Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Ovarian Research 1/2016

Open Access 01.12.2016 | Research

The association between CDH1 promoter methylation and patients with ovarian cancer: a systematic meta-analysis

verfasst von: Qiang Wang, Bing Wang, Yun-mei Zhang, Wei Wang

Erschienen in: Journal of Ovarian Research | Ausgabe 1/2016

Abstract

Background

The down-regulation of E-cadherin gene (CDH1) expression has been regarded as an important event in cancer invasion and metastasis. However, the association between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer remains unclear. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the potential role of CDH1 promoter methylation in ovarian cancer.

Methods

Relevant articles were identified by searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated to assess the strength of association.

Results

Nine studies were performed using the fixed-effects model in this study, including 485 cancer tissues and 255 nonmalignant tissues. The findings showed that CDH1 promoter methylation had an increased risk of ovarian cancer in cancer tissues (OR = 8.71, P < 0.001) in comparison with nonmalignant tissues. Subgroup analysis of the ethnicity showed that the OR value of CDH1 methylation in Asian population subgroup (OR = 13.20, P < 0.001) was higher than that in Caucasian population subgroup (OR = 3.84, P = 0.005). No significant association was found between ovarian cancer and low malignant potential (LMP) tumor (P = 0.096) among 2 studies, and between CDH1 promoter methylation and tumor stage and tumor histology (all P > 0.05). There was not any evidence of publication bias by Egger’s test (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions

CDH1 promoter methylation can be a potential biomarker in ovarian cancer risk prediction, especially Asians can be more susceptible to CDH1 methylation. However, more studies are still done in the future.
Hinweise

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

WW and QW contributed to the conception and design. QW, BW, YMZ, and WW contributed to completion of articles, the data extraction, data calculated and design of figures and tables. All the authors approved the final manuscript.

Background

Ovarian cancer, the most lethal tumor in gynecologic cancers, is the fifth most cause of cancer-related deaths among women. According to cancer statistics, approximately 21,290 women will be diagnosed and 14,180 will die due to ovarian cancer in the United States in 2015 [1]. Among ovarian cancer, serous ovarian carcinoma is the most common histotype and only less than 20 % of ovarian cancer can be detected early due to the lack of effective early detection and accurate diagnosis methods [2]. More than 80 % of ovarian cancer patients at advanced stages relapse [3]. While the overall 5-year survival rate is only 31 % [4].
Epigenetic alterations (DNA methylation, histone modifications, nucleosome positioning and non-coding RNAs) are identified to be strongly associated with cancer [5]. DNA methylation is an important mechanism of epigenetic variability involved in gene expression, which plays key roles in the development of cancer [68]. Aberrant methylation of CpG islands of the promoter regions is the major alternative to accomplish tumor suppressor gene (TSG) silencing [911]. CDH1, a tumor suppressor gene, also called as epithelial cadherin (E-cadherin) and cadherin-1, is located on 16q23 [12]. CDH1, a member of the cadherin family, plays an important role in epithelial cell-cell adhesion and in maintaining normal tissue architecture [13]. The reduction of CDH1 expression may involve in invasion and metastasis of several cancers [1315].
However, the association between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer remains to be certified. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the relationships between ovarian cancer tissues and nonmalignant ovarian tissues and Low malignant potential (LMP) tumor tissues. In addition, we also assess the relationship between CDH1 promoter methylation and clinicopathological features in ovarian cancer.

Methods

Literature search and selection criteria

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases, using the following keywords and search items: (CDH1 OR E-cadherin OR cadherin 1) AND (ovarian OR ovary) AND (cancer OR carcinoma OR tumor) AND methylation. The search updated until December 25. 2015. Moreover, a manual search of the references was also conducted to identify the potentially additional articles.
For eligible studies, studies must meet the following criteria: (1) all patients were diagnosed for primary ovarian cancer; (2) the study was about CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer; (3) study must have sufficient data about the frequencies of CDH1 promoter methylation to assess to the relationship between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer; (4) only the most recent paper or the most complete one was selected to avoid duplicated publications. Study was excluded if it did not meet the inclusion criteria above.

Data extraction

For each eligible study, the following information were extracted: the first author’s name, publication year, methylation region, country, ethnicity, the method of methylation detection, type of control, the number of methylation, the sample size, clinicopathological parameters, such as the number of tumor stage, the number of tumor histology, etc. Nonmalignant ovarian tissues were defined as controls, including benign disease, normal tissues or adjacent normal tissues. Low malignant potential (LMP) tumors were also served as a single control group.

