Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article

Identification of potential and novel target genes in pituitary prolactinoma by bioinformatics analysis

  • Received: 05 November 2020 Accepted: 29 January 2021 Published: 07 February 2021
  • Pituitary prolactinoma is one of the most complicated and fatally pathogenic pituitary adenomas. Therefore, there is an urgent need to improve our understanding of the underlying molecular mechanism that drives the initiation, progression, and metastasis of pituitary prolactinoma. The aim of the present study was to identify the key genes and signaling pathways associated with pituitary prolactinoma using bioinformatics analysis. Transcriptome microarray dataset GSE119063 was downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Limma package in R software was used to screen DEGs. Pathway and Gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis were conducted to identify the biological role of DEGs. A protein-protein interaction (PPI) network was constructed and analyzed by using HIPPIE database and Cytoscape software. Module analyses was performed. In addition, a target gene-miRNA regulatory network and target gene-TF regulatory network were constructed by using NetworkAnalyst and Cytoscape software. Finally, validation of hub genes by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. A total of 989 DEGs were identified, including 461 up regulated genes and 528 down regulated genes. Pathway enrichment analysis showed that the DEGs were significantly enriched in the retinoate biosynthesis II, signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells, ALK2 signaling events, vitamin D3 biosynthesis, cell cycle and aurora B signaling. Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis showed that the DEGs were significantly enriched in the sensory organ morphogenesis, extracellular matrix, hormone activity, nuclear division, condensed chromosome and microtubule binding. In the PPI network and modules, SOX2, PRSS45, CLTC, PLK1, B4GALT6, RUNX1 and GTSE1 were considered as hub genes. In the target gene-miRNA regulatory network and target gene-TF regulatory network, LINC00598, SOX4, IRX1 and UNC13A were considered as hub genes. Using integrated bioinformatics analysis, we identified candidate genes in pituitary prolactinoma, which might improve our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of pituitary prolactinoma.

    Citation: Vikrant Ghatnatti, Basavaraj Vastrad, Swetha Patil, Chanabasayya Vastrad, Iranna Kotturshetti. Identification of potential and novel target genes in pituitary prolactinoma by bioinformatics analysis[J]. AIMS Neuroscience, 2021, 8(2): 254-283. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2021014

    Related Papers:

