Clinicopathological and prognostic value of Lysyl oxidase expression in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1878588/v1

Download PDF

Article

Clinicopathological and prognostic value of Lysyl oxidase expression in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1878588/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background:

The association between the expression of Lysyl oxidase (LOX) and its clinicopathological parameters and prognosis in patients with gastric cancer (GC) is still disputed. We performed this meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis to clarify the relationship between the expression and methylation level of LOX with its clinicopathological parameters and prognostic value.

Methods:

We applied odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to study the associations between LOX expression and clinicopathological parameters and overall survival (OS) in GC patients. In addition, association analysis of promoter methylation levels and expression of LOX with its prognostic value was performed using the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and four Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) datasets. The PRISMA 2020 checklist was used to guide the data extraction and analysis.

Results:

This analysis includes seven clinical studies with a total of 1435 GC patients. LOX expression was related to lymph node metastasis and tumor distant metastasis in GC patients, but not to gender, tumor differentiation, Lauren classification, or tumor depth of invasion. Patients with GC grouped in high-expression of LOX had a much worse OS than those in low-expression. In addition, TCGA and four GEO datasets with 1279 samples were included in the bioinformatics analysis. The bioinformatics analysis showed that patients with high LOX levels had poor OS; low levels of methylation at some cg sites in the LOX gene were strongly related to poor OS and PFS; and methylation levels of LOX are negatively correlated with advanced tumor stage. The conclusion from comprehensive DNA methylation and gene expression analysis supports LOX as a specific diagnostic and prognosis biomarker in GC.

Conclusion:

LOX expression was related to lymph node metastasis, tumor distant metastasis and poor prognosis in GC. Low methylation levels were related to advanced tumor stage and poor prognosis in GC. Integrative analysis supports LOX as a specific diagnostic and prognosis biomarker in GC.

Lysyl oxidase

clinicopathological parameters

prognosis

gastric cancer

meta- analysis

methylation

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most commonly occurring cancerous tumors of the gastrointestinal tract, ranking fifth in incidence rate and fourth in terms of death among cancers (1). Each year, over 1 million new cases are diagnosed, and roughly 783,000 people die (2, 3). GC has become a major health burden throughout the world. Despite notable improvements in the early detection, staging system, and treatment of GC, the five-year overall survival (OS) rate is still hovering around 40% (4, 5). In particular, patients with GC in stages II, III, and IV have a five-year survival rate of nearly 31%, 13%, and 3%, respectively (6). The high mortality rate is mostly caused by a lack of cognition of cancer invasion and metastasis (7–9). There is an urgent need to regard cancer progression as a continuous process that is dependent on intricate system of tumor microenvironment (TME) (10). The continual evolution of the TME through the various clinical phases occurred in lockstep with cancer cell proliferation and invasion (11, 12). Therefore, to significantly reduce the high mortality and recurrence rates associated with GC, it is critical and urgent to find innovative biomarkers in TME for early diagnosis and prognosis.

The copper-dependent amine oxidase lysyl oxidase (LOX) is a secretory enzyme. Its primary role is to crosslink elastic and collagen fibers covalently and to remodel the extracellular matrix (ECM) (13). LOX is important in building and mediating the TME milieu, via modulating the extracellular matrix (ECM) by posttranslational modification. Recent research found that LOX plays a critical role in tumor cell proliferation and survival (14). According to a number of studies, LOX has been highlighted as a biomarker of tumor progression and metastasis in multiple cancers, such as colorectal, breast, and ovarian carcinomas, as well as bronchial cancers (15–18). Recent studies suggested that LOX can be used as a marker for diagnosis and determining prognosis in GC patients (19). However, clinical studies have described conflicting conclusions about the relationship between the expression of LOX and its clinicopathological parameters and prognostic value. Lai H et al. reported that the expression of LOX was not relevant to lymph node metastasis (20). But Peng C et al. reported that LOX expression was positively associated with lymph node metastasis (21). Jie He et al. reported that the expression of LOX was negatively associated with lymph node metastasis (22). In addition, the researchers discovered that because of methylation and heterozygozity loss, the tumor suppressor gene of LOX is inactivated in GC and that the expression of LOX may be related to a better prognosis (23). But several studies have shown that LOX expression is related to a poor prognosis. (19, 21). Strong evidence-based clinical investigations and bioinformatic analyses are required to clarify the particular role of LOX in GC. Unfortunately, previous meta-analysis and bioinformatic analyses have not noticed and addressed these great and valuable controversies. Thus, we apply meta-analysis and bioinformatic analysis to clarify the association and existing conflict in expression and methylation of LOX with its clinicopathological parameters and prognostic value.

