Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 199

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Displays Distinct DNA Methylation Signatures with Potential as Clinical Predictors

Open access
Hernandez-Vargas, Hector, Lambert, Marie-Pierre, Le Calvez-Kelm, Florence, Gouysse, Géraldine, McKay-Chopin, Sandrine, Tavtigian, Sean V., Scoazec, Jean-Yves, Herceg, Zdenko·2010·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is characterized by late detection and fast progression, and it is believed that epigenetic disruption may be the cause of its molecular and clinicopathological heterogeneity. A better understanding of the global deregulation of methylation states and how they correlate with disease progression will aid in the design of strategies for earlier detection and better therapeutic decisions. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We characterized the changes in promoter methylation in a series of 30 HCC tumors and their respective surrounding tissue and identified methylation signatures associated with major risk factors and clinical correlates. A wide panel of cancer-related gene promoters was analyzed using Illumina bead array technology, and CpG sites were then selected according to their ability to classify clinicopathological parameters. An independent series of HCC tumors and matched surrounding tissue was used for validation of the signatures. We were able to develop and validate a signature of methylation in HCC. This signature distinguished HCC from surrounding tissue and from other tumor types, and was independent of risk factors. However, aberrant methylation of an independent subset of promoters was associated with tumor progression and etiological risk factors (HBV or HCV infection and alcohol consumption). Interestingly, distinct methylation of an independent panel of gene promoters was strongly correlated with survival after cancer therapy. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that HCC tumors exhibit specific DNA methylation signatures associated with major risk factors and tumor progression stage, with potential clinical applications in diagnosis and prognosis.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0009749

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 199

Metadata

Authors
Hernandez-Vargas, H., Lambert, M.-P., Le Calvez-Kelm, F., Gouysse, G., McKay-Chopin, S., Tavtigian, S. V., Scoazec, J.-Y., & Herceg, Z.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2010-03-17
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
e9749
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2014793428
Cited by
199
References
0
FWCI
7.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hepatocellular Carcinoma Displays Distinct DNA Methylation Signatures with Potential as Clinical Predictors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0009749
The paper
Hernandez-Vargas, H., Lambert, M.-P., Le Calvez-Kelm, F., Gouysse, G., McKay-Chopin, S., Tavtigian, S. V., Scoazec, J.-Y., & Herceg, Z. (2010). Hepatocellular Carcinoma Displays Distinct DNA Methylation Signatures with Potential as Clinical Predictors. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0009749

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.