    [1] Doaa Filali, Mohammad Dilshad, Mohammad Akram . Generalized variational inclusion: graph convergence and dynamical system approach. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24525-24545. doi: 10.3934/math.20241194
    [2] Javid Iqbal, Imran Ali, Puneet Kumar Arora, Waseem Ali Mir . Set-valued variational inclusion problem with fuzzy mappings involving XOR-operation. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3288-3304. doi: 10.3934/math.2021197
    [3] Ting Xie, Dapeng Li . On the stability of projected dynamical system for generalized variational inequality with hesitant fuzzy relation. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 7107-7121. doi: 10.3934/math.2020455
    [4] Amjad Ali, Eskandar Ameer, Suhad Subhi Aiadi, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Arshad, Nabil Mlaiki, Wasfi Shatanawi . New extension to fuzzy dynamic system and fuzzy fixed point results with an application. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1208-1229. doi: 10.3934/math.2023061
    [5] Mohammad Dilshad, Fahad Maqbul Alamrani, Ahmed Alamer, Esmail Alshaban, Maryam G. Alshehri . Viscosity-type inertial iterative methods for variational inclusion and fixed point problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18553-18573. doi: 10.3934/math.2024903
    [6] Mohammad Dilshad, Mohammad Akram, Md. Nasiruzzaman, Doaa Filali, Ahmed A. Khidir . Adaptive inertial Yosida approximation iterative algorithms for split variational inclusion and fixed point problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 12922-12942. doi: 10.3934/math.2023651
    [7] Zihan Li, Xiao-Bao Shu, Fei Xu . The existence of upper and lower solutions to second order random impulsive differential equation with boundary value problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6189-6210. doi: 10.3934/math.2020398
    [8] Jamilu Abubakar, Poom Kumam, Jitsupa Deepho . Multistep hybrid viscosity method for split monotone variational inclusion and fixed point problems in Hilbert spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 5969-5992. doi: 10.3934/math.2020382
    [9] Lu-Chuan Ceng, Shih-Hsin Chen, Yeong-Cheng Liou, Tzu-Chien Yin . Modified inertial subgradient extragradient algorithms for generalized equilibria systems with constraints of variational inequalities and fixed points. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 13819-13842. doi: 10.3934/math.2024672
    [10] James Abah Ugboh, Joseph Oboyi, Hossam A. Nabwey, Christiana Friday Igiri, Francis Akutsah, Ojen Kumar Narain . Double inertial extrapolations method for solving split generalized equilibrium, fixed point and variational inequity problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 10416-10445. doi: 10.3934/math.2024509
  • Pituitary prolactinoma is one of the most complicated and fatally pathogenic pituitary adenomas. Therefore, there is an urgent need to improve our understanding of the underlying molecular mechanism that drives the initiation, progression, and metastasis of pituitary prolactinoma. The aim of the present study was to identify the key genes and signaling pathways associated with pituitary prolactinoma using bioinformatics analysis. Transcriptome microarray dataset GSE119063 was downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Limma package in R software was used to screen DEGs. Pathway and Gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis were conducted to identify the biological role of DEGs. A protein-protein interaction (PPI) network was constructed and analyzed by using HIPPIE database and Cytoscape software. Module analyses was performed. In addition, a target gene-miRNA regulatory network and target gene-TF regulatory network were constructed by using NetworkAnalyst and Cytoscape software. Finally, validation of hub genes by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. A total of 989 DEGs were identified, including 461 up regulated genes and 528 down regulated genes. Pathway enrichment analysis showed that the DEGs were significantly enriched in the retinoate biosynthesis II, signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells, ALK2 signaling events, vitamin D3 biosynthesis, cell cycle and aurora B signaling. Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis showed that the DEGs were significantly enriched in the sensory organ morphogenesis, extracellular matrix, hormone activity, nuclear division, condensed chromosome and microtubule binding. In the PPI network and modules, SOX2, PRSS45, CLTC, PLK1, B4GALT6, RUNX1 and GTSE1 were considered as hub genes. In the target gene-miRNA regulatory network and target gene-TF regulatory network, LINC00598, SOX4, IRX1 and UNC13A were considered as hub genes. Using integrated bioinformatics analysis, we identified candidate genes in pituitary prolactinoma, which might improve our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of pituitary prolactinoma.


    Abbreviations

    BioGRID:

    Biological General Repository for Interaction Datasets; 

    BP:

    biological process; 

    CC:

    cellular component; 

    DEGs:

    Differentially Expressed Genes; 

    GEO:

    Gene Expression Omnibus; 

    GO:

    Gene ontology; 

    HIPPIE:

    Human Integrated Protein-Protein Interaction rEference; 

    KEGG:

    Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes; 

    MF:

    molecular function; 

    SMPDB:

    Small Molecule Pathway Database

    Over the past five years, the world economy had a great deal to face some challenges: The COVID-19 epidemic shock has caused economic depression due to the great losses, unexpected inflation, and the more acute influence of global climate change. The potential digitization of the economy and net-zero economy may serve as a pivotal way to increase challenges posed by climate change to the environment and sustainable development [1]. In recent years, the green and digital transformation from integrating green and digital economy is the most critical climate-related issue opened at the prime agenda of sustainable development and net-zero environmental goals. In this study, the integration between the digital currency (Solana, hereafter SOL) and the carbon emission futures, thus, results in new models and produces instruments for digital and green economies (transformation).

    Consequently, scholars are looking at several specialized contributors such as green finance (GF) and financial technology (fintech) to seek ways to achieve an environmentally friendly and sustainable economy in the world [1,2,3]. There exist three distinct types of eco-friendly investment funds: carbon emissions trading, green credit, and green bonds. To be specific, carbon emissions trading plays an important role and has been treated as a green finance instrument [4,5]. Carbon emissions trading also is a crucial strategy for international cooperation in struggling with global warming. With the rapid growth of carbon trading and the evolvement of carbon financial derivatives products such as carbon options, green futures have become inescapable [6]. GF also requires financial institutions to consider pollution management and ecological conservation when providing credit to recover loans already granted to such projects [7,8].

