Cell Cycle Genes Are Potential Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liping, Xu; Jia, Li; Qi, Chen; Liang, Yang; Dongen, Li; Jianshuai, Jiang

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6206157

BioMed Research International

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods and Materials Results Discussion Conclusion Abbreviations Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Supplementary Materials References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article Corrigendum

!

A Corrigendum for this article has been published. To view the article details, please click the ‘Corrigendum’ tab above.

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2020 | Article ID 6206157 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6206157

Cell Cycle Genes Are Potential Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Xu Liping,¹Li Jia,²Chen Qi,¹Yang Liang,¹Li Dongen,¹and Jiang Jianshuai¹

Academic Editor: Udayan Apte

Received25 Mar 2020

Revised26 Apr 2020

Accepted02 May 2020

Published08 Jun 2020

Abstract

Background. The cell cycle pathway genes are comprised of 113 members which are critical to the maintenance of cell cycle and survival of tumor cells. This study was performed to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic values of cell cycle gene expression in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Methods. Clinical features and cell cycle pathway gene expression data were obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus and The Cancer Genome Atlas databases. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were determined by the student -test between HCC and noncancerous samples. Kaplan-Meier survival, univariate, and multivariate survival analyses and validation analysis were performed to characterize the associations between cell cycle gene expression and patients’ overall survival and recurrence-free survival. Results. 47 and 5 genes were significantly upregulated and downregulated genes in HCC samples, respectively. The high expression of BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 was associated with increased mortality (adjusted value = 0.04, odds ratio (OR): 1.89 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-3.46); adjusted value = 0.02, OR: 2.06 (95% CI:1.15-3.75); and adjusted value = 0.04, OR: 1.84 (%95 CI: 1.03-3.32), respectively). The expression of PTTG2 and RAD21 was significantly associated with cancer recurrence (adjusted value = 0.01, OR: 2.17 (95% CI: 1.24-3.86); adjusted value = 0.03, OR: 1.88[95% CI:1.08-3.28], respectively), while the low expression of MAD1L1 was associated with cancer recurrence (adjusted value = 0.03, OR: 0.53 (%95 CI: 0.3-0.93)). Conclusions. The present study demonstrated that BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 may serve as a prognostic biomarker for HCC patients. PTTG2, RAD21, and MAD1L1 expression is a major factor affecting the recurrence of HCC patients.

1. Introduction

Liver cancer is the sixth most common cancer type and the fourth cause of cancer-associated mortalities in 2018 worldwide. Global cancer statistics shows that approximately 841,000 new liver cancer patients are diagnosed and 782,000 patients die of the disease annually [1]. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for 75-85% of liver cancer cases and is the most common histological type of primary liver cancer. The major HCC-associated risk factors are hepatitis B and C virus infection, excessive alcohol drinking, exposure to aflatoxin, and smoking [2, 3]. Despite advances in the therapeutic methods, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate is as low as 30% for the HCC patients who underwent surgical treatment [2, 4]. Therefore, the identification of more sensitive diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers is greatly important for the early diagnosis and improvement of prognosis in HCC patients.

Cell division consists of two consecutive processes, the interphase and mitosis. The interphase includes the G1 phase during which the cell prepares for DNA synthesis, S phase during which the replication of DNA occurs, and G2 phase during which the cell prepares for mitosis [5]. Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) are key regulatory enzymes, each consisting of a catalytic CDK subunit and an activating cyclin subunit. CDKs regulate the cell’s progression through the phases of the cell cycle by modulating the activity of key substrates. Downstream targets of CDKs include transcription factor E2F and its regulator Rb. Cell cycle deregulation associated with cancer occurs through the mutation of proteins important at different levels of the cell cycle. In cancer, mutations have been observed in genes encoding CDK, cyclins, CDK-activating enzymes, CKI, CDK substrates, and checkpoint proteins [6, 7].

The diagnostic and prognostic values of the cell cycle gene expression in HCC remain poorly understood. The primary objective of the present study was to investigate the cell cycle gene expression profile and the relationship between overall survival, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and cell cycle gene expression by analyzing a large set of HCC data from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) [8, 9] and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) databases [10].

