| Title |
Decreased expression levels of PIWIL1, PIWIL2, and PIWIL4 are associated with worse survival in renal cell carcinoma patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s91295 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert Iliev, Michal Stanik, Michal Fedorko, Alexandr Poprach, Petra Vychytilova-Faltejskova, Katerina Slaba, Marek Svoboda, Pavel Fabian, Dalibor Pacik, Jan Dolezel, Ondrej Slaby |
| Abstract |
Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) are a newly discovered class of small non-coding RNAs involved in silencing of transposable elements and in sequence-specific chromatin modifications. PIWI proteins (PIWIL), which belong to the family of Argonaute genes/proteins, bind to piRNAs and function mainly in germ line cells, but more recently were described to be functional also in stem cells and cancer cells. To date, there have been four PIWI proteins discovered in humans: PIWIL1, PIWIL2, PIWIL3, and PIWIL4. Recent studies suggested that deregulated expression of PIWI proteins and selected piRNAs is common to many types of cancers. We found significantly lower expression of PIWIL1 (P<0.0001) and piR-823 (P=0.0001) in tumor tissue in comparison to paired renal parenchyma. Further, we observed a progressive decrease in PIWIL1 (P=0.0228), PIWIL2 (P=0.0015), and PIWIL4 (P=0.0028) expression levels together with increasing clinical stage. PIWIL2 (P=0.0073) and PIWIL4 (P=0.0001) expression also progressively decreased with increasing Fuhrman grade. Most importantly, low-expression levels of PIWIL1 (P=0.009), PIWIL2 (P<0.0001), and PIWIL4 (P=0.0065) were significantly associated with worse overall survival in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. Our results suggest the involvement of PIWIL genes and piR-823 in RCC pathogenesis, and indicate PIWIL1, PIWIL2, and PIWIL4 as potential prognostic biomarkers in patients with RCC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2016.
All research outputs
#3,257,968
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#95
of 2,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,078
of 400,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#5
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,967 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 400,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.