    Wang et al.'s (2010) [9] study suggested that investors either unwittingly overreact to news or continually overreact to information due to investors' sentiment. The reactional behavior may result in the properties of "leptokurtic" and long-memory processes in the returns of financial assets. Fractional Brownian motion can be a valuable instrument for describing these natural phenomena [7,10]. Although, a variety of models has been employed for pricing European options, using jump fractional Brownian motion to the valuation of green financial options has not been explored. To fill this gap, then we demonstrate how to price European green financial options utilizing the identifying jumps in a GARCH-type model incorporated into a jump-mixed fractional Brownian environment. The numerical and empirical results of our valuation models and other available estimated models suggest that our model is reasonable and easy to perform.

    To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that specifically analyzes the study's implications and could be useful to the pricing of green financial options under the mixed fractal Brownian motions with jump diffusion environment. From the theoretical viewpoint, our study did some pioneering work, we contribute to the recently emerging literature in two ways:

    First, to capture the long memory features in time series and the jump of financial asset price behavior, we conduct a mixed fractional Brownian motion model (mfBm, hereafter) with identifying jumps. Afterward, we establish a risk-neutral valuation for pricing European options under the consideration that the underlying carbon price, the volatility, the risk-free interest rate, the jump intensity and the mean value and variance of jump magnitudes are all calculated values from market data. Secondly, empirical results are conducted by applying the underlying carbon returns and European options written on ICE EUA Futures prices.

    The aforementioned model is proven to elaborate on how green assets can be captured using the GARCH-type model with the affine jump-diffusion process. We also construct an in-depth theoretical analysis with perfect replication of a contingent claim. The paper empirically analyzes the behavior of green financial prices, thereby contributing to the literature by fitting the suggested model to market data including both the estimated parameters and price jumps. Motivated by the aforementioned insights, the purpose of this study is to focus on the theoretical features of the jump fractional Brownian motion model. The most appropriate model parameters are selected with respect to historical volatility filtered from underlying asset prices, driven by both the mfBm process and Poisson jumps.

    The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we briefly review relevant studies. We describe the theoretical model for the green financial option and explain their properties in Section 3. In Section 4, we derive a European-style derivative for green financial option prices and show empirical results of green financial assets, and outline a numerical application and several fresh empirical results. Finally, Section 5 concludes with some remarks.

    Fractional Brownian motion (fBm hereafter) has been widely utilized in financial modeling as well as in other fields since an fBm has two prominent properties of long-range dependence and self-similarity to capture these abnormal phenomena [11]. Furthermore, as proposed by some prior research, the return distributions of financial assets are generally influenced by long memory (or long-range dependence) and self-similarity [12]. To deal with this problem, some authors have used to model them by utilizing the fractional Brownian motion (fBm) with Hurst exponent H∈(1/2, 1), see, e.g., [13,14,15,16,17]. However, owing to the nature fact that fBm is neither a Markov process nor a semi-martingale, one should not apply the prevailing stochastic calculus to capture it. To deal with these problems, the long memory property is concerned and analyzed these fluctuations from financial markets. As natural extensions to this strand, several scholars [18,19,20] offered plausible explanations and have introduced to utilization of the so-called mixed fractional Brownian motion (mfBm), i.e., a linear compound of Wiener process and fractional Brownian motion (fBm). While the Hurst exponent of the fBm is larger than 1/2, then mfBm leads to a long-memory Gaussian process appropriate for modeling the financial return time series. Therefore, the mfBm has been commonly used in pricing different kinds of financial derivatives, including stock options [9,21], equity warrants [22], and currency options [15,23], and credit derivatives [24]. The extensive usage of fractional Brownian motion can be synthesized as follows:

    The first methodology is to use the mfBm as an alternative approach. Cheridito (2001) [18] has proven that if the Hurst coefficient is located on a specific scale, it is equal to Brownian motion. Several studies also have constructed option pricing models with the mixed fractional Brownian motion [9,24,25,26,27], it also is widely used in developing foreign exchange (FX) option pricing models [10,23,28]. The second methodology is to use approximative fractional Brownian motion developed by Thao (2006) [29] as an alternative approach. Chang et al. (2021) [30] introduced a pricing stock option model by modeling the dynamics of stock and the variance is governed by an approximative fractional process.