2. Methods and Materials

2.1. Data Acquisition

The clinical characteristics of HCC patients and expression data of cell cycle genes were obtained from the GSE14520 dataset of the GEO database (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE14520) [8, 9]. The gene expression values of the GSE14520 dataset were robust multiarray average (RMA) normalized signal intensities. The clinical factors analyzed in this study included age, gender, serum α-fetoprotein (AFP) level, cirrhosis, main tumor size, multinodular tumors, tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, survival time, survival status, time to recurrence, and recurrence status. The HCC cohort was downloaded from the TCGA database for the validation analysis [10]. The TCGA dataset included survival status, follow-up time, recurrence status, and time to recurrence of 377 HCC patients and cell cycle expression levels of 377 HCC patients and paired 50 noncancerous tissues. The expression values of the TCGA dataset were normalized read counts for 113 cell cycle genes. 113 genes in the cell cycle pathway were downloaded from the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) database (https://www.genome.jp/dbget-bin/www_bget?pathway+hsa04110) [11]. As the datasets included in the study were downloaded from public databases, the study did not need the approval of an ethics committee.

2.2. Bioinformatics Analysis of Cell Cycle Genes

To investigate the biological functions and possible signaling pathways of cell cycle genes, the enrichment of gene ontology (GO) terms and KEGG pathways was analyzed by the Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) bioinformatics online tool, version 6.8 (https://david.ncifcrf.gov/) [12].

2.3. Diagnostic Analyses of Cell Cycle Genes

Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were determined by the student -test between 247 HCC tissues and 241 noncancerous tissues. Raw values were corrected by the Bonferroni method. The genes with adjusted values < 0.05 were considered DEGs. The 50 pairs of HCC samples and noncancerous samples from the TCGA dataset were used to validate the DEGs between primary HCC tissues and normal liver tissues. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted by the R package of pROC to determine the diagnostic values of the differentially expressed genes [13]. Area under the curve (AUC) values were computed accordingly by the R package of pROC for cell cycle genes.

2.4. Survival and Recurrence Analyses

The Fisher exact test was used to analyze the associations between overall survival and clinical factors, including age, gender, serum AFP level, cirrhosis, main tumor size, multinodular tumors, and TNM stage, in the GEO dataset. To characterize the associations of the cell cycle gene expression with patients’ overall survival, HCC patients were divided into the “high-expression” or “low-expression” group if they exhibited expression levels greater or smaller than the median values, respectively. Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis was performed to plot survival curves, and the log-rank test was utilized to compare the difference in survival rates between the high- and low-expression groups using the R package of survival [14]. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed using the logistic regression model. was considered statistically significant. The methods for recurrence-free survival analyses were the same with overall survival analyses.

2.5. Prognostic Nomogram for Survival Prediction

All 247 HCC patients in the GSE14520 dataset were used for nomogram construction. The prognosis-associated clinical variables were selected to develop the overall survival nomogram, including tumor size, multinodular, cirrhosis, serum AFP level, TNM stage, and the BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 expression. The recurrence-associated clinical factors, sex, TNM stage, and the PTTG2, RAD21, and MAD1L1 expression were included in the recurrence nomogram. The nomograms were constructed by the R package of rms (v5.1-3.1). Each variable was assigned a score, and the scores of all variables were summed to calculate the total point, which was located onto the scale. Thus, the probabilities of the survival outcome could be predicted by drawing a vertical line to the total point.

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of Patients in the GEO Database

The GSE14520 dataset of the GEO database has 247 patients available for survival analysis. Detailed characteristics of these patients are shown in Table 1. Tumor size, multinodular, cirrhosis, serum AFP level, and TNM stage were found to be positively associated with OS ( for all cases, Fisher’s exact test, Table 1), whereas sex and TNM stage were positively associated with cancer recurrence ( values < 0.05 for all cases, Fisher’s exact test, Table 1). The remaining characteristics did not exhibit a significant association with OS or cancer recurrence ( values > 0.05 for all cases, Fisher’s exact test, Table 1).

3.2. Bioinformatics Analysis of Cell Cycle Genes

The GO function analysis indicated that cell cycle genes were mainly enriched in the regulation of cell division, mitotic nuclear division, G1/S transition of mitotic cell cycle, and DNA replication (Supplementary Table 1, adjusted values < 0.05 for all cases). The KEGG pathway analysis suggested that cell cycle genes were associated with the WNT signaling pathway, chronic myeloid leukemia, pathways in cancer, and other pathways (Supplementary Table 2, adjusted values < 0.05 for all cases).

