Cited by 22Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisCancer-related molecular mechanisms research

Identification and Validation of Hub Genes Associated With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Via Integrated Bioinformatics Analysis

Open access
Wang, Sumei, Song, Zuoli, Tan, Bing, Zhang, Jinjuan, Zhang, Jiandong, Liu, Shuye·2021·Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common malignant tumor of the liver, with high morbidity and mortality, yet its molecular mechanisms of tumorigenesis are still unclear. In this study, gene expression profile of GSE62232 was downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO). The RNA-seq expression data and relative clinical information were retrieved from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. The datasets were analyzed by differential gene expression analysis and Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA) to obtain the overlapping genes. Then, we performed a functional enrichment analysis to understand the potential biological functions of these co-expression genes. Finally, we constructed the protein-protein interaction (PPI) analysis combined with survival analysis. MARCO, CLEC4M, FCGR2B, LYVE1, TIMD4, STAB2, CFP, CLEC4G, CLEC1B, FCN2, FCN3 and FOXO1 were identified as the candidate hub genes using the CytoHubba plugin of Cytoscape. Based on survival analysis, the lower expression of FCN3 and FOXO1 were associated with worse overall survival (OS) in HCC patients. Furthermore, the expression levels of FCN3 and FOXO1 were validated by the Human Protein Atlas (HPA) database and the qRT-PCR. In summary, our findings contribute new ideas for the precise early diagnosis, clinical treatment and prognosis of HCC in the future.

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 · 10.3389/fonc.2021.614531

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Wang, S., Song, Z., Tan, B., Zhang, J., Zhang, J., & Liu, S.
Affiliations
Tianjin Third Central Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhang, Jinjuan
  • Zhang, Jiandong
  • Liu, Shuye
Venue
Frontiers in Oncology
Published
2021-06-30
Volume
11
Pages
614531-614531
ISSN
2234-943X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3174749768
Cited by
22
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of the People's Republic of China
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Keywords
hepatocellular carcinoma, hub genes, gene co-expression network, ficolin-3, FOXO1, prognostic factors, overall survival, MARCO, Fc gamma receptor IIb, LYVE-1, TIMD4, stabilin-2, CFP, protein-protein interaction, differential gene expression

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