Figure 1: Smurf1 expression is elevated in colorectal cancer tissues.

(a) Smurf1 expression scores are shown as box plots, with the horizontal lines representing the median; the bottom and top of the boxes representing the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively; and the vertical bars representing the range of the data; any outliers are marked with a circle. Colorectal cancer tissues were compared with matched adjacent normal tissues using the Wilcoxon test (n=336). Representative images of immunohistochemical staining of Smurf1 expression in the same tumour from three cases are shown. Scale bars, 400 μm. (b) Box plot of Smurf1 expression in tumours with different T stages (T Stages 1–4). Any outliers are marked with a circle and extreme cases are marked with an asterisk. Data were analysed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. (c) The percentage of tumours in the four groups of subjects described in (b). Data were analysed using Pearson’s χ² test. (d) Representative images from immunohistochemical staining of Smurf1 expression in two serial sections of the same tumour from four cases in different T stages (T Stages 1–4) are shown. Scale bars, 100 μm. Data were analysed using Pearson’s χ² test. (e) Box plot of Smurf1 expression in tumours with different M stages. Data were analysed using the Mann–Whitney U-test. (f) The percentage of tumours in the two groups of subjects described in (e). Data were analysed using Pearson’s χ² test. (g) Kaplan–Meier estimates of the cumulative survival rate (n=26). Comparison was made of groups with low Smurf1 expression (scores 0–7), Medium Smurf1 expression (scores 7–8) and high Smurf1 expression (scores 11–12). Marks on graph lines represent censored samples. P-value refers to two-sided log-rank tests. (h) Smurf1-depleted HCT116 cells and control HCT116 cells were injected subcutaneously into the right flank of nude mice. Tumours were isolated after 5 weeks.