Back to all available

Promoter methylation of Retinol Binding Protein 7 (RBP7) predicts worse prognosis in breast cancer patients

immunology
oncology
medical-genetics

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women all over the world. G enetic and epigenetic events are accumulated in breast tumorigenesis. Retinoid-binding protein7 (RBP7) is a member of the cellular retinol-binding protein (CRBP) family, which is involved in the pathogenesis of breast cancer. Previous study indicated h igh expression of RBP7 was significantly related to good relative percent survival in the luminal A subtype . However, promoter methylation of RBP7 and its relationship with clinicopathological features remains unclear. In order to investigate the methylation status of RBP7 in breast cancer patients. We collected and conducted MSP in a cohort of breast cancer patients. Our results showed that h igh expression of R BP7 correlates with better prognosis in breast cancer from TCGA database. And the MSP experiment in the breast cancer cohort indicated promoter methylation of RBP7 might be one of the reasons causing RBP7 down-regulation in breast cancer patient . Further study indicated that RBP7 methylation was found to be significantly associated with molecular status, LNM and cancer related death. Furthermore, t he univariate and multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that RBP7 methylation ac ted as a predictor of poor survival either in the whole cohort or ER, PR, Her 2 negative subtypes. Our study in conclusion indicates that promoter methylation of RBP7 may predict poor prognosis in breast cancer regardless of its molecular status .
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].