    Due to surprise macroeconomic news, analyzing ambiguous volatility and jump innovations in asset returns have attracted a great deal of attention. Therefore, several researchers have addressed the pricing contingent claims under jump-diffusion or self-exciting (Hawkes) processes (e.g., [31]). In this regard, there is also a growing literature explaining the sudden shocks or jumps using volatility models as shown by [32,33,34]. The exclusion of sudden shocks (changes) or jumps in the volatility dynamics can generate the persistence of estimated volatility bias (see, e.g., [35]) or jump dynamics in the volatility process [36]. Some studies in the area of option pricing (models) were conducted by [37,38], but an extensive empirical analysis is not undertaken yet. For this, we first apply the nonparametric approach to detect jumps in GARCH models developed by Laurent et al. (2016) [35] on leading green cryptocurrencies such as Solana (SOL) to identify the price jumps. Recognizing surprise news-driven jump phenomena, the difficulty of estimating jump parameters, and the importance of incorporating marketing information into option pricing models, we employ alternately jump models and more advanced option pricing models to obtain an insight into the green financial markets.

    Unfortunately, little attention has been dedicated to integrating green financial studies with that of option pricing to establish green financial option pricing models under jump-diffusion process. In the wake of blockchain technology, there is an increasing interest in tokenonomics or 'token finance', and many research papers have begun exploring the price dynamics of cryptocurrencies, see e.g., [32,33]. However, little work has been dedicated to incorporating jump detection into green financial assets to conduct option pricing models with jump fractional Brownian motion.

    Let a probability space (Ω,F,P) be a complete probability space with a right-continuous filtration (Ft)t>0. A fractional Brownian motion (fBm) with Hurst exponent H ∈ (0, 1] follows a centered Gaussian process. A mixed fractional Brownian motion MHα,β(t)of parameters are α, β and H stands for a linear compound of a Brownian motion or a Wiener process Wt and fractional Brownian motion WH(t) with a Gaussian zero-mean nonstationary stochastic process indexed by a single scalar of Hurst parameter H ∈ (0, 1), defined on a probability space {(Ftt≥0, ) P} by:

    MHα,β(t) = αWt + βWHt,

    where Wt and WHt are independent, and α and β denote real constants such that (α, β) ≠ (0, 0). P is the physical probability measurement and the information filtering {Ft}t≥0 is produced by (Wτ, WHτ) for τ ≤ t, which meets the monotonic increasing properties. As shown in previous research, we list some properties of the mfBm.

    Proposition 1. The mfBm MHα,β(t) satisfies the properties as follow:

    (ⅰ) MHα,β(t) is a centered Gaussian process with mean zero and the covariation function is regarded as long-range dependence then given by

    Cov(MH(t),MH(s))=α2(ts)+β22(t2H+s2H|ts|2H), s, t > 0;

    (ⅱ) MHα,β(t) is not a Markovian process for H ∈ (0, 1) \ {12};

    (ⅲ) The increments of MHα,β(t) are mixed-self-similar and stationary, in this regard, for any h > 0,

    MHα,β(t)dMHαh2,βhH(t); (3.1)

    where the symbol d represents the random variables on both sides of the Eq (3.1) have drawn from the same asymptotic distribution;

    (ⅳ) The increments of the process MHα,β(t) are positively correlated if H∈(12, 1), uncorrelated if H = 12, and negatively correlated if H ∈ (0, 12);

    (ⅴ) The increments of MHα,β(t) are long-range dependence if and only if H ∈ (12, 1);

    (ⅵ) The mfBm MHα,β(t) is equivalent to BM for H ∈ (34, 1).

    Proof of Proposition 1 and for a comprehensive description of the features of the mfBm, the interested reader is referred to [19,22]. The details of the Hurst exponent algorithms are available from the corresponding author.

