Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2010 Protein Translation and Cancer
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rhodes, D. R.
Right arrow Articles by Chinnaiyan, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rhodes, D. R.
Right arrow Articles by Chinnaiyan, A. M.
[Cancer Research 62, 4427-4433, August 1, 2002]
© 2002 American Association for Cancer Research

Molecular Biology and Genetics

Meta-Analysis of Microarrays

Interstudy Validation of Gene Expression Profiles Reveals Pathway Dysregulation in Prostate Cancer1

Daniel R. Rhodes, Terrence R. Barrette, Mark A. Rubin, Debashis Ghosh and Arul M. Chinnaiyan2

Departments of Pathology [D. R. R., T. R. B., M. A. R., A. M. C.], Biostatistics [D. G.], Urology [M. A. R., A. M. C.], and the Comprehensive Cancer Center [M. A. R., A. M. C.], University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109


   ABSTRACT
Top
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The increasing availability and maturity of DNA microarray technology has led to an explosion of cancer profiling studies. To extract maximum value from the accumulating mass of publicly available cancer gene expression data, methods are needed to evaluate, integrate, and intervalidate multiple datasets. Here we demonstrate a statistical model for performing meta-analysis of independent microarray datasets. Implementation of this model revealed that four prostate cancer gene expression datasets shared significantly similar results, independent of the method and technology used (i.e., spotted cDNA versus oligonucleotide). This interstudy cross-validation approach generated a cohort of genes that were consistently and significantly dysregulated in prostate cancer. Bioinformatic investigation of these genes revealed a synchronous network of transcriptional regulation in the polyamine and purine biosynthesis pathways. Beyond the specific implications for prostate cancer, this work establishes a much-needed model for the evaluation, cross-validation, and comparison of multiple cancer profiling studies.


   INTRODUCTION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
DNA microarray technology offers the ability to screen thousands of genes in parallel. This genome-wide approach has been used successfully to classify tumors and identify novel biomarkers associated with cancer (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) . Before drawing conclusions about the expression of a specific gene, it is thought necessary to demonstrate independent experimental validation (6) using techniques such as reverse transcription-PCR, Northern blots, or tissue microarrays. Therefore, it is commonplace to use the microarray as a screening tool, then to validate a few intriguing genes for additional investigation. Whereas this model has proved fruitful, it under-uses the "depth" inherent in the original microarray dataset. With the increasing number of publicly available datasets, we and others (7) have proposed a meta-analysis of multiple datasets that address similar hypotheses to validate and statistically assess all of the positive results simultaneously. This analysis would potentially yield sets of significant, differentially expressed genes, void of the artifacts of individual studies. From these confirmed gene sets, cellular pathways or transcription factor networks could be reconstructed, ultimately leading to a more reliable understanding of the underlying biology. This proposition poses unique challenges both statistically and computationally, for whereas the hypotheses in microarray studies are often similar (i.e., identify genes differentially expressed in cancer), individual investigators use distinct protocols, microarray platforms, and analysis techniques. Here we demonstrate a robust statistical model for performing meta-analysis of gene expression data across independent studies and platforms. The model treats each gene in each study as an independent hypothesis. Significance is assigned to a gene based on random permutations of the expression values of the gene, and then the similarity of significance values across studies is assessed with meta-analysis methods combined with multiple inference statistical testing.

The model was implemented on four publicly available prostate cancer gene expression data sets generated by independent laboratories (3 , 8, 9, 10) . All four of the studies made comparisons between the gene expression profiles of clinically localized prostate cancer and benign prostate tissue with the goal of identifying genes differentially expressed between the two sample groups (summarized in Table 1Citation ). Two of the groups used spotted cDNA technology (3 , 8) , whereas two other groups used commercial oligonucleotide-based technology (9 , 10) . Considerable overlap in the genes assayed (Table 2)Citation and similar experimental objectives among the studies allowed us to address four important questions, both technological and biological: (a) do the individual studies generate statistically significant results; (b) if so, do the studies identify the same genes (more than would be expected by chance); (c) is the significance of interstudy validation independent of the experimental platform (spotted cDNA versus oligonucleotide); and (d) do intervalidated sets of dysregulated genes provide clues into prostate carcinogenesis?


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1 Prostate cancer gene expression data sets used in meta-analysis of microarrays

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2 Percentage of genes shared by studies used in meta-analysis

For each study (rows) the percentage of genes found in all other studies (columns). The actual number of genes shared is given in parentheses.

 

   MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Data Collection.
Data used in this study was publicly available or provided on request. Cluster ID and gene names were assigned to all of the cDNA clones and Affymetrix probes based on Unigene Build 139. The two sample groups considered in this meta-analysis were clinically localized prostate cancer (independent of tumor grade) and benign prostate tissue (for the purposes of this study, benign prostatic hyperplasia was not distinguished from other benign prostate tissue). All of the available data were used except for negative values from the oligonucleotide-based studies. The expression ratios from Luo et al. (8) were transformed by taking the reciprocal, so that they would be analogous to those of Dhanasekaran et al. (3) . All of the expression values were base-two log-transformed. Missing data were allowed.

Individual Study Analysis.
Analysis was performed with custom software written in Perl. Statistical tests were one-sided and performed independently for the two null hypotheses that no genes are overexpressed and no genes are underexpressed in prostate cancer. Study-specific, gene-specific Ps were calculated using one-sided random permutation t tests. A t statistic (t) for an individual gene was calculated and compared with 10,000 t statistics generated by randomly assigning the sample labels to the expression values of the gene.

The P then equaled the fraction of random t statistics that were greater than or equal to the actual t statistic. Ps equal to zero were set to 0.0001. If a gene was present more than once in a study, the P was set to the smallest value. To calculate the q value (or gene-specific false discovery rate), genes were sorted by P, and then the ratio of the expected number of occurrences at or better than each P to the actual number of occurrences was computed.