Statistical analysis

Meta-analysis was conducted using the STATA software (version 12.0, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA). The pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) were calculated to evaluate the association between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer risk. Between-study heterogeneity was examined using the Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistic [16]. If I2 < 50 % and p ≥ 0.1 were considered as a measure of lack heterogeneity, a fixed-effects model was applied; otherwise, the random-effects model was used [17, 18]. Publication bias was assessed by using Egger’s linear regression test [19].

Results

Study characteristics

One hundred twenty-seven potentially relevant articles were initially identified by the databases above. These studies were further selected based on the inclusion criteria. Finally, a total of 9 studies met the inclusion criteria were included in the current meta-analysis (Fig. 1). The methylation region of these studies was promoter. Among these studies, 8 studies used methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) and 1 study used methylation specific headloop suppression PCR (MSHSP). There were two control groups, including nonmalignant control with 8 studies and LMP control with 2 studies. 8 studies evaluated the association between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer risk, 4 studies evaluated the relationship between CDH1 and tumor histology, and 3 studies assessed the relationship between CDH1 and tumor stage. The main characteristics of included studies were listed in Table 1 [2026].
Table 1
The main characteristics of included studies in this meta-analysis
First author
Region
Country
Race
Method
Sample
Control
Case
Control
Stage 1-2
Stage 3-4
Serous
Non-serous
M/N
M/N
M/N
M/N
M/N
M/N
Rathi 2002 [35]
Promoter
USA
Caucasians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
14/49
2/39
-
-
-
-
Makarla 2005 [21]
Promoter
USA
Caucasians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
6/23
4/39
-
-
2/9
3/13
Makarla 2005 [21]
Promoter
USA
Caucasians
MSP
Tissue
LMP
6/23
4/23
-
-
-
-
Yuecheng 2006 [26]
Promoter
China
Asians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
34/80
0/34
-
-
-
-
Shen 2007 [23]
Promoter
China
Asians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
18/63
1/30
2/22
16/41
9/34
9/29
Montavon 2012 [34]
Promoter
Australia
Caucasians
MSHSP
Tissue
NMT
17/78
1/5
-
-
-
-
Bhagat 2013 [20]
Promoter
India
Asians
MSP
Tissue
NM
31/86
2/34
8/23
23/63
17/44
7/25
Bhagat 2013 [20]
Promoter
India
Asians
MSP
Tissue
LMP
31/86
2/14
-
-
-
-
Wu 2014 [25]
Promoter
China
Asians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
32/50
-
7/12
25/38
25/35
7/15
Moselhy 2015 [22]
Promoter
Saudi Arabia
Asians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
12/18
8/32
-
-
-
-
Sun and Zhang 2015 [24]
Promoter
China
Asians
MSP
Tissue
NMT
15/38
1/42
-
-
-
-
MSP Methylation Specific PCR, MSHSP Methylation specific headloop suppression PCR, NMT nonmalignant tissues, LMP low malignant potential tumor, “-” indicates data not available, M stands for the number of methylation positive, N stands for the number of the total samples

The association between CDH1 promoter methylation and OC risk

Significant between-study heterogeneity was not detected (I2 = 16.6 % and P = 0.299), a fixed-effects model was used. A significant association was observed between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer among 8 studies (OR = 8.71, 95 % CI = 4.87 - 15.58, P < 0.001), including 435 malignant tissues from ovarian cancer and 255 nonmalignant tissues (Fig. 2). Subgroup analysis based on the ethnic population showed that the CDH1 promoter methylation status was significant associated with the risk of ovarian cancer in Asian population and Caucasian population (OR = 13.20, 95 % CI = 6.12 - 28.45, P < 0.001; OR = 3.84, 95 % CI = 1.52 - 9.74, P = 0.005; respectively) (Fig. 3). No significant association was found in the comparison of ovarian cancer and LMP tumor (OR = 2.40, 95 % CI = 0.86 - 6.76, P = 0.096), reporting a total of 109 ovarian cancer patients and 37 low malignant tumor patients in 2 studies (Table 2).
Table 2
Summary of the association of CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer
 
Studies
Overall OR 95CI %
I2; p
P value
Cases
Controls
p (Egger’s test)
NMT group
8
8.71(4.87 - 15.58)
16.6 %; 0.299
<0.001
435
255
0.335
Race
       