The protocol for this meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022284572). The PRISMA 2020 checklist was used to guide the data extraction and analysis. We used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) and AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) Guidelines to perform this meta-analysis (24).

Search strategy

Two authors (Zirui Jia and Jiacheng Gao) performed a literature search, and if a difference emerged, it was resolved by a third author (Yuhang Wang). Pubmed, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Chinese databases (CNKI, WanFang, WeiPu and CBM) were searched for articles published between the creation of the database and February 30, 2022. There were no specified limitations, such as language or country. The search strategy was made up of two primary parts that were connected by AND: (I) Stomach Neoplasms (eg, Gastric Cancer, Stomach Neoplasm, Stomach Cancer), (II) LOX protein, human (eg, LOX, lysyl oxidase)".

Clinical study selection

The studies listed below were chosen for inclusion: (I) The entire text of article is accessible; (II) the relationship between LOX expression and clinicopathological parameters or prognosis in GC patients was explored; (III) Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was used to evaluate LOX protein expression. The degree of LOX expression must be clearly; (IV) Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective or retrospective approaches, and all other quantitative research designs were considered.

The following articles were found to be ineligible for inclusion: (I) experiments on animals or cells; (II) the research was presented in the form of a review article, case report, letter, comment, or conference abstract; (III) studies that were repeated; (IV) the content of the study is irrelevant to the subject.

The quality of study was determined by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The NOS scores of 6 or above denote exceptional excellence in quality scores and are included in meta-analysis.

Clinical data extraction

Two authors (Zirui Jia and Jiacheng Gao) separately extracted results from every study that qualified: issuing time, first author, country, study period, gender, Lauren classification, tumor differentiation, depth of invasion, tumor metastasis, lymph node metastasis and OS in one, three, and five years. If there was a dispute, it was decided by a third author (Yuhang Wang).

Extraction of TCGA and GEO Data

The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database includes gene expression databases as well as clinical and methylation data. All fragment per kilobase million mapped reads (FPKM) data, methylation450 profile and clinical data with GC from the TCGA database, which includes 375 cases of GC and 32 normal controls, were downloaded using UCSC Xena (https://xena.ucsc.edu/). In addition, we searched the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database with the keywords “gastric cancer”, “survival” and “Homo sapiens”. The dataset was selected with a sample size of > 50. Finally, the data sets "GSE84437", "GSE62254", "GSE29272", and "GSE57303" with 433, 300, 126, and 70 samples were downloaded.

The expression of LOX mRNA and methylation levels in GC patients and healthy controls

Perl software was used to extract the mRNA expressions of LOX from the HTSeq of GC. The differential expression of LOX in GC compared to healthy controls was estimated using the ggpubr package in R software. By using Perl software, the methylation levels of LOX were obtained from the methylation450 profile. Using the R software packages plyr and ggpubr, the methylation levels of cg sites in the LOX DNA promoter regions were analyzed in GC.

Survival analysis of methylation levels of cg sites and the mRNA expressions of LOX

The mRNA expression and methylation levels of LOX in the median were used to divide GC patients into high and low expression groups. Survival analysis between high and low groups was performed using the survminer and survival packages.