Meta-Analysis.
For each possible combination of studies, a meta-analysis was performed to test the null hypothesis that positive results from individual studies do not correspond to the same genes. For each gene that was present in all of the studies within a given meta-analysis, a P summary statistic (S) was computed using the Ps from the random permutation t tests.

Summary statistic Ps were calculated by a comparison to 100,000 summary statistics generated by randomly selecting a P from each individual study contributing to the respective meta-analysis. The summary statistic P then equaled the fraction of random summary statistics that were greater than or equal to the actual. For each meta-analysis, we sorted genes by summary P, and then calculated the summary q value of a gene as the ratio of the expected number of occurrences at or better than the P of the gene to the actual number of occurrences (same formula as individual study analysis). To assimilate results from all of the meta-analyses, we selected the minimum summary q value for each gene and then ranked the gene lists by this variable. To visualize meta-analysis results, we normalized each gene in each study independently so that the mean gene expression of the benign samples equaled zero and the SD = 1. Data were visualized in TreeView (11) . The color scale represents the level of over- or underexpression based on the number of SDs an expression value is above or below the mean benign sample.

Random Simulation.
In each study, samples were randomly assigned to prostate cancer or benign groups, maintaining the actual sample group sizes. The meta-analysis described previously was then performed.


   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
Individual Study Analysis of Prostate Cancer Gene Expression Datasets.
Before performing the interstudy analysis, we evaluated the results of the individual prostate cancer gene expression studies. For each gene in each study, we tested the null hypothesis that no relationship exists between the expression values of the gene and the cancer versus benign distinction. Ps were assigned to each gene with permutation t tests (4 , 12) and, thus, represent the likelihood that expression values of a gene were associated with samples at random. If we were only investigating one gene, thus one hypothesis, the P would be a sufficient measure of significance; however, the simultaneous multiple inferences inherent in microarray analysis require special statistical consideration. For example, if we surveyed 1000 genes, a P of 0.05 may not be significant, because we would expect, on average, to randomly find 50 genes with Ps < 0.05. To address this, we adopted the method of false discovery rates (13) . Estimated lowest gene-specific false discovery rates (or q values) have been suggested as a measure of significance analogous to Ps but adapted to multiple inference scenarios.3 Q values are determined by ranking genes by their Ps and then calculating the ratio of expected random occurrences at or better than a P of a gene to the actual number of occurrences. Fig. 1Citation depicts the q value plots of the four studies analyzed. The X axis is the rank index for genes sorted by P. If the null hypothesis were true, we would expect the gene q-values (represented on the Y axis) to remain nearly constant and equal to 1.0. As anticipated, all four of the studies had genes with q values much less than one, suggesting that many genes can differentiate prostate cancer from benign tissue. We suspect that the number of genes at a particular q value in a given study reflects the sample size of the study (and, thus, statistical power), as well as quality of the samples, arrays, and signals. The disparity among the number of positive "calls" for overexpression in prostate cancer is evident at a q value of 0.10 where Dhanasekaran et al. (3) called 665 genes, Luo et al. (8) called 758 genes, Welsh et al. (10) called 1194 genes, and Magee et al. (Ref. 9 ; the smallest study) called zero genes (Fig. 1A)Citation . A similar phenomenon was observed for down-regulated genes (Fig. 1B)Citation .



View larger version (55K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 1. Evaluating individual prostate cancer gene expression studies by estimated lowest false discovery rates (q value). The X axis represents the gene index as ranked by P, and the Y axis represents q value. A, q value plot for overexpressed genes and (B) under-expressed genes in prostate cancer. Gene expression data sets are indicated by the first author (3 , 8 9 10) . See text for details.

 
Meta-Analysis of Prostate Cancer Gene Expression.
We then implemented a meta-analysis model to assess the similarity of the findings between studies to ultimately identify statistically reliable sets of over- and underexpressed genes in prostate cancer (schematically described in Fig. 2Citation ). In all four of the published studies, molecular validation was performed on small sets of identified genes (maximum of 4) by Northern blotting (3) , reverse transcription-PCR (8, 9, 10) , in situ hybridization (9) , and immunohistochemistry (for protein; Refs. 3 , 10 ). We performed in-silico interstudy validation and significance analysis for all of the genes present in at least two, studies by integrating the methods of meta-analysis summary statistics (14) and false discovery rates (described previously). The null hypothesis we tested was that the positive findings in the four individual studies do not correspond to the same genes. Because different combinations of 2, 3, and 4 studies have different sets of overlapping genes, we performed an analysis for each possible combination and then assimilated the results. In each analysis, summary statistics were computed for genes represented in all of the included studies, and their significance was evaluated based on a distribution of randomly generated summary statistics (see "Materials and Methods"). Each gene was then assigned a summary q value, which was an estimate of the likelihood that the Ps of the gene from the individual studies were assigned to the gene by random selection from the respective studies. If the expression values of a gene significantly differentiated cancer from benign in multiple studies, the meta-analysis summary statistic of a gene would also be significant (i.e., represented by a low q value). However, if a gene was significant in only one study, the summary statistic would not be significant. The q value plot for overexpressed genes in all of the two-study analyses showed that all of the pair-wise combinations of studies yielded sets of significantly similar genes, although certain pairs of studies yielded more similarly "called" genes than others (Fig. 3A)Citation . Interestingly, the spotted studies (i.e., Dhanasekaran et al. and Luo et al.; Refs. 3 , 8 ) shared approximately equal similarity with the Welsh et al. (10) oligonucleotide study as they did with each other, suggesting that the two technologies generate comparable results. As expected, we found that increasing the number of studies in the meta-analysis increases the significance and number of called genes, with the exception of including the Magee et al. study (Ref. 9 ; Fig. 3BCitation ). To formally assess the utility of our statistical model, we randomly designated samples in each study as benign or prostate cancer and carried out the meta-analysis as described. As anticipated, the randomly generated q value plots maintained values near 1.0 (supplementary Fig. 1Citation ).