Asians
5
13.20 (6.12 - 28.45)
0.0 %; 0.545
<0.001
285
172
 
Caucasians
3
3.84 (1.52 - 9.74)
0.0 %; 0.380
0.005
150
83
 
LMT group
2
2.40 (0.86 - 6.76)
0.0 %; 0.512
0.096
109
37
 
Clinicopathological features
  
Patients
 
Histology
    
Stage 1-2
Stage 3-4
 
 
4
1.41 (0.76 - 2.60)
0.0 %; 0.483
0.273
122
82
0.935
     
Patients
 
Stage
    
Serous
Non-serous
 
 
3
0.55 (0.28 - 1.08)
45.3 %; 0.161
0.082
57
142
0.316
NMT nonmalignant tissues, LMP low malignant potential tumor

The association of CDH1 promoter methylation and clinicopathological features

The associations between CDH1 promoter methylation and clinicopathological features were further analyzed in the present meta-analysis (Table 2), such as tumor stage (57 early ovarian cancer patients vs. 142 advanced ovarian cancer patients) and tumor histology (122 serous cancer patients vs. 82 non-serous cancer patients), including 3 studies and 4 studies respectively. Between-study heterogeneity was lack (P > 0.1), the fixed-effects model was used. The result showed that CDH1 promoter methylation was not significantly associated with tumor histology and tumor stage (OR = 1.41, 95 % CI = 0.76 - 2.60, P = 0.273; OR = 0.55, 95 % CI = 0.28 - 1.08, P = 0.082; respectively).

Publication bias

Egger’s test was performed to estimate the publication bias of included studies. Egger’s test of CDH1 methylation of cancer versus nonmalignant control showed that there was not any evidence of publication bias (P = 0.335). No publication bias was detected in tumor histology and tumor stage (P = 0.935 and P = 0.316 respectively) (Table 2).

Discussion

The gene epigenomic regulation of initiation and progression of cancer has two essential components of the molecular mechanism, which are the hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes and hypomethylation of oncogenes [2729]. The CpG islands methylation of the promoter is an important reason for loss of gene expression, which can lead to the transcription repression of the gene [30]. Inactivation of CDH1 by promoter hypermethylation has been observed in several types of cancers, including breast cancer, ovarian cancer and gastric cancer [3133]. However, the frequency of CDH1 promoter methylation was inconsistent. Montavon et al. reported that the frequency of CDH1 promoter methylation was 21.8 % and 20 % in ovarian cancer and nonmalignant ovarian disease respectively [34]. Rathi et al. reported that the frequency of CDH1 promoter methylation was 28.6 % and 5 % in ovarian cancer tissues and nonmalignant tissues respectively [35]. So the current meta-analysis was performed to identify the association between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer risk.
A total of 9 studies including 485 cancer tissues and 255 nonmalignant tissues were involved in our study. CDH1 promoter methylation had an increased risk in cancer tissues (OR = 8.71, 95 % CI = 4.87 - 15.58, P < 0.001) in comparison with nonmalignant tissues. Subgroup analysis based on the ethnicity suggested that the CDH1 promoter methylation status was significantly increased risks of ovarian cancer in Asian population and Caucasian population (OR = 13.20, 95 % CI = 6.12 - 28.45; OR = 3.84, 95 % CI = 1.52 - 9.74; respectively). The OR value of Asian population subgroup (OR = 13.20) was higher than that in Caucasian population subgroup (OR = 3.84), suggesting that Asian population can be more susceptible to CDH1 promoter methylation. However, the results should be interpreted with caution as only small subjects were included in subgroup analyses. No significant association was observed between ovarian cancer and LMP tumor (P = 0.096), including a total of 109 ovarian cancer patients and 37 low malignant tumor patients.
We further evaluated the relationships of CDH1 promoter methylation with clinicopathological features, such as tumor histology and tumor stage. Our findings indicated that the CDH1 promoter methylation status was not significantly associated with tumor stage and histology. Publication bias was not detected by Egger’s test (all P > 0.05).
The current study had some limitations. Firstly, the search strategy was restricted to articles published in English or Chinese. Secondly, the total sample size was not sufficient larger (less than 1000) [36], our results may be lack vigorous power to evaluate the associations between CDH1 promoter methylation and ovarian cancer risk. Thirdly, based on the limitation of insufficient data, we did not study the CDH1 promoter methylation status in other clinicopathological features, such as tumor grade, sex status and age etc. Therefore, a meta-analysis including more studies with larger sample size should be necessary to confirm the results in the future.

Conclusion

CDH1 promoter methylation is significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk. In addition, the potential association on CDH1 promoter methylation and some clinicopathological features are still unclear due to the limitation of studies and sample size.
Not applicable
Not applicable.

Availability of data and material

All data is available in this paper.