Statistical analysis

R (v4.1.3) and RStudio (v2.0.433) were used for all analyses. For dichotomous variables including gender, Lauren classification, differentiation, depth of invasion, lymph node metastases, and tumor metastasis, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were adopted. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI were used to compare time-related prognostic information such as OS. All statistical tests were two-sided, and statistical significance was determined by a P value of less than 0.05. Meta-analysis was performed using the “meta” package. The results of the study evaluation were shown in forest plots, and the funnel plot was used to visually assess publication bias. I² statistics were applied to analyze heterogeneity, while funnel plots were utilized to test publication bias. A fixed effect model was proposed for Meta-analysis when heterogeneity was less than 40%, according to the Cochrane Handbook (25). Otherwise, a random effect model should be considered. The I² statistic from the Q test quantifies the heterogeneity of studies. The funnel plot is used to check for publication bias.

The difference in survival between the high and low expression groups in GC was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Categorical variables were estimated using the Chi-squared test based on between-group differences. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyse continuous variables. By using the R package "pROC", the ROC curve with time dependence was utilized to discover the prognostic implications by comparing the AUC (26). In addition, for ROC verification and AUC data calculation, a 10-fold cross-approach was used.

Description of Studies

From 9 database searches, we retrieved 79 articles (Fig. 1). 32 articles were found to be duplicates and were removed. 40 papers were eliminated from the remaining 47 for being unsuitable, including experiments on animals or cells (N = 19), review (N = 15), and no clinical data (N = 6). This meta-analysis included 1435 patients from seven studies, all of which matched the survey design (19–22, 27–29). The major collected data from included studies is summarized in Table 1. Studies with a NOS score of 6 or above.

Table 1: Main characteristics of the eligible studies.

No.	First author	Year	N.	Gender(M/F)	During	Country
1	Han YL (19)	2019	140	112/28	2008-2012	China
2	Peng C (21)	2018	184	132/52	2002-2011	China
3	Kasashima H (26)	2015	544	312/232	2009-2015	Japan
4	Lai H (20)	2014	215	95/120	2009-2012	China
5	Yalin Han (27)	2014	166	136/30	2007-2013	China
6	Zhang Q (28)	2013	161	107/54	2002-2010	China
7	He Jie (22)	2002	25	-	1999-2000	China

Abbreviation: IHC: immunohistochemistry; H: high expression; L: low expression;

Relationship between LOX expression and clinicopathological characteristics

The meta-analysis outcomes demonstrated that LOX expression was not related to gender (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.652–1.415, p = 0.836), Lauren classification (OR = 0.943, 95% CI = 0.710-1.252, p = 0.686), differentiation (OR = 0.981, 95% CI = 0.702–1.373, p = 0.912), and depth of invasion (OR = 1.362, 95% CI = 0.232–8.013, p = 0.733) in patients with GC. Our results indicated that the expression of LOX was related to lymph node metastasis (OR = 3.12, 95% CI = 1.670–5.836, p < 0.001) and tumor distant metastasis (OR = 3.199, 95% CI = 1.141–8.972, p = 0.027) (Figure 2).

There was no significant publication bias found in gender, Lauren classification, differentiation, depth of tumor invasion, lymph node metastasis, or tumor distant metastasis since their p-values were larger than 0.05 in Begg’s test (p = 0.361, 0.503, 0.336, 0.635, 0.537 and 0.765, respectively) (Figure 3).

Association of LOX Expression with OS

Compared to GC patients with low LOX expression, the one-year OS (OR = 2.973, 95% CI = 1.593–5.546, p = 0.001), three-year OS (OR = 3.323, 95% CI = 2.179–5.068, p < 0.001), and five-year OS (OR = 3.332, 95% CI = 2.063–5.382, p < 0.001) were significantly poorer with high LOX expression in GC patients (Figure 4).

The publication bias in one-, three-, and five-year OS (Begg’s test, p = 0.020, 0.239, and 0.262, respectively) was showed in Figure 5. We performed metatrim for one-year OS. Two hypothetical studies with a beneficial impact were included, and the pooled result remained consistent. (OR: 4.458, 95% CI = 2.237-8.886, P < 0.001) (Begg’s test, p = 0.671).