View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 2. A model for meta-analysis of microarrays. See text for details.

 


View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 3. Comparison of summary q value plots for analyses of different combinations of studies. A, two-study meta-analyses q value plot. B, three-study meta-analyses and four-study meta-analysis. See Fig. 1Citation for details.

 
Results from the various combination analyses were assimilated by selecting the lowest q value for each gene and then sorting genes based on the q value. We found 50 genes to be reliably overexpressed and 103 genes to be reliably underexpressed in prostate cancer at a q value of 0.10, suggesting that the studies identified a cohort of shared differentially expressed genes. We suspect that more genes would be called significant if additional studies were available. Several of the genes validated or commented on in the individual studies scored high in the meta-analysis including hepsin, myc, AMACR, and fatty acid synthase (3 , 8, 9, 10) . All four of the studies identified hepsin, a transmembrane serine protease, as being overexpressed in prostate cancer. Importantly, 11 other genes scored equally high in the meta-analysis (Fig. 4)Citation . An equal number of intriguing underexpressed genes were identified by meta-analysis including SPARCL1, a candidate tumor suppressor gene (15) , and TIMP3, an inhibitor of metalloproteinases that is silenced by methylation in cancers (16) , among others. Fig. 4Citation depicts an Eisen matrix representation (11) of the top 40 over- and underexpressed genes across the meta-analysis. As apparent from the figure, many genes reliably discriminate prostate cancer from benign prostate, independent of the particular dataset. The complete listing of genes identified by meta-analysis is available in our supplementary materials.



View larger version (89K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 4. A cohort of cross-validated genes identified by meta-analysis of prostate cancer gene expression profiles. Eisen matrix representation of genes consistently differentially expressed between clinically localized prostate cancer (P) and benign prostate tissue (B) across four independent microarray studies (3 , 8 9 10) . Each column represents an individual sample (number of samples is in parentheses), and each row represents a specific gene. Within each study, the data were normalized so that the mean expression level of the genes in the benign prostate specimens equaled zero and the SD = 1. A, 40 genes with the lowest q value for overexpression. Red intensity level indicates degree of overexpression, whereas black indicates equal or lower expression than the mean benign sample (see scale). B, 40 genes with the lowest q value for underexpression. Green intensity level indicates degree of underexpression, whereas black indicates equal or higher expression than the mean benign sample (see scale). Gray signifies technically inadequate or not present in a particular study. q value thresholds are provided to the left of the matrix. See supplementary data for full listing of calculated q values, and gene- and study-specific Ps for the genes delineated by meta-analysis.

 
Delineation of Pathway Dysregulation by Interstudy Validation of Prostate Cancer Gene Expression.
We hypothesized that this cohort of validated, differentially expressed genes contained concurring clues into the underlying mechanisms of prostate carcinogenesis. To investigate this using a bioinformatic approach, we performed directed Entrez PubMed literature searches (17) and performed a KEGG4 pathway database query (18) using significant differentially expressed genes. Of the 6538 genes present in at least two studies, 631 were present in the KEGG database. Because of the decrease in the number of genes (hypotheses) in this analysis, summary q values were adjusted accordingly. A q value threshold of 0.02, which approximately corresponds to a q value of 0.2 in the preceding analysis, was adopted. The KEGG database batch entry and color-coded pathway tool allowed us to evaluate a large set of differentially expressed genes and simultaneously evaluate the involvement of a number of metabolic pathways. Pathways that were most populated by the database query were investigated.

We identified significant transcriptional involvement of the polyamine biosynthesis pathway at a number of enzymatic steps, some of which are confirmed by previous reports (Ref. 19 ; Fig. 5ACitation ). Polyamines, including spermidine, spermine, and their precursor putrescine, have been implicated in cancer cell proliferation, protection from apoptosis, and DNA-protein binding (20) . Interestingly, polyamines have also been found at high levels in the urine of prostate cancer patients (21) . We found that enzymes directing substrates toward polyamines were overexpressed in prostate cancer. By contrast, the enzyme that directs ornithine (a urea cycle intermediate and polyamine precursor) to its alternate destination, proline synthesis, was underexpressed in prostate cancer. One gene that we identified was ODC, which is the rate-limiting enzyme in polyamine synthesis converting ornithine to putrescine. ODC has been shown previously to be overexpressed in prostate cancer and is the target of the chemotherapeutic agent DFMO (22) . A recent clinical trial demonstrated that DFMO caused nearly complete depletion of putrescine (97.6%) but not of spermidine and spermine (73.6% and 50.8%, respectively). This result is consistent with the differential expression of polyamine biosynthesis enzymes revealed by meta-analysis. When ODC is inhibited by DFMO, excess ornithine (ODC substrate) may normally be shunted through OAT. However, the consistent underexpression of OAT in prostate cancer prevents this, thus driving ornithine through any uninhibited ODC to produce putrescine. The rapid conversion of putrescine to spermidine is facilitated by increased levels of spermidine synthase, which leads to high levels of spermidine and spermine but not putrescine. This proposed explanation warrants additional experimentation and may facilitate the design of better strategies directed at controlling polyamine levels in prostate cancer.



View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 5. Meta-analysis of microarrays coupled with bioinformatic resources revealed metabolic pathway dysregulation in prostate cancer. A, polyamine (spermidine and spermine) biosynthesis pathway. B, adenine monophosphate synthesis pathway. Genes identified as over- or underexpressed in prostate cancer by meta-analysis are shown in red and green, respectively. See text for details.