3.3. Assessment of Diagnostic Value

By comparing cell cycle gene expression levels between 247 tumor tissues and 241 adjacent nontumor tissues, 92 cell cycle genes were found to be differentially expressed between tumor and nontumor tissues. The DEGs included 79 upregulated and 13 downregulated genes in HCC samples (Figure 1(a) and Supplementary Table 3, adjusted values < 0.05 for all cases). The TCGA dataset was used to further validate the cell cycle genes that were differentially expressed between normal liver tissues and primary HCC tissues. The validation analysis confirmed that 47 and 5 genes were significantly upregulated and downregulated genes in HCC samples (Figures 1(b) and 1(c), adjusted values < 0.05 for all cases). ROC curves were constructed to further explore the diagnostic values of these 52 DEGs. 30 cell cycle genes had a potential prediction value, with all values < 0.05 and for the GEO and TCGA datasets (Supplementary Table 5); CDC14B, CDC20, CDK1, MCM2, MCM6, and MCM7 in particular exhibited high accuracy in differentiating HCC tissues from nontumor tissues (Figure 2, values < 0.05, for all cases).

(a)

(b)

(c)

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

3.4. Survival Analysis

To evaluate the predictive capability of cell cycle gene expression for patients’ overall survival, the 247 HCC patients were divided into the low- and high-expression groups based on median values. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis suggested that the high expression of 30 genes and low expression of 5 genes were associated with a poor overall survival ( for all cases, log-rank test, Supplementary Table 6). Univariate analysis using the logistic regression model showed that the high expression of 21 genes was significantly associated with increased mortality, while the high expression of 2 genes was associated with decreased mortality ( for all cases, Supplementary Table 6). The characteristics associated with clinical prognostic outcome, including tumor size, multinodular, cirrhosis, serum AFP level, and tumor stage, were included in the multivariate cox regression analysis. Following the adjustment of the prognosis-related risk factors, the expression of 8 genes was significantly associated with OS in the survival analysis (adjusted values < 0.05 for all cases, Table 2 and Figure 3). The high expression of BUB3, CDK1, CDKN2B, CHEK1, MCM5, PTTG2, and RAD21 was associated with increased mortality (adjusted value = 0.04, odds ratio (OR): 1.89 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-3.46); adjusted value = 0.02, OR: 2.06 (95% CI:1.15-3.75); adjusted value = 0.00, OR: 2.92 (95% CI:1.61-5.41); adjusted value = 0.04, OR: 1.84 (%95 CI: 1.03-3.32); adjusted value = 0.01, OR: 2.07 (%95 CI:1.16-3.72); adjusted value = 0.04, OR: 1.87 (%95 CI:1.03-3.44); and adjusted value = 0.00, OR: 2.49 (%95 CI:1.38-4.60), respectively), while the low expression of GSK3B was associated with increased mortality (adjusted value = 0.04, OR: 0.55 (%95 CI: 0.3-0.78)). To further validate the associations between overall survival and the 8 genes above, the TCGA cohort was used to conduct the KM analysis. The survival analysis results suggested that BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 were found to be associated with the OS of HCC patients in the TCGA cohort ( values < 0.05 for all cases, log-rank test, Supplementary Figure 1).

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

3.5. Recurrence-Free Survival Analysis

To analyze the associations of cell cycle gene expression with patients’ RFS, the 247 HCC patients were divided into the low- and high-expression groups based on median values. Kaplan-Meier analysis suggested that the high expression of 9 genes, CDKN1C, CDC25B, CDC20, PTTG2, SMC3, RAD21, EP300, CDC25A, and MCM5 and low expression of 3 genes, MAD1L1, GADD45A, and GADD45G were associated with RFS in HCC ( values < 0.05 for all cases, log-rank test, supplementary table 7). Univariate analysis using the logistic regression model showed that the high expression of PTTG2 and RAD21 was significantly associated with tumor relapse, while low expression of MAD1L1 was associated with tumor relapse ( values < 0.05 for all cases, supplementary table 7). The characteristics associated with cancer recurrence, including gender and tumor stage, were included in the multivariate Cox regression analysis. Following the adjustment of the recurrence-related risk factors, the expression of PTTG2 and RAD21 was significantly associated with cancer recurrence (adjusted value = 0.01, OR: 2.17 (95% CI: 1.24-3.86); adjusted value = 0.03, OR: 1.88 (95% CI:1.08-3.28),respectively), while the low expression of MAD1L1 was associated with cancer recurrence (adjusted value = 0.03, OR: 0.53 (%95 CI: 0.3-0.93), supplementary table 7). The TCGA dataset was used to validate the associations of 12 cell cycle genes with RFS in HCC patients. The high expression of CDC20, PTTG2, and CDC25A was positively associated with cancer recurrence ( value = 0.02, OR: 1.72 (95% CI: 1.09-2.74); value = 0.65, OR: 1.11 (95% CI: 0.7-1.76); and value = 0.16, OR: 1.39 (95% CI: 0.88-2.2)), while the increased expression of GADD45A was negatively associated with cancer recurrence ( value = 0.99, OR: 1 (95% CI: 0.63-1.59), supplementary table 8).