Funding

None.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

WW and QW contributed to the conception and design. QW, BW, YMZ, and WW contributed to completion of articles, the data extraction, data calculated and design of figures and tables. All the authors approved the final manuscript.
Literatur
1.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaja S et al. Detection of novel biomarkers for ovarian cancer with an optical nanotechnology detection system enabling label-free diagnostics. J Biomed Opt. 2012;17(8):0814121–8.CrossRef Kaja S et al. Detection of novel biomarkers for ovarian cancer with an optical nanotechnology detection system enabling label-free diagnostics. J Biomed Opt. 2012;17(8):0814121–8.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Network CGAR. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature. 2011;474(7353):609–15.CrossRef Network CGAR. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature. 2011;474(7353):609–15.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Khan SA, Reddy D, Gupta S. Global histone post-translational modifications and cancer: Biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment? World J Biol Chem. 2015;6(4):333–45.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Khan SA, Reddy D, Gupta S. Global histone post-translational modifications and cancer: Biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment? World J Biol Chem. 2015;6(4):333–45.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Pouliot M-C et al. The role of methylation in breast cancer susceptibility and treatment. Anticancer Res. 2015;35(9):4569–74.PubMed Pouliot M-C et al. The role of methylation in breast cancer susceptibility and treatment. Anticancer Res. 2015;35(9):4569–74.PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Herman JG, Baylin SB. Gene silencing in cancer in association with promoter hypermethylation. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(21):2042–54.CrossRefPubMed Herman JG, Baylin SB. Gene silencing in cancer in association with promoter hypermethylation. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(21):2042–54.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Esteller M, Herman JG. Cancer as an epigenetic disease: DNA methylation and chromatin alterations in human tumours. J Pathol. 2002;196(1):1–7.CrossRefPubMed Esteller M, Herman JG. Cancer as an epigenetic disease: DNA methylation and chromatin alterations in human tumours. J Pathol. 2002;196(1):1–7.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Berx G et al. E-cadherin is a tumour/invasion suppressor gene mutated in human lobular breast cancers. EMBO J. 1995;14(24):6107–15.PubMedPubMedCentral Berx G et al. E-cadherin is a tumour/invasion suppressor gene mutated in human lobular breast cancers. EMBO J. 1995;14(24):6107–15.PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Oka H et al. Expression of E-cadherin cell adhesion molecules in human breast cancer tissues and its relationship to metastasis. Cancer Res. 1993;53(7):1696–701.PubMed Oka H et al. Expression of E-cadherin cell adhesion molecules in human breast cancer tissues and its relationship to metastasis. Cancer Res. 1993;53(7):1696–701.PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Takeichi M. Cadherin cell adhesion receptors as a morphogenetic regulator. Science. 1991;251(5000):1451–5.CrossRefPubMed Takeichi M. Cadherin cell adhesion receptors as a morphogenetic regulator. Science. 1991;251(5000):1451–5.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Tsanou E et al. The E-cadherin adhesion molecule and colorectal cancer. A global literature approach. Anticancer Res. 2008;28(6A):3815–26.PubMed Tsanou E et al. The E-cadherin adhesion molecule and colorectal cancer. A global literature approach. Anticancer Res. 2008;28(6A):3815–26.PubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Coory MD. Comment on: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39(3):932.CrossRefPubMed Coory MD. Comment on: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39(3):932.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat DerSimonian R. Meta-analysis in the design and monitoring of clinical trials. Stat Med. 1996;15(12):1237–48.CrossRefPubMed DerSimonian R. Meta-analysis in the design and monitoring of clinical trials. Stat Med. 1996;15(12):1237–48.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Peters JL et al. Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006;295(6):676–80.CrossRefPubMed Peters JL et al. Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006;295(6):676–80.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Bhagat R et al. Altered expression of β-catenin, E-cadherin, and E-cadherin promoter methylation in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Tumor Biol. 2013;34(4):2459–68.CrossRef Bhagat R et al. Altered expression of β-catenin, E-cadherin, and E-cadherin promoter methylation in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Tumor Biol. 2013;34(4):2459–68.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Makarla PB et al. Promoter hypermethylation profile of ovarian epithelial neoplasms. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(15):5365–9.CrossRefPubMed Makarla PB et al. Promoter hypermethylation profile of ovarian epithelial neoplasms. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(15):5365–9.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Moselhy SS et al. Hypermethylation of P15, P16, and E-cadherin genes in ovarian cancer. Toxicol Ind Health. 2015;31(10):924–30.CrossRefPubMed Moselhy SS et al. Hypermethylation of P15, P16, and E-cadherin genes in ovarian cancer. Toxicol Ind Health. 2015;31(10):924–30.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Shen WJ et al. Promoter hypermethylation of CDH1 gene in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Chin J Pract Gynecol Obstet. 2007;23(07):520–2. Shen WJ et al. Promoter hypermethylation of CDH1 gene in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Chin J Pract Gynecol Obstet. 2007;23(07):520–2.