 
In addition to the polyamine biosynthesis pathway, we also detected a dysregulation of the purine biosynthesis pathway in prostate cancer. It is well known that nucleotide biosynthesis is necessary for DNA synthesis in mitotic cell division. Consistent with this notion, we found that the adenine monophosphate biosynthesis pathways, both salvage and de novo, are increased in prostate cancer by transcriptional up-regulation of multiple enzymes (Fig. 5B)Citation . One enzyme identified by the meta-analysis, adenylosuccinate lyase, has been reported previously to be an indicator of breast and prostate malignancy (23) . Perhaps the other enzymes in this pathway, implicated by our meta-analysis, could provide insight into the metabolic regulation of prostate cancer or indirectly serve as biomarkers. These examples of pathway dysregulation discovered by meta-analysis and KEGG demonstrate potential sets of synchronous clues that exist in a cohort of validated, differentially expressed genes.

Our model for microarray meta-analysis used a statistical and computational approach to facilitate the validation and significance analysis of four prostate cancer gene expression profiling studies. The resulting validated genes, coupled with interrogation of the KEGG database, enabled us to reconstruct the transcriptional events of two metabolic pathways important in prostate cancer. As in-silico molecular modeling evolves to contain more complete cell signaling and enzymatic pathways, as well as transcription factor networks, more valuable inferences will be possible. Beyond the analysis of the prostate cancer gene expression datasets, our work established a statistically rigorous model for evaluating and comparing multiple microarray datasets. As microarray technology continues to mature and an increasing amount of data becomes publicly available, larger scale meta-analyses will facilitate maximum usation and warehousing of microarray data.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank the authors of the prostate cancer gene expression studies used in this meta-analysis for making their data publicly available. We also thank Sarvana Dhanasekaran and Sobryangrayana Varambally (Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI) for helpful discussions, and Robin Kunkel (Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI) for assistance in preparation of the figures.


   FOOTNOTES
 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1 D. R. R. is a Fellow of the Medical Scientist Training Program. A. M. C. is a Pew Foundation Scholar. This work was supported by the CapCURE Foundation, Wendy Will Case Cancer Foundation, a pilot grant from the University of Michigan Bioinformatics Program, and a Career Development Award from the Specialized Program of Research Excellence in Prostate Cancer (P50 CA69568), National Cancer Institute. Supplementary information will be available at the author’s website (http://www.pathology.med.umich.edu/chinnaiyan/). Back

2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, 1301 Catherine Road, MSI Room 4237, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0602. Phone: (734) 936-1887; Fax: (734) 763-6476; E-mail: arul{at}umich.edu Back

3 Internet address: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~jstorey/. Back

4 The abbreviations used are: KEGG, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes; ODC, ornithine decarboxylase; DFMO, {alpha}-difluoromethylornithine; OAT, ornithine aminotransferase. Back

Received 2/21/02. Accepted 6/ 3/02.


