Hussain SA, Hall E, Jenkins P, Tremlett J, Rawlings C, Crundwell M, Sizer B, Sreenivasan T, Hendron C, et al: Radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. N Engl J Med. 366:1477–1488. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Shen Y, Wang X, Jin Y, Lu J, Qiu G and Wen X: Differentially expressed genes and interacting pathways in bladder cancer revealed by bioinformatic analysis. Mol Med Rep. 10:1746–1752. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

Zhou N, Singh K, Mir MC, Parker Y, Lindner D, Dreicer R, Ecsedy JA, Zhang Z, Teh BT, Almasan A and Hansel DE: The investigational aurora kinase a inhibitor MLN8237 induces defects in cell viability and cell-cycle progression in malignant bladder cancer cells in vitro and in vivo. Clin Cancer Res. 19:1717–1728. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

8 

Zhang Z, Furge KA, Yang XJ, Teh BT and Hansel DE: Comparative gene expression profiling analysis of urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis and bladder. BMC Med Genomics. 3:582010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

9 

Gautier L, Cope L, Bolstad BM and Irizarry RA: Affy-analysis of Affymetrix GeneChip data at the probe level. Bioinformatics. 20:307–315. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Smyth GK: Limma: Linear models for microarray dataBioinformatics and computational biology solutions using R and Bioconductor. Springer; New York, NY: pp. 397–420. 2005, View Article : Google Scholar

11 

Chen H and Boutros PC: VennDiagram: A package for the generation of highly-customizable Venn and Euler diagrams in R. BMC Bioinformatics. 12:352011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Wickham H: ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer; New York, NY: 2009, View Article : Google Scholar

13 

Hulsegge I, Kommadath A and Smits MA: Globaltest and GOEAST: Two different approaches for Gene Ontology analysis. BMC Proc. 3 Suppl 4:S102009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Galperin MY and Fernández-Suárez XM: The 2012 nucleic acids research database issue and the online molecular biology database collection. Nucleic Acids Res. 40:(Database Issue). D1–D8. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

Huang da W, Sherman BT and Lempicki RA: Bioinformatics enrichment tools: Paths toward the comprehensive functional analysis of large gene lists. Nucleic Acids Res. 37:1–13. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Smoot ME, Ono K, Ruscheinski J, Wang PL and Ideker T: Cytoscape 2.8: New features for data integration and network visualization. Bioinformatics. 27:431–432. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

17 

Martin A, Ochagavia ME, Rabasa LC, Miranda J, Fernandez-de-Cossio J and Bringas R: BisoGenet: A new tool for gene network building, visualization and analysis. BMC Bioinformatics. 11:912010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Bader GD, Betel D and Hogue CW: BIND: The biomolecular interaction network database. Nucleic Acids Res. 31:248–250. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Nepusz T, Yu H and Paccanaro A: Detecting overlapping protein complexes in protein-protein interaction networks. Nat Methods. 9:471–472. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T and Thun MJ: Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 58:71–96. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Mulac-Jericevic B and Conneely OM: Reproductive tissue selective actions of progesterone receptors. Reproduction. 128:139–146. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

Miyamoto H, Yang Z, Chen YT, Ishiguro H, Uemura H, Kubota Y, Nagashima Y, Chang YJ, Hu YC, Tsai MY, et al: Promotion of bladder cancer development and progression by androgen receptor signals. J Natl Cancer Inst. 99:558–568. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

De León-Nava MA, Nava K, Soldevila G, López-Griego L, Chávez-Ríos JR, Vargas-Villavicencio JA and Morales-Montor J: Immune sexual dimorphism: Effect of gonadal steroids on the expression of cytokines, sex steroid receptors, and lymphocyte proliferation. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 113:57–64. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Loyola A and Almouzni G: Histone chaperones, a supporting role in the limelight. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1677:3–11. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

25 

Vaquero A, Loyola A and Reinberg D: The constantly changing face of chromatin. Sci Aging Knowledge Environ. 2003:RE42003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Esteller M: Cancer epigenomics: DNA methylomes and histone-modification maps. Nat Rev Genet. 8:286–298. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

27 

Schneider AC, Heukamp LC, Rogenhofer S, Fechner G, Bastian PJ, von Ruecker A, Müller SC and Ellinger J: Global histone H4K20 trimethylation predicts cancer-specific survival in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. BJU Int. 108:E290–E296. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