Prognosis and expression analysis of LOX in the TCGA and GEO databases

The LOX gene was expressed at a significantly higher level in GC tissues than in normal ones (P＜0.001) (Figure 6a). Based on the median expression of LOX, we divided all GC patients into high and low groups to explore the prognostic significance of LOX expression in GC patients. Compared to patients with low LOX levels, those with high LOX levels had poor OS (p = 0.002, Figure 6b and progression-free survival (p = 0.037, Figure 6c). For one-year, three-years, and five-years of survival, the AUC of the relevant ROC curve was 0.582, 0.658, and 0.777, respectively, indicating that the prognostic indicator based on LOX expression showed potential to forecast survival (Figure 6d). The survival significance of LOX expression was then analyzed using GSE84437, GSE62254, GSE29272, and GSE57303. In the GSE84437 and GSE62254 datasets, survival analyses revealed that patients with high LOX levels had a poor OS (Figure 6e and f). However, no clear relationship between LOX expression and OS was seen in the GSE29272 or GSE57303 datasets (Figure 6g and h). To resolve the controversy of results obtained by five datasets, we performed a meta-analysis with 1279 samples from the TGCA and four GEO datasets. As shown in Figure 6i, the pooled HR and 95 percent CI for the correlation between high LOX expression and OS were 1.24 (1.11-1.37), with no significant inhomogeneity among the five datasets. As a result, our team came to the conclusion that high LOX expression was a robust predictive factor of poor OS among GC patients.

The association of LOX gene methylation and tumor stage and expression

A total of 362 samples were obtained from TCGA HumanMethylation450, comprising 360 primary GC and 2 normal samples. We demonstrated the association between LOX gene methylation levels and its location. Our findings imply that the LOX gene is methylationed less in GC tissue than in normal samples (P = 0.001) (Figure 7a).

In addition, there were 19 (cg05256605, cg08623535, cg09262269, cg21215899, cg01824804, cg08431704, cg06508445, cg02548238, cg22836153, cg09499414, cg23913350, cg20703137, cg03619973, cg01429321, cg23352712, cg07233159, cg11960393, cg08920068, and cg26422022) methylation cg sites in the LOX gene. In each cg site, the methylation level of LOX in primary GC is lower than that in para-carcinoma samples (Figure 7b).

Furthermore, the average general LOX gene DNA methylation level and tumor stage were analyzed. Kruskal-Wallis test showed that: DNA methylation level of LOX is corelated with tumor stage (stageⅡ vs stageⅣ, stageⅢ vs stage Ⅳ) (all p < 0.05; Figures 8).

Validation of various methylation cg sites in GC for prognostic values

The prognostic significance of methylation cg sites of LOX in GC patients from the TCGA database was investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. We found that cg sites (cg05256605, cg08623535, cg01824804, cg08431704, cg09262269, cg08920068, cg01429321, cg02548238, and cg11960393) that have low methylation levels of LOX were related to an unfavorable OS (P = 0.003, 0.03, 0.014, 0.013, 0.025, 0.047, 0.023, 0.019 and 0.011, respectively) (Figure 7c–k), whereas other methylation cg sites (cg21215899, cg06508445, cg22836153, cg09499414, cg23913350, cg20703137, cg03619973, cg23352712, cg07233159, and cg26422022) did not have a prognostic value for GC patients (P = 0.604, 0.088, 0.068, 0.584, 0.071, 0.108, 0.287, 0.058, 0.297 and 0.404, respectively) (Supplementary Material 1a-j).

In addition, we found that the low methylation levels of cg sites (cg08623535, cg11960393, cg23913350, and cg05256605) of LOX were related to unfavorable PFS (P = 0.007, 0.012, 0.006 and 0.002, respectively) (Figure 7l–o), whereas other methylation cg sites (cg01429321, cg01824804, cg02548238, cg03619973, cg06508445, cg07233159, cg08431704, cg08920068, cg09262269, cg09499414, cg20703137, cg21215899, cg22836153, cg23352712 and cg26422022) were not related to prognostic value for GC patients (P = 0.132, 0.14, 0.06, 0.835, 0.617, 0.157, 0.094, 0.089, 0.103, 0.43, 0.07, 0.396, 0.36, 0.159 and 0.217, respectively) (Supplementary Material 2a-o).