   REFERENCES
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Alizadeh A. A., Eisen M. B., Davis R. E., Ma C., Lossos I. S., Rosenwald A., Boldrick J. C., Sabet H., Tran T., Yu X., Powell J. I., Yang L., Marti G. E., Moore T., Hudson J., Jr., Lu L., Lewis D. B., Tibshirani R., Sherlock G., Chan W. C., Greiner T. C., Weisenburger D. D., Armitage J. O., Warnke R., Staudt L. M., et al Distinct types of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma identified by gene expression profiling. Nature (Lond.), 403: 503-511, 2000.[Medline]
  2. Golub T. R., Slonim D. K., Tamayo P., Huard C., Gaasenbeek M., Mesirov J. P., Coller H., Loh M. L., Downing J. R., Caligiuri M. A., Bloomfield C. D., Lander E. S. Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. Science (Wash. DC), 286: 531-537, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Dhanasekaran S. M., Barrette T. R., Ghosh D., Shah R., Varambally S., Kurachi K., Pienta K. J., Rubin M. A., Chinnaiyan A. M. Delineation of prognostic biomarkers in prostate cancer. Nature (Lond.), 412: 822-826, 2001.[Medline]
  4. Takahashi M., Rhodes D. R., Furge K. A., Kanayama H., Kagawa S., Haab B. B., Teh B. T. Gene expression profiling of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: gene identification and prognostic classification. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 9754-9759, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Bittner M., Meltzer P., Chen Y., Jiang Y., Seftor E., Hendrix M., Radmacher M., Simon R., Yakhini Z., Ben-Dor A., Sampas N., Dougherty E., Wang E., Marincola F., Gooden C., Lueders J., Glatfelter A., Pollock P., Carpten J., Gillanders E., Leja D., Dietrich K., Beaudry C., Berens M., Alberts D., Sondak V. Molecular classification of cutaneous malignant melanoma by gene expression profiling. Nature (Lond.), 406: 536-540, 2000.[Medline]
  6. King H. C., Sinha A. A. Gene expression profile analysis by DNA microarrays: promise and pitfalls. JAMA, 286: 2280-2288, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Khan J., Saal L. H., Bittner M. L., Chen Y., Trent J. M., Meltzer P. S. Expression profiling in cancer using cDNA microarrays. Electrophoresis, 20: 223-229, 1999.[Medline]
  8. Luo J., Duggan D. J., Chen Y., Sauvageot J., Ewing C. M., Bittner M. L., Trent J. M., Isaacs W. B. Human prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia: molecular dissection by gene expression profiling. Cancer Res., 61: 4683-4688, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Magee J. A., Araki T., Patil S., Ehrig T., True L., Humphrey P. A., Catalona W. J., Watson M. A., Milbrandt J. Expression profiling reveals hepsin overexpression in prostate cancer. Cancer Res., 61: 5692-5696, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Welsh J. B., Sapinoso L. M., Su A. I., Kern S. G., Wang-Rodriguez J., Moskaluk C. A., Frierson H. F., Jr., Hampton G. M. Analysis of gene expression identifies candidate markers and pharmacological targets in prostate cancer. Cancer Res., 61: 5974-5978, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Eisen M. B., Spellman P. T., Brown P. O., Botstein D. Cluster analysis and display of genome-wide expression patterns. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 95: 14863-14868, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Hedenfalk I., Duggan D., Chen Y., Radmacher M., Bittner M., Simon R., Meltzer P., Gusterson B., Esteller M., Kallioniemi O. P., Wilfond B., Borg A., Trent J. Gene-expression profiles in hereditary breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med., 344: 539-548, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Tusher V. G., Tibshirani R., Chu G. Significance analysis of microarrays applied to the ionizing radiation response. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 5116-5121, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Hedges L. Olkin I. V. eds. . Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis, Academic Press New York 1985.
  15. Claeskens A., Ongenae N., Neefs J. M., Cheyns P., Kaijen P., Cools M., Kutoh E. Hevin is down-regulated in many cancers and is a negative regulator of cell growth and proliferation. Br. J. Cancer, 82: 1123-1130, 2000.[Medline]
  16. Esteller M., Corn P. G., Baylin S. B., Herman J. G. A gene hypermethylation profile of human cancer. Cancer Res., 61: 3225-3229, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Wheeler D. L., Chappey C., Lash A. E., Leipe D. D., Madden T. L., Schuler G. D., Tatusova T. A., Rapp B. A. Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Res., 28: 10-14, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Ogata H., Goto S., Sato K., Fujibuchi W., Bono H., Kanehisa M. KEGG: Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes. Nucleic Acids Res., 27: 29-34, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Bettuzzi S., Davalli P., Astancolle S., Carani C., Madeo B., Tampieri A., Corti A., Saverio B., Pierpaola D., Serenella A., Cesare C., Bruno M., Auro T., Arnaldo C. Tumor progression is accompanied by significant changes in the levels of expression of polyamine metabolism regulatory genes and clusterin (sulfated glycoprotein 2) in human prostate cancer specimens. Cancer Res., 60: 28-34, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Thomas T., Thomas T. J. Polyamines in cell growth and cell death: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic applications. Cell Mol. Life Sci., 58: 244-258, 2001.[Medline]
  21. Sakai S., Ito Y., Koide T., Tei K., Hara A., Sawada H. Detection of urinary polyamine by a new enzymatic differential assay. (III). Studies on urinary polyamines in patients with malignant genitourinary diseases. Hinyokika Kiyo., 32: 343-350, 1986.[Medline]
  22. Simoneau A. R., Gerner E. W., Phung M., McLaren C. E., Meyskens F. L., Jr. {alpha}-Difluoromethylornithine and polyamine levels in the human prostate: results of a phase IIa trial. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 93: 57-59, 2001.[Free Full Text]
  23. Reed V. L., Mack D. O., Smith L. D. Adenylosuccinate lyase as an indicator of breast and prostate malignancies: a preliminary report. Clin. Biochem., 20: 349-351, 1987.[Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
Y. Choi and C. Kendziorski
Statistical methods for gene set co-expression analysis
Bioinformatics, November 1, 2009; 25(21): 2780 - 2786.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
G. Marot, J.-L. Foulley, C.-D. Mayer, and F. Jaffrezic
Moderated effect size and P-value combinations for microarray meta-analyses