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Sun B, Zhang X. Value of abnormal methylation of CDH1 gene and the detection of serum HE4 in the identification of ovarian cancer and ovarian endometriosis cyst. Hainan Med J. 2015;26(20):3023–5. Sun B, Zhang X. Value of abnormal methylation of CDH1 gene and the detection of serum HE4 in the identification of ovarian cancer and ovarian endometriosis cyst. Hainan Med J. 2015;26(20):3023–5.
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Wu X et al. Clinical importance and therapeutic implication of E-cadherin gene methylation in human ovarian cancer. Med Oncol. 2014;31(8):1–8. Wu X et al. Clinical importance and therapeutic implication of E-cadherin gene methylation in human ovarian cancer. Med Oncol. 2014;31(8):1–8.
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Yuecheng Y, Hongmei L, Xiaoyan X. Clinical evaluation of E-cadherin expression and its regulation mechanism in epithelial ovarian cancer. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2006;23(1):65–74.CrossRefPubMed Yuecheng Y, Hongmei L, Xiaoyan X. Clinical evaluation of E-cadherin expression and its regulation mechanism in epithelial ovarian cancer. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2006;23(1):65–74.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Bodmer W. 1998 Runme Shaw Memorial Lecture: somatic evolution of cancer. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 1999;28(3):323–9.PubMed Bodmer W. 1998 Runme Shaw Memorial Lecture: somatic evolution of cancer. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 1999;28(3):323–9.PubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Corson TW, Gallie BL. One hit, two hits, three hits, more? Genomic changes in the development of retinoblastoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2007;46(7):617–34.CrossRefPubMed Corson TW, Gallie BL. One hit, two hits, three hits, more? Genomic changes in the development of retinoblastoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2007;46(7):617–34.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Franco R et al. Oxidative stress, DNA methylation and carcinogenesis. Cancer Lett. 2008;266(1):6–11.CrossRefPubMed Franco R et al. Oxidative stress, DNA methylation and carcinogenesis. Cancer Lett. 2008;266(1):6–11.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Yoshiura K et al. Silencing of the E-cadherin invasion-suppressor gene by CpG methylation in human carcinomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1995;92(16):7416–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yoshiura K et al. Silencing of the E-cadherin invasion-suppressor gene by CpG methylation in human carcinomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1995;92(16):7416–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Tamura G et al. E-Cadherin gene promoter hypermethylation in primary human gastric carcinomas. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(7):569–73.CrossRefPubMed Tamura G et al. E-Cadherin gene promoter hypermethylation in primary human gastric carcinomas. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(7):569–73.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Fearon ER. BRCA1 and E-Cadherin promoter hypermethylation and gene inactivation in cancer—association or mechanism? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(7):515–7.CrossRefPubMed Fearon ER. BRCA1 and E-Cadherin promoter hypermethylation and gene inactivation in cancer—association or mechanism? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(7):515–7.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Liu X, Chu K-M. E-cadherin and gastric cancer: cause, consequence, and applications. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:637308.PubMedPubMedCentral Liu X, Chu K-M. E-cadherin and gastric cancer: cause, consequence, and applications. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:637308.PubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Montavon C et al. Prognostic and diagnostic significance of DNA methylation patterns in high grade serous ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124(3):582–8.CrossRefPubMed Montavon C et al. Prognostic and diagnostic significance of DNA methylation patterns in high grade serous ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124(3):582–8.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Rathi A et al. Methylation profiles of sporadic ovarian tumors and nonmalignant ovaries from high-risk women. Clin Cancer Res. 2002;8(11):3324–31.PubMed Rathi A et al. Methylation profiles of sporadic ovarian tumors and nonmalignant ovaries from high-risk women. Clin Cancer Res. 2002;8(11):3324–31.PubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Karahalios A et al. A review of the reporting and handling of missing data in cohort studies with repeated assessment of exposure measures. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12(1):96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Karahalios A et al. A review of the reporting and handling of missing data in cohort studies with repeated assessment of exposure measures. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12(1):96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
The association between CDH1 promoter methylation and patients with ovarian cancer: a systematic meta-analysis
verfasst von
Qiang Wang
Bing Wang
Yun-mei Zhang
Wei Wang
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2016
Verlag
BioMed Central
Erschienen in
Journal of Ovarian Research / Ausgabe 1/2016
Elektronische ISSN: 1757-2215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-016-0231-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2016

Journal of Ovarian Research 1/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.