3.6. Prognostic Nomogram for Survival Prediction

The prognostic risk factors that may predict the outcome of survival, including sex, serum AFP level, cirrhosis, TNM stage, tumor size, and cell cycle gene expression, were selected to construct the nomogram, which can provide an individualized prognosis prediction. For the 247 HCC patients, nomogram analysis was performed for the probabilities of death (Figure 4(a)) and recurrence event (Figure 4(b)). As shown in the nomogram, BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 expression contributed to a certain extent to the patients’ overall survival and PTTG2, RAD21, and MAD1L1 expression is a major factor affecting the RFS of HCC patients.

(a)

(b)

4. Discussion

The aim of the present study was to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic values of cell cycle gene expression in HCC patients by analyzing a large set of HCC data from the GEO and TCGA database. The results suggested that 30 genes may serve as potential diagnostic biomarkers for HCC patients with high accuracy. Some genes are known diagnostic biomarkers in cancers, such as CDK1 and CDC20. High expression of CDC20, a key component of the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC), has been reported in various malignancies, and CDC20 plays a vital role in tumorigenesis and progression. CDC20 is overexpressed in a wide range of tumor types, including prostate [15], bladder, cervix, liver, stomach, thyroid, and colon cancer [16–18]. High CDC20 expression was associated with advanced tumor stage in breast, colon, endometrium, and prostate cancer [16, 18] and HCC [17]. In addition to the known DEGs, this study, for the first time, reported a set of new diagnostic biomarkers in HCC patients, such as CDC14B, CCNE1, CCNE2, and CDKN2C.

AFP shows a sensitivity of 39%– 65% and a specificity of 76%–94% in the screening for HCC, suggesting AFP as a screening tool might miss a large fraction of HCC patients [19]. In our study, we found that 30 genes effectively discriminated patients with HCC from healthy controls ( for all cases). The performance of these genes for HCC is superior to AFP and may provide a more cost-effective and less resource-intensive method. Prospective clinical evaluation is needed to compare or potentially combine AFP screening with these genes.

In addition, we demonstrated that the expression level of BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 was significantly associated with mortality, with patients with a higher expression level of BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 expected to have a poor prognostic outcome. BUB3 is a member of the spindle assembly checkpoint genes which maintain accurate chromosomal segregation and prevents the formation of aneuploidy during mitosis. Germline mutations in BUB1 and BUB3 are associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer [20]. BUB3 expression is upregulated in oral squamous cell carcinoma patients. A high expression of BUB3 was an independent prognostic indicator for cancer-specific survival and was associated with increased cellular proliferation [21]. There are few reports on the functions of BUB3 in HCC patients; this study for the first time revealed that BUB3 was a negative prognostic biomarker for HCC patients.

CDK1 is a member of the Ser/Thr protein kinase family. This protein is a catalytic subunit of the highly conserved protein kinase complex known as the M-phase-promoting factor, which plays an important role in cell division [22]. In line with the findings in our study, CDK1 is overexpressed in several cancer types, including laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma [23], lung cancer [24], HCC [25], epithelial ovarian cancer [26], and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [27]. A high expression of CDK1 is negatively associated with overall survival for lung cancer [24], HCC [28], epithelial ovarian cancer [26], and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [27]. CDK1 expression was significantly higher in the bone marrow from acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients at recurrence than that at initial diagnosis. AML patients with higher level of nuclear CDK1 in their leukemic blasts showed inferior clinical outcome compared with those with lower levels [29]. Additionally, CDK1 modulates the levels of P27(kip) and AKT phosphorylation in response to all-trans retinoic acid treatment in AML patients. The regulation of the subcellular content of CDK1 and RARγ by all-trans retinoic acid is an important process for achieving an effective response in treatment of leukemia [29].