Tumor initiation and growth depend on their microenvironment. Previous study reported that the expression of LOX may have a significant impact in conditioning various TME. LOX might be used as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker, even a new therapeutic target (30, 31). Currently, an increasing number of studies explore the relationship of LOX expression in GC with clinicopathological parameters and prognosis (19, 21, 27). But the results are seriously inconsistent. Our research investigated the relationship in expression and methylation of LOX in GC with its clinicopathological parameters and prognostic value. We pooled seven clinical studies, including 1435 patients. We also used the TCGA and GEO databases for analysis. Combining our meta-analysis and bioinformatic exploration, we draw the following conclusions: (I) LOX expression was related to lymph node metastasis and tumor distant metastasis of GC patients but not correlated with gender, tumor differentiation, Lauren classification, and tumor depth of invasion. (II) the OS of patients with GC who expressed a high level of LOX was significantly poorer than that of patients who expressed a low level. (III) Low levels of methylation at some cg sites in the LOX gene were significantly related to poor OS and PFS, and methylation levels of LOX are negatively correlated with advanced tumor stage. (IV) LOX is a significant diagnostic and prognosis biomarker in GC.

Earlier studies have indicated that LOX seems to have a crucial role in the metastasis of many malignancies by regulating epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) and the establishment of premetastatic niches (27, 32-34). The establishment of a pre-metastatic niche (PMN), which offers a receptive and supportive environment, is a critical step during GC metastasis (35). Therefore, LOX may play an important role in GC. Many studies suggest an association between LOX expression and clinicopathological parameters in GC. Kasashima et al. reported that LOX expression is positively corelated with lymph node metastasis and tumor distant metastasis (27). However, the relationship between LOX expression and clinicopathological characteristics in GC is controversial. Lai, H. et al. reported that LOX expression is not statistically associated with lymph node metastasis and tumor metastasis (20). Han YL et al. reported that the expression of LOX was positively correlated with the tumor depth of invasion (19). But the expression of LOX was negatively correlated with tumor depth of invasion, which has also been reported in clinical studies (22). Our meta-analysis combining seven clinical studies showed that LOX expression was associated with lymph node metastasis and tumor metastasis of GC patients but not correlated with gender, tumor differentiation, Lauren classification, and tumor depth of invasion.

Many researchers have found a relationship between LOX expression and the prognosis of GC. The expression of LOX may enhance many independent risk factors for OS or DFS, including macrophage infiltration, ECM remodeling, angiogenesis, neo-microvessel maturation, MMP-9 secretion, and type IV collagen breakdown (21). Han et al. reported that LOX may be a poor predictive biomarker that is correlated with a poor prognosis (19). However, the association between LOX expression and OS in GC patients is still being disputed. Kaneda A et al. reported that LOX is a tumor suppressor gene and correlated with well prognosis (23). This may be because LOX is an extracellular enzyme that causes collagen and elastin to cross-link. Loss of this function might facilitate the spread of tumor GC cells (36). Another possible reason may be that the LOX propeptide exerts a tumor suppressor effect (37). Our meta-analysis revealed that compared to GC patients with low LOX expression, the OS was significantly poorer with high LOX expression, regardless of whether the data came from clinical studies or bioinformatic datasets.