Bioinformatics, October 15, 2009; 25(20): 2692 - 2699.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
M. S. Arredouani, B. Lu, M. Bhasin, M. Eljanne, W. Yue, J.-M. Mosquera, G. J. Bubley, V. Li, M. A. Rubin, T. A. Libermann, et al.
Identification of the Transcription Factor Single-Minded Homologue 2 as a Potential Biomarker and Immunotherapy Target in Prostate Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res., September 15, 2009; 15(18): 5794 - 5802.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
C. G. Drake
Immunotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Walk, Don't Run
J. Clin. Oncol., September 1, 2009; 27(25): 4035 - 4037.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anticancer ResHome page
B. BICKERS and C. AUKIM-HASTIE
New Molecular Biomarkers for the Prognosis and Management of Prostate Cancer - The Post PSA Era
Anticancer Res, August 1, 2009; 29(8): 3289 - 3298.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
J. D. Wren
A global meta-analysis of microarray expression data to predict unknown gene functions and estimate the literature-data divide
Bioinformatics, July 1, 2009; 25(13): 1694 - 1701.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
J. P. de Magalhaes, J. Curado, and G. M. Church
Meta-analysis of age-related gene expression profiles identifies common signatures of aging
Bioinformatics, April 1, 2009; 25(7): 875 - 881.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
E. Muhlbradt, E. Asatiani, E. Ortner, A. Wang, and E. P. Gelmann
NKX3.1 Activates Expression of Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 to Mediate Insulin-like Growth Factor-I Signaling and Cell Proliferation
Cancer Res., March 15, 2009; 69(6): 2615 - 2622.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
G. Sardana, B. Dowell, and E. P. Diamandis
Emerging Biomarkers for the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer
Clin. Chem., December 1, 2008; 54(12): 1951 - 1960.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BloodHome page
L. Zhou, A. N. Nguyen, D. Sohal, J. Ying Ma, P. Pahanish, K. Gundabolu, J. Hayman, A. Chubak, Y. Mo, T. D. Bhagat, et al.
Inhibition of the TGF-{beta} receptor I kinase promotes hematopoiesis in MDS
Blood, October 15, 2008; 112(8): 3434 - 3443.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
A. A. Shabalin, H. Tjelmeland, C. Fan, C. M. Perou, and A. B. Nobel
Merging two gene-expression studies via cross-platform normalization
Bioinformatics, May 1, 2008; 24(9): 1154 - 1160.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BiostatisticsHome page
E. Garrett-Mayer, G. Parmigiani, X. Zhong, L. Cope, and E. Gabrielson
Cross-study validation and combined analysis of gene expression microarray data
Biostat., April 1, 2008; 9(2): 333 - 354.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Brief Funct Genomic ProteomicHome page
I. G. Yulug and B. Gur-Dedeoglu
Functional genomics in translational cancer research: focus on breast cancer
Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic, March 7, 2008; (2008) eln009v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Mol. Diagn.Home page
B. S. Knudsen, A. N. Allen, D. F. McLerran, R. L. Vessella, J. Karademos, J. E. Davies, B. Maqsodi, G. K. McMaster, and A. R. Kristal
Evaluation of the Branched-Chain DNA Assay for Measurement of RNA in Formalin-Fixed Tissues
J. Mol. Diagn., March 1, 2008; 10(2): 169 - 176.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
T. A. Wallace, R. L. Prueitt, M. Yi, T. M. Howe, J. W. Gillespie, H. G. Yfantis, R. M. Stephens, N. E. Caporaso, C. A. Loffredo, and S. Ambs
Tumor Immunobiological Differences in Prostate Cancer between African-American and European-American Men
Cancer Res., February 1, 2008; 68(3): 927 - 936.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ReproductionHome page
S L Rodriguez-Zas, K Schellander, and H A Lewin
Biological interpretations of transcriptomic profiles in mammalian oocytes and embryos
Reproduction, February 1, 2008; 135(2): 129 - 139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ReproductionHome page
S L Rodriguez-Zas, Y Ko, H A Adams, and B R Southey
Advancing the understanding of the embryo transcriptome co-regulation using meta-, functional, and gene network analysis tools
Reproduction, February 1, 2008; 135(2): 213 - 224.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
F. Hong and R. Breitling
A comparison of meta-analysis methods for detecting differentially expressed genes in microarray experiments
Bioinformatics, February 1, 2008; 24(3): 374 - 382.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
Y. Lu, X. He, and S. Zhong
Cross-species microarray analysis with the OSCAR system suggests an INSR->Pax6->NQO1 neuro-protective pathway in aging and Alzheimer's disease
Nucleic Acids Res., July 13, 2007; 35(suppl_2): W105 - W114.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
I. Fishel, A. Kaufman, and E. Ruppin
Meta-analysis of gene expression data: a predictor-based approach
Bioinformatics, July 1, 2007; 23(13): 1599 - 1606.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.Home page
S. N. Sahu, S. Nunez, G. Bai, and A. Gupta
Interaction of Pyk2 and PTP-PEST with leupaxin in prostate cancer cells
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, June 1, 2007; 292(6): C2288 - C2296.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
Y. K. Ghiorghi, K. I. Zeller, C. V. Dang, and P. A. Kaminski
The c-Myc Target Gene Rcl (C6orf108) Encodes a Novel Enzyme, Deoxynucleoside 5'-monophosphate N-Glycosidase
J. Biol. Chem., March 16, 2007; 282(11): 8150 - 8156.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
F. Pan, C.-H. Chiu, S. Pulapura, M. R. Mehan, J. Nunez-Iglesias, K. Zhang, K. Kamath, M. S. Waterman, C. E. Finch, and X. J. Zhou
Gene Aging Nexus: a web database and data mining platform for microarray data on aging
Nucleic Acids Res., January 12, 2007; 35(suppl_1): D756 - D759.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
B. Knudsen
Migrating with Myosin VI
Am. J. Pathol., November 1, 2006; 169(5): 1523 - 1526.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
S. Pyne, B. Futcher, and S. Skiena
Meta-analysis based on control of false discovery rate: combining yeast ChIP-chip datasets
Bioinformatics, October 15, 2006; 22(20): 2516 - 2522.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
T. Park, S.-G. Yi, Y. K. Shin, and S. Lee
Combining multiple microarrays in the presence of controlling variables
Bioinformatics, July 15, 2006; 22(14): 1682 - 1689.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