CHEK1 is another member of the Ser/Thr protein kinase family. It has crucial roles in the checkpoint-mediated cell cycle arrest in response to DNA damage or the presence of unreplicated DNA. As previously reported, CHEK1, both at the mRNA and protein levels, is highly expressed in medulloblastoma [30] and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia [31]. Elevated CHEK1 expression in medulloblastoma is an adverse prognostic marker [30]. Cytoplasmic expression of CHEK1 was associated with higher grade, triple-negative phenotype, KI67, p53, AKT, and PI3K expression in breast cancer [32]. The function of CHEK1 has been rarely reported in HCC; our study demonstrated that CHEK1 might serve as an adverse prognostic biomarker for HCC patients.

BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 expression profiling may guide the treatment for HCC patients in the clinical settings. If the specimens of HCC patients exhibit high BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 expression, these patients are probably associated with an inferior prognosis. Therefore, these patients might need a more aggressive treatment or frequent follow-up. BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 may also pave the way for developing targeted therapies for HCC patients. For instance, the CDK1 inhibitor, purvalanol A, enhances the taxol-induced apoptosis and inhibitory effects on cellular proliferation of taxol through Op18/stathmin in non-small-cell lung cancer cells in vitro [33]. Knockdown of CDK1 allowed cancer cells to undergo active mitosis and inhibited their sensitivity to all-trans retinoic acid-induced cell cycle arrest in AML cells [29].

5. Conclusion

Taken together, the results of the present study demonstrated that CDC14B, CDC20, CDK1, MCM2, MCM6, and MCM7 may be potential diagnostic biomarkers and BUB3, CDK1, and CHEK1 may serve as a negative prognostic biomarker for HCC patients. PTTG2, RAD21, and MAD1L1 expression is a major factor affecting the recurrence of HCC patients.

Abbreviations

HCC:	Hepatocellular carcinoma
GEO:	Gene Expression Omnibus
TCGA:	The Cancer Genome Atlas
OS:	Overall survival
RFS:	Recurrence-free survival
AFP:	α-Fetoprotein
TNM:	Tumor-node-metastasis
GO:	Gene ontology
KEGG:	Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes
DAVID:	Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery
DEGs:	Differentially expressed genes
ROC:	Receiver operating characteristic
AUC:	Area under curve
OR:	Odd ratio
CI:	Confidence interval
KM:	Kaplan-Meier
AML:	Acute myeloid leukemia.

Data Availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary Materials

1. Supplementary tables present the enrichment of GO terms, KEGG pathways of cell cycle genes, differentially expressed genes in the GEO and TCGA datasets, and the associations of cell cycle genes with overall survival and recurrence-free survival of HCC patients. 2. Supplementary Figure 1: the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis results of BUB3 (A), CDK1 (B), and CHEK1 (C) in the TCGA dataset. (Supplementary Materials)