Abnormal DNA methylation has been shown to alter the tumor microenvironment and may be used to diagnose disease and predict prognosis. The methylation profile is critical for identifying the functional state of genes since their expression is reliant on the methylation status of the DNA CpG island (38, 39). According to research, abnormal DNA methylation of certain genes may have a key role in GC pathophysiology and development (40). Oue, Naohide et al. also reported that the level of promoter DNA methylation in LOX is strongly negative associated with LOX expression (41). Previous studies reported that LOX methylation may corelated with poor prognosis (23) (36). But it is not consistent with the conclusion of this study. So we further explore the association between methylation levels of cg sites and prognosis. We found that LOX expression is higher but methylation is lower in GC compared with healthy controls. We also found that the low methylation levels of cg sites (cg05256605, cg08623535, cg01824804, cg08431704, cg09262269, cg08920068, cg01429321, cg02548238 and cg11960393) of LOX were significantly related to a poor OS for GC patients. The low methylation levels of cg sites (cg08623535, cg11960393, cg23913350, and cg05256605) of LOX were related to poor PFS. These findings demonstrate that methylation cg sites might be used as prognostic and therapeutic targets for GC. In addition, we found that methylation levels of LOX are negatively correlated with advanced tumor stage. These findings are very consistent with our elsewhere results within this present study and strongly supported that LOX expression was correlated with poor prognosis.

Several studies have reported the diagnostic and prognostic value of LOX in GC patients. Zhu J et al. reported that overexpression of LOX may serve as a biomarker for a poor prognosis in GC (30). Lai H et al. reported that combining LOX with CEA, and CA199 might increase the sensitivity of lymph node and peritoneal metastasis diagnosis in GC patients (20). There is growing evidence that DNA methylation analysis is critical for early illness detection, therapy effectiveness evaluation, and prognosis estimation in GC patients (42). Our integrated analysis of DNA methylation and gene expression supports LOX as a significant diagnostic and prognosis biomarker in GC.

Our study also has some potential limitations. Firstly, despite our comprehensive literature search strategy, the sample size from clinical studies was not enough to perform the clinical parameter analysis of any subgroup of GC patients. Secondly, all of the clinical studies were from east Asia, which may have caused heterogeneity. Furthermore, the classification criteria (high/low) for IHC of LOX expression in GC samples in seven clinical studies were not totally the same. Thus, further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm our findings.

Our meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis were designed to clarify the association and existing conflict in expression and methylation of LOX with its clinicopathological parameters and prognostic value. To sum up, our work found that LOX expression was related to lymph node metastases and tumor metastasis of GC patients but not related to gender, tumor differentiation, Lauren classification, and tumor depth of invasion. In addition, compared to GC patients with low LOX expression, the OS was significantly poorer with high LOX expression. Furthermore, low levels of methylation at some cg sites in the LOX gene were found to be strongly correlated with poor OS and PFS and methylation levels of LOX are negatively correlated with advanced tumor stage. Integrative methylation and gene expression analysis support LOX in TME as a specific diagnostic and prognosis biomarker in GC.

Availability of data and materials

The meta-analysis data generated or analyzed during this study is included in this published article and its supplementary material files. The datasets generated and analysised during the current study are available in the GEO and UCSC Xena repository, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/ and https://xena.ucsc.edu/.

Funding

None.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Consent for publication

Not Applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable (this paper was provided based on researching in global databases).

