Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 173

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Global microRNA profiles in cervical squamous cell carcinoma depend on Drosha expression levels

Muralidhar, B, Goldstein, LD, Ng, G, Winder, DM, Palmer, RD, Gooding, EL, Barbosa‐Morais, NL, Mukherjee, G, Thorne, NP, Roberts, I, Pett, MR, Coleman, N·2007·The Journal of Pathology

Abstract

Gain of chromosome 5p is seen in over 50% of advanced cervical squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs), although the genes responsible for the selective advantage provided by this abnormality are poorly understood. In the W12 cervical carcinogenesis model, we observed that 5p gain was rapidly selected over ∼15 population doublings and was associated with the acquisition of a growth advantage and invasiveness. The most significantly upregulated transcript following 5p gain was the microRNA (miRNA) processor Drosha. In clinically progressed cervical SCC, Drosha copy‐number gain was seen in 21/36 clinical samples and 8/10 cell lines and there was a significant association between Drosha transcript levels and copy‐number gain. Other genes in the miRNA processing pathway, DGCR8, XPO5 and Dicer, showed infrequent copy‐number gain and over‐expression. Drosha copy‐number and expression were not elevated in pre‐malignant cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Importantly, global miRNA profiling showed that Drosha over‐expression in cervical SCC appears to be of functional significance. Unsupervised principal component analysis of a mixed panel of cervical SCC cell lines and clinical specimens showed clear separation according to Drosha over‐expression. miRNAs most significantly associated with Drosha over‐expression are implicated in carcinogenesis in other tissues, suggesting that they regulate fundamental processes in neoplastic progression. Our evidence suggests that copy‐number driven over‐expression of Drosha and consequent changes in miRNAs are likely to be important contributors to the selective advantage provided by 5p gain in cervical neoplastic progression. Copyright © 2007 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/path.2179

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Muralidhar, B., Goldstein, L., Ng, G., Winder, D., Palmer, R., Gooding, E., Barbosa‐Morais, N., Mukherjee, G., Thorne, N., Roberts, I., Pett, M., & Coleman, N.
Venue
The Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-04-30
Volume
212
Issue
4
Pages
368-377
ISSN
  • 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9896
OpenAlex
W1998206145
Cited by
173
References
2
FWCI
5.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.