    Corollary 1. The assets prices at every t of a bounded -measurable claim can be described as

    Ft=er(Tt)Et(F), (3.2)

    where r is the constant risk-free interest rate.

    The price processS=(St)t of a green financial asset is defined. Under the physical probability measure P, the green financial prices with return dynamics are given by:

    dStSt=(μλk)dt+σdWt+(eJ1)dNt, (3.3)

    where μ and σ are the instantaneous expected return and the continuous volatility, respectively. The process Nt is a Poisson process, independent of the jump-sizes J with arrival intensity λ per unit time so that its increments satisfy

    dNt={0 with probability 1λdt,jumps cannot occur,1 with probabilityλdt.jumps can occur (3.4)

    The corresponding function is in that case, the expected proportional jump size

    kEP(eJ1).

    Recalling a filtered probability measure space[Ω,F,P,(Ft)t>0] is supposed where the filtration Ft is the natural filtration yielded by the Wiener process Wt under the market measure P and the compound Poisson process Ntj=1Jj. Jumps arriving at different times are supposed to be independent of each other. A sample path St for a process described by

    dStSt=μdt+σdWt+d[Nti=1(eJ1)]λE(eJ1)dt=μdt+σdWt+(eJ1)dNtλE(eJ1)dt. (3.5)

    The mixed fractional nature and jumps have an impact on the fundamental theorem of asset pricing. This impact involves ensuring martingale properties under the risk-neutral measure1 Q and examining conditions that maintain market completeness with these dynamics. Specifically, we define the risk-neutral dynamics for the asset price under mixed fractional Brownian motion with jump diffusion, ensuring that the pricing measure Q satisfies the no-arbitrage conditions and preserves market completeness.

    1 The authors are thankful to an anonymous referee for suggesting the mixed fractional Brownian motion with jump-diffusion model under risk-neutral measure Q.

    Under the risk-neutral measure Q, the asset price St evolves according to

    dSt=rStdt+σSt~Wt+St(e˜J1)d~Nt, (3.5a)

    where

    - ~Wtis a standard Brownian motion under Q.

    - ~Nt is a Poisson process with intensity λunder Q, independent of ~Wt.

    - ˜J are the jump sizes with an adjusted distribution under Q to ensure the martingale property of the discounted asset price.

    To solve the prominent issues associated with the construction of our prime model, we model the long memory and jump-type behavior on the underlying asset price under an uncertain environment. Accordingly, pricing the European cryptocurrency option and carbon option in a mixed fractional Brownian motion with detecting jumps is analyzed. More accurately, we first show the dynamics of the underlying asset price driven by a jump fractional Brownian motion and then derive analytical pricing formulae for European options. Recent advances in mathematical models offer a better choice, the mixed fractal Brownian model with jumps (MFBMJ) has extended from mixed fractional Brownian motion (hereafter MFBM) which is a linear component of BM and FBM.

    European green financial options

    One of our purposes here is exactly to derive the pricing of European-style options for underlying green financial assets. Subsequently, the mfBm with jump model by incorporating the mixed fractional Brownian motion and Poisson jump process is acquired and several prominent features are investigated. To develop the fresh option pricing derivation in a jump mixed fractional market, some assumptions will be given as follows:

    (ⅰ) There are no transaction costs or taxes and all green assets are perfectly divisible;

    (ⅱ) The risk-free interest rate is constant;

    (ⅲ) Assets trading is continuous;

    (ⅳ) Asset prices conform to FBM.

    Now consider an MFBMJ market that includes two investment possibilities:

    (ⅰ) A carbon market account:

    dpt=rcptdt,p0=1,0tT, (3.6)

    where rc is the return of carbon emissions prices.

    (ⅱ) A green crypto (Solana: SOL) whose price movements are governed by a fractional Wiener process as follows:

    dSt=μStdt+σStd¯Wt+σStd¯WHt,S0=S>0,0tT, (3.7)

    where H is Hurst parameter satisfied H > 1/2, where St denote the spot price at time 𝑡 of one unit of the major green cryptocurrency: Solana is measured in low carbon emissions.

