Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Search research articles

Home
Research Domains
Biomedical And Clinical Sciences
Oncology And Carcinogenesis
Predictive And Prognostic Markers
Genomic Characterization Of Peritoneal Lavage Cytology-positive Gastric Cancer.

Home
Research Domains
Biomedical And Clinical Sciences
Oncology And Carcinogenesis
Predictive And Prognostic Markers
Genomic Characterization Of Peritoneal Lavage Cytology-positive Gastric Cancer.

Related Experiment Video

Genome-Wide Analysis of DNA Methylation in Gastrointestinal Cancer

Genome-Wide Analysis of DNA Methylation in Gastrointestinal Cancer

Published on: September 18, 2020

Genomic characterization of peritoneal lavage cytology-positive gastric cancer.

Zhouqiao Wu¹, Tingfei Gu¹, Changxian Xiong²

¹Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing 100142, China.

Chinese Journal of Cancer Research = Chung-Kuo Yen Cheng Yen Chiu

|March 8, 2024

View abstract on PubMed

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Positive peritoneal lavage cytology (CY1) gastric cancer shows poor prognosis. This study identified marker and driver genes for CY1, suggesting it may be a progression of CY0 rather than a distinct subtype.

Keywords:

Cytology gastric carcinoma peritoneal metastasis whole exome sequencing

More Related Videos

Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT

Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT

Published on: January 22, 2018

Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors

Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors

Published on: February 16, 2024

Related Experiment Videos

Genome-Wide Analysis of DNA Methylation in Gastrointestinal Cancer

Genome-Wide Analysis of DNA Methylation in Gastrointestinal Cancer

Published on: September 18, 2020

Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT

Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT

Published on: January 22, 2018

Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors

Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors

Published on: February 16, 2024

Area of Science:

Oncology
Genomics
Molecular Biology

Background:

Gastric cancer with positive peritoneal lavage cytology (CY1) has a dismal prognosis and high risk of peritoneal metastasis.
The pathogenic mechanisms and therapeutic strategies for CY1 gastric cancer remain poorly understood, highlighting the need for further investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

To identify specific driver and marker genes in CY1 gastric cancer.
To provide potential molecular markers for risk assessment and therapeutic targets in CY1 gastric cancer.
To explore the genomic landscape of CY1 gastric cancer to inform treatment strategies.

Main Methods:

Whole exome sequencing was performed on tumor samples from 17 CY1 and 31 matched cytology-negative (CY0) gastric cancer patients.
The Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) algorithm was used to identify marker genes.

MutSigCV was employed to identify driver genes.

Main Results:

The LASSO algorithm identified 43 cytology-positive marker genes.
MutSigCV identified 42 cytology-positive specific driver genes.
CD3G and CDKL2 were identified as both driver and marker genes for CY1. No significant differences in mutational signatures, driver gene mutations, or tumor subclone architecture were observed between CY1 and CY0 groups.

Conclusions:

CY1 gastric cancer may represent a progression of CY0 gastric cancer rather than a distinct subtype.
Genomic insights from this study can guide treatment recommendations for both CY1 and CY0 gastric cancer patients.
The findings offer opportunities for genome-guided clinical trials and drug development for gastric cancer.