References

F. Bray, J. Ferlay, I. Soerjomataram, R. L. Siegel, L. A. Torre, and A. Jemal, “Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries,” CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 394–424, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Bosetti, F. Turati, and C. La Vecchia, “Hepatocellular carcinoma epidemiology,” Best Practice & Research. Clinical Gastroenterology, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 753–770, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J.-H. Fan, J.-B. Wang, Y. Jiang et al., “Attributable causes of liver cancer mortality and incidence in China,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 7251–7256, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Savitha, V. Vishnupriya, and S. Krishnamohan, “Hepatocellular carcinoma- a review,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1276–1280, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Vermeulen, D. R. Van Bockstaele, and Z. N. Berneman, “The cell cycle: a review of regulation, deregulation and therapeutic targets in cancer,” Cell Proliferation, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 131–149, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. R. McDonald and W. S. El-Deiry, “Cell cycle control as a basis for cancer drug development (review),” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 871–886, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. J. Sherr, “Cancer cell cycles,” Science, vol. 274, no. 5293, pp. 1672–1677, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Roessler, H.-L. Jia, A. Budhu et al., “A unique metastasis gene signature enables prediction of tumor relapse in early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma patients,” Cancer Research, vol. 70, no. 24, pp. 10202–10212, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Roessler, E. L. Long, A. Budhu et al., “Integrative genomic identification of genes on 8p associated with hepatocellular carcinoma progression and patient survival,” Gastroenterology, vol. 142, no. 4, pp. 957–966.e12, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Ally, M. Balasundaram, R. Carlsen et al., “Comprehensive and integrative genomic characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma,” Cell, vol. 169, no. 7, pp. 1327–1341.e23, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Ogata, S. Goto, K. Sato, W. Fujibuchi, H. Bono, and M. Kanehisa, “KEGG: Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 29–34, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. W. Huang, B. T. Sherman, and R. A. Lempicki, “Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources,” Nature Protocols, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 44–57, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Robin, N. Turck, A. Hainard et al., “pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves,” Bmc Bioinformatics, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 77, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. M. Therneau and P. M. Grambsch, Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model, Springer, New York, 2000.
Y. Mao, K. Li, L. Lu, J. Si-Tu, M. Lu, and X. Gao, “Overexpression of Cdc20 in clinically localized prostate cancer: relation to high Gleason score and biochemical recurrence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,” Cancer Biomarkers, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 351–358, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. F. Gayyed, N. M. R. A. El-Maqsoud, E. R. Tawfiek, S. A. A. El Gelany, and M. F. A. Rahman, “A comprehensive analysis of CDC20 overexpression in common malignant tumors from multiple organs: its correlation with tumor grade and stage,” Tumor Biology, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 749–762, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Li, J. Z. Gao, J. L. Du, Z. X. Huang, and L. X. Wei, “Increased CDC20 expression is associated with development and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1547–1555, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W.-J. Wu, K.-S. Hu, D.-S. Wang et al., “CDC20 overexpression predicts a poor prognosis for patients with colorectal cancer,” Journal of Translational Medicine, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 142–148, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Daniele, A. Bencivenga, A. S. Megna, and V. Tinessa, “α-fetoprotein and ultrasonography screening for hepatocellular carcinoma,” Gastroenterology, vol. 127, no. 5, pp. S108–S112, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. M. De Voer, A. Geurts Van Kessel, R. D. A. Weren et al., “Germline mutations in the spindle assembly checkpoint genes BUB1 and BUB3 are risk factors for colorectal cancer,” Gastroenterology, vol. 145, no. 3, pp. 544–547, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. M. A. Silva, M. L. Delgado, N. Ribeiro et al., “Spindly and Bub3 expression in oral cancer: prognostic and therapeutic implications,” Oral Diseases, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 1291–1301, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. W. Murray, “Recycling the Cell Cycle: Cyclins Revisited,” Cell, vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 221–234, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Bednarek, K. Kiwerska, M. Szaumkessel et al., “Recurrent CDK1 overexpression in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma,” Tumor Biology, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 11115–11126, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y.-X. Shi, T. Zhu, T. Zou et al., “Prognostic and predictive values of CDK1 and MAD2L1 in lung adenocarcinoma,” Oncotarget, vol. 7, no. 51, pp. 85235–85243, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Zhao, S. X. Han, J. L. Ma et al., “The role of CDK1 in apoptin-induced apoptosis in hepatocellular carcinoma cells,” Oncology Reports, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 253–259, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Yang, H. Cho, H.-Y. Shin et al., “Accumulation of cytoplasmic Cdk1 is associated with cancer growth and survival rate in epithelial ovarian cancer,” Oncotarget, vol. 7, no. 31, pp. 49481–49497, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Piao, L. Zhu, J. Sun et al., “High expression of CDK1 and BUB1 predicts poor prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma,” Gene, vol. 701, pp. 15–22, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Cai, B. Li, Y. Zhu et al., “Prognostic biomarker identification through integrating the gene signatures of hepatocellular carcinoma properties,” eBioMedicine, vol. 19, pp. 18–30, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Hedblom, K. Laursen, R. Miftakhova et al., “CDK1 interacts with RARγ And plays an important role in treatment response of acute myeloid leukemia,” Cell Cycle, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 1251–1266, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Prince, M. Shah, S. Venkataraman et al., “Mb-22 checkpoint kinase 1 expression is an adverse prognostic marker and therapeutic target in Myc-driven medulloblastoma,” Neuro-Oncology, vol. 17, Supplement 3, pp. iii24–iii24, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. M. Sarmento, V. Póvoa, R. Nascimento et al., “CHK1 overexpression in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia is essential for proliferation and survival by preventing excessive replication stress,” Oncogene, vol. 34, no. 23, pp. 2978–2990, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Al-Kaabi, A. T. Alshareeda, D. A. Jerjees et al., “Checkpoint kinase1 (CHK1) is an important biomarker in breast cancer having a role in chemotherapy response,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 901–911, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Chen, Y. Liao, D. Long, T. Yu, F. Shen, and X. Lin, “The Cdc2/Cdk1 inhibitor, purvalanol a, enhances the cytotoxic effects of taxol through Op18/stathmin in non-small cell lung cancer cells in vitro,” International Journal of Molecular Medicine, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 235–242, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2020 Xu Liping et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

495

Downloads

1156

Citations