    Making the change of variable

    Wt+WtH=μ+rgrcσ+¯Wt+¯WHt, (3.8)

    then under the risk-neutral measure, one can obtain that:

    dSt=(rcrg)Stdt+σStdWt+σStdWHt,S0=S>0,0tT, (3.9)

    where rg is the return of green cryptocurrency (Solana). Hence, we obtain the solution of (3.7) as follows

    ST=Stexp(rcrg)T+σ(WT+WHT)12σ2Tσ22T2H. (3.10)

    More importantly, under the risk-neutral measure ¯PH, the fractional Brownian motion model with jumps can be described as (3.11)

    dStSt=(μtμJ(t))dt+Ni=1σitdWHit+σtdWt+(eJ(t)1)dNt. (3.11)

    S0 = S, 0≤tT,

    where Nt represents a Poisson process with rate λ; J(t) is the jump size percent at time t which follows a sequence of independent identically distributed (iid) process, and (eJ(t)1) N(μJ(t),δ2J(t)).

    Besides, the FBM i.e., WHit, i = ¯1,N, the Poisson process Nt, and the jump size (eJ(t)1) are supposed to be relatively independent of all sources of randomness.

    Let

    ¯Wt=Wt+t0μ(u)+rg(u)rc(u)σ(u)du,¯WHit=WHit. (3.12)

    A risk-neutral measure ¯PH is given by

    d¯PHdP=exp(Rθ(u)dW(u)12Rθ2(u)du), (3.13)
    whereθt=μ(t)+rg(t)rc(t)σ(t). (3.14)

    Then ¯Wt+Ni=1¯WHit stands for a new MFBM under the risk-neutral measure ¯PH. Under the risk-neutral measure ¯PH, Eq (3.11) can be described as (3.15)

    dStSt=(rg(t)rc(t))dt+Ni=1σitdWHit+σtdWt+(eJ(t)1)dNt. (3.15)

    Let C(St,t) be the price of a European contingent claim (option) at time t with a strike price X that expires at time T. Then we present the pricing formula for the green financial call option by the theorem as follows.

    Theorem 1. The price at every t ∈ [0, T] of a European call green financial option with strike price X that expires at time 𝑇 is described as

    Ca(St,X,t)=n=0eλτ(λτ)nn!En[Stni=1eJ(ti)e(rg+λμJ(t))τN(d1i)Xe(rc)τN(d2i)] (3.16)
    d1i=ln(Stni=1eJ(ti)X)+(rcrgλμJ(t))τ+12σ2τ+12σ2τ2HσT2Ht2H
    d2i=d1iσT2Ht2H

    En, τ=Tt, is the expectation operator over the distribution of ni=1eJ(ti), time to expiration (maturity), respectively. N(⋅) denotes the normal cumulative distribution.

    Proof of Theorem 1. In a risk natural world, from Corollary 1, a European call green financial option with maturity 𝑇 and strike price X can be shown. Also, a European call option with maturity 𝑇 and strike price X is theoretically equivalent to

    Ca(St,X,t)=ER[erc(Tt)(STX)+FHt]=erc(Tt)EPH[ST1ST>XFHt]Xerc(Tt)ER[1ST>XFHt], (3.17)

    where 1ST>X denotes an indicator function.

    Let¯Wt+¯WHt=μλμJ(t)+rgrcσt+Wt+WtH. (3.18)

    Then we obtain

    ST=StNTti=1e(μλμJ(t))(Tt)+σ(¯WT¯Wt)+σ(¯WHT¯WHt)×[12σ2(Tt)12σ2(T2Ht2H)], (3.19)

    let

    ST=Stni=1e(μλμJ(t))(Tt)+σ(¯WT¯Wt)+σ(¯WHT¯WHt)×[12σ2(Tt)12σ2(T2Ht2H)].