Provenance and peer review

Not commissioned, externally peer-reviewed

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Zirui Jia: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft. Jiacheng Gao: Methodology, Investigation. Yuhang Wang: Methodology, Investigation. Tingting Zhou: Formal analysis, Investigation. Xiangwen Zhang: Supervision. Guo Zu: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.
Global Burden of Disease Cancer C, Fitzmaurice C, Abate D, Abbasi N, Abbastabar H, Abd-Allah F, et al. Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(12):1749–68.
Bang Y-J, Kim Y-W, Yang H-K, Chung HC, Park Y-K, Lee KH, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): a phase 3 open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9813):315–21.
Hartgrink HH, Jansen EP, van Grieken NC, van de Velde CJ. Gastric cancer. Lancet. 2009;374(9688):477–90.
Akhondi-Meybodi M, Ghane M, Akhondi-Meybodi S, Dashti G. Five-year Survival Rate for Gastric Cancer in Yazd Province, Central Iran, from 2001 to 2008. Middle East J Dig Dis. 2017;9(1):39–48.
Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, Zhang S, Zeng H, Bray F, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(2):115–32.
Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144(5):646–74.
Lambert AW, Pattabiraman DR, Weinberg RA. Emerging Biological Principles of Metastasis. Cell. 2017;168(4):670–91.
Ilkow CS, Marguerie M, Batenchuk C, Mayer J, Ben Neriah D, Cousineau S, et al. Reciprocal cellular cross-talk within the tumor microenvironment promotes oncolytic virus activity. Nature medicine. 2015;21(5):530–6.
Koontongkaew S. The tumor microenvironment contribution to development, growth, invasion and metastasis of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. J Cancer. 2013;4(1):66–83.
Webber J, Yeung V, Clayton A. Extracellular vesicles as modulators of the cancer microenvironment. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2015;40:27–34.
Chen W, Yang A, Jia J, Popov YV, Schuppan D, You H. Lysyl Oxidase (LOX) Family Members: Rationale and Their Potential as Therapeutic Targets for Liver Fibrosis. Hepatology. 2020;72(2):729–41.
Cox TR, Gartland A, Erler JT. Lysyl Oxidase, a Targetable Secreted Molecule Involved in Cancer Metastasis. Cancer Res. 2016;76(2):188–92.
Ahn SG, Dong SM, Oshima A, Kim WH, Lee HM, Lee SA, et al. LOXL2 expression is associated with invasiveness and negatively influences survival in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;141(1):89–99.
Cox TR, Erler JT. Lysyl oxidase in colorectal cancer. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2013;305(10):G659-66.
Ji F, Wang Y, Qiu L, Li S, Zhu J, Liang Z, et al. Hypoxia inducible factor 1alpha-mediated LOX expression correlates with migration and invasion in epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Oncol. 2013;42(5):1578–88.
Woznick AR, Braddock AL, Dulai M, Seymour ML, Callahan RE, Welsh RJ, et al. Lysyl oxidase expression in bronchogenic carcinoma. Am J Surg. 2005;189(3):297–301.
Han YL, Chen L, Qin R, Wang GQ, Lin XH, Dai GH. Lysyl oxidase and hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha: biomarkers of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2019;25(15):1828–39.
Lai H, Jin Q, Lin Y, Mo X, Li B, He K, et al. Combined use of lysyl oxidase, carcino-embryonic antigen, and carbohydrate antigens improves the sensitivity of biomarkers in predicting lymph node metastasis and peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer. Tumour Biol. 2014;35(10):10547–54.
Peng C, Liu J, Yang G, Li Y. Lysyl oxidase activates cancer stromal cells and promotes gastric cancer progression: quantum dot-based identification of biomarkers in cancer stromal cells. Int J Nanomedicine. 2018;13:161–74.
Jie He KT, Yingyue Wang, Meihua Xiong, Fang Zhou, Kang Zhao, Tiping Li. Expression of lysyl Oxidase gene in upper digestive tract carcinomas and its clinical significance. Chinese Journal of Cancer. 2002;21(6):4.
Kaneda A, Wakazono K, Tsukamoto T, Watanabe N, Yagi Y, Tatematsu M, et al. Lysyl oxidase is a tumor suppressor gene inactivated by methylation and loss of heterozygosity in human gastric cancers. Cancer research. 2004;64(18):6410–5.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg. 2021;88:105906.
Higgins JPJhwc-ho. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0. 1. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2008.
Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A, Tiberti N, Lisacek F, Sanchez JC, et al. pROC: an open-source package for R and S + to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011;12:77.
Kasashima H, Yashiro M, Kinoshita H, Fukuoka T, Morisaki T, Masuda G, et al. Lysyl oxidase is associated with the epithelial-mesenchymal transition of gastric cancer cells in hypoxia. Gastric Cancer. 2016;19(2):431–42.
Han Y. Expression and prognosis analysis of angiogenesis-related factors in gastric cancer tissues [D]: Chinese People's Liberation Army Medical College; 2014.
Zhang Q, Jin XS, Yang ZY, Wei M, Zhu XC, Wang P, et al. Upregulated expression of LOX is a novel independent prognostic marker of worse outcome in gastric cancer patients after curative surgery. Oncol Lett. 2013;5(3):896–902.
Zhu J, Luo C, Zhao J, Zhu X, Lin K, Bu F, et al. Expression of LOX Suggests Poor Prognosis in Gastric Cancer. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8:718986.
Wang L, Cao S, Zhai R, Zhao Y, Song G. Systematic Analysis of Expression and Prognostic Values of Lysyl Oxidase Family in Gastric Cancer. Front Genet. 2021;12:760534.
Boufraqech M, Zhang L, Nilubol N, Sadowski SM, Kotian S, Quezado M, et al. Lysyl Oxidase (LOX) Transcriptionally Regulates SNAI2 Expression and TIMP4 Secretion in Human Cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(17):4491–504.
El-Haibi CP, Bell GW, Zhang J, Collmann AY, Wood D, Scherber CM, et al. Critical role for lysyl oxidase in mesenchymal stem cell-driven breast cancer malignancy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(43):17460–5.
Erler JT, Bennewith KL, Nicolau M, Dornhöfer N, Kong C, Le Q-T, et al. Lysyl oxidase is essential for hypoxia-induced metastasis. Nature. 2006;440(7088):1222–6.
Gao J, Li S, Xu Q, Zhang X, Huang M, Dai X, et al. Exosomes Promote Pre-Metastatic Niche Formation in Gastric Cancer. Front Oncol. 2021;11:652378.
Napieralski R, Ott K, Kremer M, Becker K, Boulesteix AL, Lordick F, et al. Methylation of tumor-related genes in neoadjuvant-treated gastric cancer: relation to therapy response and clinicopathologic and molecular features. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(17):5095–102.
Trackman PC. Functional importance of lysyl oxidase family propeptide regions. J Cell Commun Signal. 2018;12(1):45–53.
Shen H, Wu H, Sun F, Qi J, Zhu Q. A novel four-gene of iron metabolism-related and methylated for prognosis prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma. Bioengineered. 2021;12(1):240–51.
Boer K, Hesselink DA, Baan CC. Variations in DNA methylation and allograft rejection. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2021;26(1):30–6.
Qu Y, Dang S, Hou P. Gene methylation in gastric cancer. Clin Chim Acta. 2013;424:53–65.
Oue N, Mitani Y, Motoshita J, Matsumura S, Yoshida K, Kuniyasu H, et al. Accumulation of DNA methylation is associated with tumor stage in gastric cancer. Cancer. 2006;106(6):1250–9.
Sapari NS, Loh M, Vaithilingam A, Soong R. Clinical potential of DNA methylation in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e36275.

