↓ Skip to main content

Sporadic PCDH18 somatic mutations in EpCAM-positive hepatocellular carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Cell International, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sporadic PCDH18 somatic mutations in EpCAM-positive hepatocellular carcinoma
Published in
Cancer Cell International, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12935-017-0467-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takehiro Hayashi, Taro Yamashita, Hikari Okada, Kouki Nio, Yasumasa Hara, Yoshimoto Nomura, Tomoyuki Hayashi, Yoshiro Asahina, Mariko Yoshida, Naoki Oishi, Hajime Sunagozaka, Hajime Takatori, Masao Honda, Shuichi Kaneko

Abstract

The relationship between specific genome alterations and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cancer stem cells (CSCs) remains unclear. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between somatic mutations and epithelial cell adhesion molecule positive (EpCAM(+)) CSCs. Two patient-derived HCC samples (HCC1 and HCC2) were sorted by EpCAM expression and analyzed by whole exome sequence. We measured PCDH18 expression level in eight HCC cell lines as well as HCC1 and HCC2 by real-time quantitative RT-PCR. We validated the identified gene mutations in 57 paired of HCC and matched non-cancerous liver tissues by Sanger sequence. Whole exome sequencing on the sorted EpCAM(+) and EpCAM(-) HCC1 and HCC2 cells revealed 19,263 nonsynonymous mutations in the cording region. We selected mutations that potentially impair the function of the encoded protein. Ultimately, 60 mutations including 13 novel nonsense and frameshift mutations were identified. Among them, PCDH18 mutation was more frequently detected in sorted EpCAM(+) cells than in EpCAM(-) cells in HCC1 by whole exome sequences. However, we could not confirm the difference of PCDH18 mutation frequency between sorted EpCAM(+) and EpCAM(-) cells by Sanger sequencing, indicating that PCDH18 mutation could not explain intracellular heterogeneity. In contrast, we found novel PCDH18 mutations, including c.2556_2557delTG, c.1474C>G, c.2337A>G, and c.2976G>T, were detected in HCC1 and 3/57 (5.3%) additional HCC surgical specimens. All four HCCs with PCDH18 mutations were EpCAM-positive, suggesting that PCDH18 somatic mutations might explain the intertumor heterogeneity of HCCs in terms of the expression status of EpCAM. Furthermore, EpCAM-positive cell lines (Huh1, Huh7, HepG2, and Hep3B) had lower PCDH18 expression than EpCAM-negative cell lines (PLC/PRL/5, HLE, HLF, and SK-Hep-1), and PCDH18 knockdown in HCC2 cells slightly enhanced cell proliferation. Our data suggest that PCDH18 is functionally suppressed in a subset of EpCAM-positive HCCs through somatic mutations, and may play a role in the development of EpCAM-positive HCCs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 40%
Other 1 20%
Student > Master 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 July 2021.
All research outputs
#19,011,832
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Cell International
#1,166
of 1,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,703
of 328,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Cell International
#9
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,884 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.