    Using the independence of NTt and 𝐽(ti) and the theory of Poisson distribution with intensity λ(Tt), we have

    ST=n=0P(NT=n)SnT=n=0eλτ(λτ)nn!SnT. (3.20)

    By utilizing the fractional Girsanov theorem, we conclude that ¯WHT¯Wt is a new mixed fractional Brownian motion under ¯R. Hence, setting

    d2=ln(XStni=1eJ(ti))(rcrgλμJ(t))τ+σ(¯WHT¯Wt)+12σ2(Tt)+12σ2(T2Ht2H),

    and applying Corollary 1, we infer that

    ER[1ST>XFHt]=ER[1d2<σ(¯WHT+¯Wt)<FHt]=d212π[σ2(Tt)+σ2(T2Ht2H)]×exp[(yσ¯WHTσ¯Wt)22[σ2(Tt)+σ2(T2Ht2H)]]dy=σ¯WHT+σ¯Wtd2/σ2(Tt)+σ2(T2Ht2H)12π×ez22dz=N(d2), (3.21)

    where

    d2=σ¯WHT+σ¯Wtd2σ2(Tt)+σ2(T2Ht2H)=ln(Stni=1eJ(ti)X)+(rcrgλμJ(t))τ12σ2(Tt)σ22(T2Ht2H)σ(Tt)+(T2Ht2H). (3.22)

    Now we considerER[ST1ST>XFHt] and set the following equation

    σWt+σ(WHt)=(¯Wtσt)+σ(¯WHTσt2H). (3.23)

    From the Girsanov transformation on the fractional Wiener process, one knows that there exists a probability measure ER in which σWt+σ(WHt) is a new MFBM.

    Zt=exp(σ¯WHT+σ¯Wt12σ2t2H12σ2t). (3.24)

    Let, then ST=Ste(rcrg)(T)tZt from previous theorem, we can obtain that

    ER[ST1ST>XFHt]=Ste(rcrg)(T)t×ER[ZT1d2<σ(¯WHT+¯Wt)<(σ¯WHT+σ¯Wt)FHt]=Ste(rcrg)(T)t×ER[1d2<σ(WHT+WT)<(σ(¯WHT)+σ¯Wt)FHt]=Ste(rcrg)(T)t×σ(WHT)+σWTd1/σ2(Tt)+σ2(T2Ht2H)d212π×ez22dz=Ste(rcrg)(T)tN(d1) (3.25)

    where d1 = ln(Stni=1eJ(ti)X)+(rcrgλμJ(t))τ12σ2(Tt)+σ22(T2Ht2H)σT2Ht2H

    d2=ln(Stni=1eJ(ti)X)+(rcrgλμJ(t))τ12σ2(Tt)σ22(T2Ht2H)σT2Ht2H.

    From the above analysis, it is calculated that the price of the European call green financial option can be expressed as

    Ca(St,X,t)=n=0eλτ(λτ)nn!En[Stni=1eJ(ti)e(rg+λμJ(t))τN(d1i)Xe(rc)τN(d2i)]. (3.26)

    The proof is achieved.

    For the sake of simplicity, we consider only the above European call option in the following analysis, while the put option can be handled analogously. Furthermore, we can computer the price of a put green financial option which is produced by the following corollary. Perhaps, utilizing the put–call parity, one can readily acquire the evaluation model for a put green financial option, which the following corollary is given by.

    Corollary 2. The price at every 𝑡∈ [0, 𝑇] of a European put green financial option with strike price 𝐾 and maturity 𝑇 is described as follows.

    Pu(St,X,t)=n=0eλτ(λτ)nn!En[Xe(rc)τN(d2i)Stni=1eJ(ti)e(rg+λμJ(t))τN(d1i)] (3.27)

    where d1i and d2i are shown in the preceding equation.

    As discussed above, our model assumes that the underlying asset price processes are driven by mfBm and Poisson jumps. Thus, our first procedure is looking to estimate jump instants or excessively volatile, and our second procedure is to calculate the corresponding amplitude of the jump motion. Our approach is based on the argument introduced in [39] Bouri et al.'s (2020) work, in which methodology for estimating jump instants is proposed by Laurent et al. (2016 [35]; hereafter LLP) test. The LLP test is based on the semi-parametric approach which considers additive jumps in AR-asymmetric-GARCH models to take potential asymmetric effects into account. Assume random asset returns (rt) in an AR (1)-GJR-GARCH (1, 1) model are described as follows:

    rt=ut+ξrt1+εt (3.28)
    σ2t=ω+αε2t1+γDt1ε2t1+βσ2t1 (3.29)
    εt=atztandzti.i.dN(0,1) (3.30)

    where zt denotes the white noise process, and σ2t represents the conditional variance of rt. Here is denoted as Dt1 = 1 if εti < 0 and 0 otherwise.

