Association of miR-193b Down-regulation and miR-196a up-Regulation with Clinicopathological Features and Prognosis in Gastric Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dysregulated expression of microRNAs (miRNAs) has been shown to be closely associated with tumor development, progression, and carcinogenesis. However, their clinical implications for gastric cancer remain elusive. To investigate the hypothesis that genome-wide alternations of miRNAs differentiate gastric cancer tissues from those matched adjacent non-tumor tissues (ANTTs), miRNA arrays were employed to examine miRNA expression profiles for the 5-pair discovery stage, and the quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT- PCR) was applied to validate candidate miRNAs for 48-pair validation stage. Furthermore, the relationship between altered miRNA and clinicopathological features and prognosis of gastric cancer was explored. Among a total of 1,146 miRNAs analyzed, 16 miRNAs were found to be significantly different expressed in tissues from gastric cancer compared to ANTTs (p<0.05). qRT-PCR further confirmed the variation in expression of miR-193b and miR-196a in the validation stage. Down-expression of miR-193b was significantly correlated with Lauren type, differentiation, UICC stage, invasion, and metastasis of gastric cancer (p<0.05), while over-expression of miR-196a was significantly associated with poor differentiation (p=0.022). Moreover, binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the UICC stage was a significant risk factor for down-expression of miR-193b (adjusted OR=8.69; 95%CI=1.06-56.91; p=0.043). Additionally, Kaplan-Meier survival curves indicated that patients with a high fold-change of down-regulated miR-193b had a significantly shorter survival time (n=19; median survival=29 months) compared to patients with a low fold-change of down-regulated miR-193b (n=29; median survival=54 months) (p=0.001). Overall survival time of patients with a low fold-change of up-regulated miR- 196a (n=27; median survival=52 months) was significantly longer than that of patients with a high fold-change of up-regulated miR-196a (n=21; median survival=46 months) (p=0.003). Hence, miR-193b and miR-196a may be applied as novel and promising prognostic markers in gastric cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".