F. Pan, K. Kamath, K. Zhang, S. Pulapura, A. Achar, J. Nunez-Iglesias, Y. Huang, X. Yan, J. Han, H. Hu, et al.
Integrative Array Analyzer: a software package for analysis of cross-platform and cross-species microarray data
Bioinformatics, July 1, 2006; 22(13): 1665 - 1667.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
M. Scaltriti, L. Belloni, A. Caporali, P. Davalli, D. Remondini, F. Rizzi, S. Astancolle, A. Corti, and S. Bettuzzi
Molecular classification of green tea catechin-sensitive and green tea catechin-resistant prostate cancer in the TRAMP mice model by quantitative real-time PCR gene profiling
Carcinogenesis, May 1, 2006; 27(5): 1047 - 1053.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
C. Prieto, M.J. Rivas, J.M. Sanchez, J. Lopez-Fidalgo, and J. De Las Rivas
Algorithm to find gene expression profiles of deregulation and identify families of disease-altered genes
Bioinformatics, May 1, 2006; 22(9): 1103 - 1110.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
P. Liu, S. Ramachandran, M. Ali Seyed, C. D. Scharer, N. Laycock, W. B. Dalton, H. Williams, S. Karanam, M. W. Datta, D. L. Jaye, et al.
Sex-determining region y box 4 is a transforming oncogene in human prostate cancer cells.
Cancer Res., April 15, 2006; 66(8): 4011 - 4019.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Histochem. Cytochem.Home page
L. Young, R. Salomon, W. Au, C. Allan, P. Russell, and Q. Dong
Ornithine Decarboxylase (ODC) Expression Pattern in Human Prostate Tissues and ODC Transgenic Mice
J. Histochem. Cytochem., February 1, 2006; 54(2): 223 - 229.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
E. M. Vestergaard, M. Borre, S. S. Poulsen, E. Nexo, and N. Torring
Plasma Levels of Trefoil Factors are Increased in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res., February 1, 2006; 12(3): 807 - 812.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Genome ResHome page
Y. Sasuga, T. Tani, M. Hayashi, H. Yamakawa, O. Ohara, and Y. Harada
Development of a microscopic platform for real-time monitoring of biomolecular interactions
Genome Res., January 1, 2006; 16(1): 132 - 139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
A. Andersson, T. Olofsson, D. Lindgren, B. Nilsson, C. Ritz, P. Eden, C. Lassen, J. Rade, M. Fontes, H. Morse, et al.
Molecular signatures in childhood acute leukemia and their correlations to expression patterns in normal hematopoietic subpopulations
PNAS, December 27, 2005; 102(52): 19069 - 19074.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
L. L. Elo, L. Lahti, H. Skottman, M. Kylaniemi, R. Lahesmaa, and T. Aittokallio
Integrating probe-level expression changes across generations of Affymetrix arrays
Nucleic Acids Res., December 14, 2005; 33(22): e193 - e193.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
L. Xu, A. C. Tan, D. Q. Naiman, D. Geman, and R. L. Winslow
Robust prostate cancer marker genes emerge from direct integration of inter-study microarray data
Bioinformatics, October 15, 2005; 21(20): 3905 - 3911.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
S. Bhattacharya and T. J. Mariani
Transformation of expression intensities across generations of Affymetrix microarrays using sequence matching and regression modeling
Nucleic Acids Res., October 13, 2005; 33(18): e157 - e157.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
A. Frigessi, M. A. van de Wiel, M. Holden, D. H. Svendsrud, I. K. Glad, and H. Lyng
Genome-wide estimation of transcript concentrations from spotted cDNA microarray data
Nucleic Acids Res., October 4, 2005; 33(17): e143 - e143.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
M. A. Rubin, T. A. Bismar, O. Andren, L. Mucci, R. Kim, R. Shen, D. Ghosh, J. T. Wei, A. M. Chinnaiyan, H.-O. Adami, et al.
Decreased {alpha}-Methylacyl CoA Racemase Expression in Localized Prostate Cancer is Associated with an Increased Rate of Biochemical Recurrence and Cancer-Specific Death
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2005; 14(6): 1424 - 1432.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Physiol. GenomicsHome page
M. Kano, S. Tsutsumi, N. Kawahara, Y. Wang, A. Mukasa, T. Kirino, and H. Aburatani
A meta-clustering analysis indicates distinct pattern alteration between two series of gene expression profiles for induced ischemic tolerance in rats
Physiol Genomics, April 14, 2005; 21(2): 274 - 283.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Plant Physiol.Home page
J. Allemeersch, S. Durinck, R. Vanderhaeghen, P. Alard, R. Maes, K. Seeuws, T. Bogaert, K. Coddens, K. Deschouwer, P. Van Hummelen, et al.
Benchmarking the CATMA Microarray. A Novel Tool forArabidopsis Transcriptome Analysis
Plant Physiology, February 1, 2005; 137(2): 588 - 601.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
M. Tanino, M.-A. Debily, T. Tamura, T. Hishiki, O. Ogasawara, K. Murakawa, S. Kawamoto, K. Itoh, S. Watanabe, S. J. de Souza, et al.
The Human Anatomic Gene Expression Library (H-ANGEL), the H-Inv integrative display of human gene expression across disparate technologies and platforms
Nucleic Acids Res., January 1, 2005; 33(suppl_1): D567 - D572.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
R. B. Shah, R. Mehra, A. M. Chinnaiyan, R. Shen, D. Ghosh, M. Zhou, G. R. MacVicar, S. Varambally, J. Harwood, T. A. Bismar, et al.
Androgen-Independent Prostate Cancer Is a Heterogeneous Group of Diseases: Lessons from a Rapid Autopsy Program
Cancer Res., December 15, 2004; 64(24): 9209 - 9216.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J ANIM SCIHome page
A. Reverter, Y. H. Wang, K. A. Byrne, S. H. Tan, G. S. Harper, and S. A. Lehnert
Joint analysis of multiple cDNA microarray studies via multivariate mixed models applied to genetic improvement of beef cattle
J Anim Sci, December 1, 2004; 82(12): 3430 - 3439.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
K. Kee, B. A. Foster, S. Merali, D. L. Kramer, M. L. Hensen, P. Diegelman, N. Kisiel, S. Vujcic, R. V. Mazurchuk, and C. W. Porter
Activated Polyamine Catabolism Depletes Acetyl-CoA Pools and Suppresses Prostate Tumor Growth in TRAMP Mice
J. Biol. Chem., September 17, 2004; 279(38): 40076 - 40083.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Endocr Relat CancerHome page
R. Foley, D. Hollywood, and M. Lawler
Molecular pathology of prostate cancer: the key to identifying new biomarkers of disease
Endocr. Relat. Cancer, September 1, 2004; 11(3): 477 - 488.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
S. Ashida, H. Nakagawa, T. Katagiri, M. Furihata, M. Iiizumi, Y. Anazawa, T. Tsunoda, R. Takata, K. Kasahara, T. Miki, et al.