No competing interests reported.

SupplementaryMaterial1.pdf
Supplementary Material 1: The methylation levels of cg sites (cg21215899, cg06508445, cg22836153, cg09499414, cg23913350, cg20703137, cg03619973, cg23352712, cg07233159, and cg26422022) were not related to OS for GC patients (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, and j).
SupplementaryMaterial2.pdf
Supplementary Material 2: The methylation levels of cg sites (cg01429321, cg01824804, cg02548238, cg03619973, cg06508445, cg07233159, cg08431704, cg08920068, cg09262269, cg09499414, cg20703137, cg21215899, cg22836153, cg23352712 and cg26422022) were not related to PFS for GC patients (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, and o).

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Major revision
01 Sep, 2022
Reviews received at journal
16 Aug, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
08 Aug, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
08 Aug, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
08 Aug, 2022
Editor invited by journal
29 Jul, 2022
Submission checks completed at journal
28 Jul, 2022
First submitted to journal
20 Jul, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Clinicopathological and prognostic value of Lysyl oxidase expression in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Background:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Search strategy

Clinical study selection

Clinical data extraction

Extraction of TCGA and GEO Data

The expression of LOX mRNA and methylation levels in GC patients and healthy controls

Survival analysis of methylation levels of cg sites and the mRNA expressions of LOX

Statistical analysis

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1