28 

Kim K, Punj V, Choi J, Heo K, Kim JM, Laird PW and An W: Gene dysregulation by histone variant H2A.Z in bladder cancer. Epigenetics Chromatin. 6:342013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

29 

Motohashi H, O'Connor T, Katsuoka F, Engel JD and Yamamoto M: Integration and diversity of the regulatory network composed of Maf and CNC families of transcription factors. Gene. 294:1–12. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

30 

Kyo M, Yamamoto T, Motohashi H, Kamiya T, Kuroita T, Tanaka T, Engel JD, Kawakami B and Yamamoto M: Evaluation of MafG interaction with Maf recognition element arrays by surface plasmon resonance imaging technique. Genes Cells. 9:153–164. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

31 

Shimokawa N, Kumaki I, Qiu CH, Ohmiya Y, Takayama K and Koibuchi N: Extracellular acidification enhances DNA binding activity of MafG-FosB heterodimer. J Cell Physiol. 205:77–85. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

32 

Shaulian E and Karin M: AP-1 as a regulator of cell life and death. Nat Cell Biol. 4:E131–E136. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

33 

Avouac J, Palumbo K, Tomcik M, Zerr P, Dees C, Horn A, Maurer B, Akhmetshina A, Beyer C, Sadowski A, et al: Inhibition of activator protein 1 signaling abrogates transforming growth factor β-mediated activation of fibroblasts and prevents experimental fibrosis. Arthritis Rheum. 64:1642–1652. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

34 

Gopalakrishnan A and Kong Tony AN: Anticarcinogenesis by dietary phytochemicals: Cytoprotection by Nrf2 in normal cells and cytotoxicity by modulation of transcription factors NF-kappa B and AP-1 in abnormal cancer cells. Food Chem Toxicol. 46:1257–1270. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

35 

Borlado LR and Méndez J: CDC6: From DNA replication to cell cycle checkpoints and oncogenesis. Carcinogenesis. 29:237–243. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

36 

Brun C, Guénoche A and Jacq B: Approach of the functional evolution of duplicated genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using a new classification method based on protein-protein interaction data. J Struct Funct Genomics. 3:213–224. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

37 

Korkolopoulou P, Givalos N, Saetta A, Goudopoulou A, Gakiopoulou H, Thymara I, Thomas-Tsagli E and Patsouris E: Minichromosome maintenance proteins 2 and 5 expression in muscle-invasive urothelial cancer: A multivariate survival study including proliferation markers and cell cycle regulators. Human Pathol. 36:899–907. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar

38 

Murphy N, Ring M, Heffron CC, King B, Killalea AG, Hughes C, Martin CM, McGuinness E, Sheils O and O'Leary JJ: p16INK4A, CDC6, and MCM5: Predictive biomarkers in cervical preinvasive neoplasia and cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol. 58:525–534. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

39 

Borlado LR and Méndez J: CDC6: From DNA replication to cell cycle checkpoints and oncogenesis. Carcinogenesis. 29:237–243. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

40 

Yao Z and Mishra L: Cancer stem cells and hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Biol Ther. 8:1691–1698. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

41 

Luo JH: Oncogenic activity of MCM7 transforming cluster. World J Clin Oncol. 2:120–124. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

June-2018
Volume 15 Issue 6

Print ISSN: 1792-1074
Online ISSN:1792-1082

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Wang JP, Leng JY, Zhang RK, Zhang L, Zhang B, Jiang WY and Tong L: Functional analysis of gene expression profiling‑based prediction in bladder cancer. Oncol Lett 15: 8417-8423, 2018
APA
Wang, J., Leng, J., Zhang, R., Zhang, L., Zhang, B., Jiang, W., & Tong, L. (2018). Functional analysis of gene expression profiling‑based prediction in bladder cancer. Oncology Letters, 15, 8417-8423. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.8370
MLA
Wang, J., Leng, J., Zhang, R., Zhang, L., Zhang, B., Jiang, W., Tong, L."Functional analysis of gene expression profiling‑based prediction in bladder cancer". Oncology Letters 15.6 (2018): 8417-8423.
Chicago
Wang, J., Leng, J., Zhang, R., Zhang, L., Zhang, B., Jiang, W., Tong, L."Functional analysis of gene expression profiling‑based prediction in bladder cancer". Oncology Letters 15, no. 6 (2018): 8417-8423. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.8370