Molecular Features of the Transition from Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia (PIN) to Prostate Cancer: Genome-wide Gene-expression Profiles of Prostate Cancers and PINs
Cancer Res., September 1, 2004; 64(17): 5963 - 5972.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
R. W. Georgantas III, V. Tanadve, M. Malehorn, S. Heimfeld, C. Chen, L. Carr, F. Martinez-Murillo, G. Riggins, J. Kowalski, and C. I. Civin
Microarray and Serial Analysis of Gene Expression Analyses Identify Known and Novel Transcripts Overexpressed in Hematopoietic Stem Cells
Cancer Res., July 1, 2004; 64(13): 4434 - 4441.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Cell. ProteomicsHome page
P. A. Everley, J. Krijgsveld, B. R. Zetter, and S. P. Gygi
Quantitative Cancer Proteomics: Stable Isotope Labeling with Amino Acids in Cell Culture (SILAC) as a Tool for Prostate Cancer Research
Mol. Cell. Proteomics, July 1, 2004; 3(7): 729 - 735.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
S. Karanam and C. S. Moreno
CONFAC: automated application of comparative genomic promoter analysis to DNA microarray datasets
Nucleic Acids Res., July 1, 2004; 32(suppl_2): W475 - W484.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
K. Kee, S. Vujcic, S. Merali, P. Diegelman, N. Kisiel, C. T. Powell, D. L. Kramer, and C. W. Porter
Metabolic and Antiproliferative Consequences of Activated Polyamine Catabolism in LNCaP Prostate Carcinoma Cells
J. Biol. Chem., June 25, 2004; 279(26): 27050 - 27058.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
D. R. Rhodes, J. Yu, K. Shanker, N. Deshpande, R. Varambally, D. Ghosh, T. Barrette, A. Pandey, and A. M. Chinnaiyan
Large-scale meta-analysis of cancer microarray data identifies common transcriptional profiles of neoplastic transformation and progression
PNAS, June 22, 2004; 101(25): 9309 - 9314.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
H. Maeda, S. Nagata, C. D. Wolfgang, G. L. Bratthauer, T. K. Bera, and I. Pastan
The T Cell Receptor {gamma} Chain Alternate Reading Frame Protein (TARP), a Prostate-specific Protein Localized in Mitochondria
J. Biol. Chem., June 4, 2004; 279(23): 24561 - 24568.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
A. Sreekumar, B. Laxman, D. R. Rhodes, S. Bhagavathula, J. Harwood, D. Giacherio, D. Ghosh, M. G. Sanda, M. A. Rubin, and A. M. Chinnaiyan
Humoral Immune Response to {alpha}-Methylacyl-CoA Racemase and Prostate Cancer
J Natl Cancer Inst, June 2, 2004; 96(11): 834 - 843.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Genome ResHome page
H. K. Lee, A. K. Hsu, J. Sajdak, J. Qin, and P. Pavlidis
Coexpression Analysis of Human Genes Across Many Microarray Data Sets
Genome Res., June 1, 2004; 14(6): 1085 - 1094.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
M. A. Rubin, S. Varambally, R. Beroukhim, S. A. Tomlins, D. R. Rhodes, P. L. Paris, M. D. Hofer, M. Storz-Schweizer, R. Kuefer, J. A. Fletcher, et al.
Overexpression, Amplification, and Androgen Regulation of TPD52 in Prostate Cancer
Cancer Res., June 1, 2004; 64(11): 3814 - 3822.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
O. Modlich, H.-B. Prisack, G. Pitschke, U. Ramp, R. Ackermann, H. Bojar, T. A. Vogeli, and M.-O. Grimm
Identifying Superficial, Muscle-Invasive, and Metastasizing Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Bladder: Use of cDNA Array Analysis of Gene Expression Profiles
Clin. Cancer Res., May 15, 2004; 10(10): 3410 - 3421.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
G. Parmigiani, E. S. Garrett-Mayer, R. Anbazhagan, and E. Gabrielson
A Cross-Study Comparison of Gene Expression Studies for the Molecular Classification of Lung Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res., May 1, 2004; 10(9): 2922 - 2927.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Physiol. GenomicsHome page
N. Mah, A. Thelin, T. Lu, S. Nikolaus, T. Kuhbacher, Y. Gurbuz, H. Eickhoff, G. Kloppel, H. Lehrach, B. Mellgard, et al.
A comparison of oligonucleotide and cDNA-based microarray systems
Physiol Genomics, February 13, 2004; 16(3): 361 - 370.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
R. O. Stuart, W. Wachsman, C. C. Berry, J. Wang-Rodriguez, L. Wasserman, I. Klacansky, D. Masys, K. Arden, S. Goodison, M. McClelland, et al.
In silico dissection of cell-type-associated patterns of gene expression in prostate cancer
PNAS, January 13, 2004; 101(2): 615 - 620.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
C. G. Kleer, Q. Cao, S. Varambally, R. Shen, I. Ota, S. A. Tomlins, D. Ghosh, R. G. A. B. Sewalt, A. P. Otte, D. F. Hayes, et al.
EZH2 is a marker of aggressive breast cancer and promotes neoplastic transformation of breast epithelial cells
PNAS, September 30, 2003; 100(20): 11606 - 11611.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
J. A. Mobley, I. Leav, P. Zielie, C. Wotkowitz, J. Evans, Y.-W. Lam, B. S. L'Esperance, Z. Jiang, and S.-M. Ho
Branched Fatty Acids in Dairy and Beef Products Markedly Enhance {alpha}-Methylacyl-CoA Racemase Expression in Prostate Cancer Cells in Vitro
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., August 1, 2003; 12(8): 775 - 783.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol Hum ReprodHome page
W.A. Schulz, M. Burchardt, and M.V. Cronauer
Molecular biology of prostate cancer
Mol. Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2003; 9(8): 437 - 448.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
D. K. Vanaja, J. C. Cheville, S. J. Iturria, and C. Y. F. Young
Transcriptional Silencing of Zinc Finger Protein 185 Identified by Expression Profiling Is Associated with Prostate Cancer Progression
Cancer Res., July 15, 2003; 63(14): 3877 - 3882.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
D. R. Rhodes, M. G. Sanda, A. P. Otte, A. M. Chinnaiyan, and M. A. Rubin
Multiplex Biomarker Approach for Determining Risk of Prostate-Specific Antigen-Defined Recurrence of Prostate Cancer
J Natl Cancer Inst, May 7, 2003; 95(9): 661 - 668.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
W. Xin, D. R. Rhodes, C. Ingold, A. M. Chinnaiyan, and M. A. Rubin
Dysregulation of the Annexin Family Protein Family Is Associated with Prostate Cancer Progression
Am. J. Pathol., January 1, 2003; 162(1): 255 - 261.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rhodes, D. R.
Right arrow Articles by Chinnaiyan, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rhodes, D. R.
Right arrow Articles by Chinnaiyan, A. M.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online