    If a target-independent jump component atIt is added to rt, we can yield

    rt=rt+atIt (3.31)

    where rt represents the observed returns, It is a binary variable taking the value of 1 in the case while a jump occurs on day t and 0 otherwise, and at is the jump size. In Eq (3.31), an additive jump atIt cannot influence the conditional variance σ2t+1 at the next periodt+1 (see [35]).

    The results are qualitatively the descriptive statistics on significant jumps via LLP test and are shown in Table 2.

    Table 1.  Summary statistics of prices and its log-return for the SOL (Solana) and carbon.
    SOL rs Carbon rc
    Mean 47.5417 0.0048 63.9873 0.0009
    Median 26.4800 0.0019 70.3800 0.0014
    Maximum 248.470 0.5805 98.0100 0.1613
    Minimum 0.51530 −0.5495 19.3100 −0.1773
    Std. Dev. 53.9461 0.0861 23.3654 0.0276
    Skewness 1.6470 0.2379 −0.5132 −0.3960
    Kurtosis 5.0897 10.2789 1.8545 6.9415
    Jarque-Bera 635.359 2221.512 98.768 674.821
    Probability 0.0000 *** 0.0000 *** 0.0000 *** 0.0000 ***
    Standard error 0.0123 0.0273
    t-stat 13.978 2.633
    p-value 0.00%*** 3.89%**
    Observations 2,004
    Notes:
    1. *, ** and ***, represent statistical significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively.
    2. rs and rc denote the daily log return computed from closing prices of SOL and carbon.
    3. The carbon price is currency in EUR? and rsrc = 0.0039.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 2.  Descriptive statistics on significant jumps using LLP statistics.
    SOL Carbon
    Jump Mean 0.1775 0.0658
    Jump Std Dev 0.3823 0.2481
    Jump probability 0.1766 0.0659
    average 0.1214
    No. of jumps per year
    2020 26 10
    2021 38 20
    2022 49 26
    2023 56 7
    2024 9 3
    Total jumps 178 66
    Notes:
    1. Concerning number of jumps and jump intensity are calculated as the total number jumps (# jumps), their proportion (%) over sample observations, i.e., shown as (P(jump) = 100 (#jumps/#obs.)), and their mean and standard deviation of jump components are also reported. Percentage of the year having jumps=NumberofjumpdaysTotalnumberofdays∗ 100.
    2. Yearly estimates for the Solana (SOL) and Carbon and no. of jumps denote the number of detecting jumps, and P (jump freq.) indicates the proportion of observations with a significant jump occurrence at α = 0.05.
    3. LLP statistics is the Laurent et al. (2016) [35] jump test statistic.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The study is conducted on green financial options with underlying green asset prices, including quotes according to two leading green assets: SOL (Solana) and Carbon. In this study, we designed a green financial option contract. First, we combined a generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity model (GARCH) to predict the dynamics jump of green financial assets. Next, we established a fractional Brownian motion option pricing model with temporally variable volatility. Consequently, we apply this approach to the valuation of option pricing by executing the closing price of the underlying assets of SOL (Solana) and Carbon from 14 April 2020 to 29 February 2024 as an empirical analysis. The trend of the prices detected by the GARCH model with jumps was consistent with the actual trend and predictions of actual prices were highly accurate. Our approach is based on ideas proposed in [39] Bouri et al.'s (2020) work, which method for estimating jump instants is introduced by Laurent et al. (2016) [35]. The technique is based on the semi-parametric approach which is extended to consider additive jumps in AR-asymmetric-GARCH models to measure potential asymmetric effects.

    This section aims to present the green financial option value process in the formula (3.20) based on the physical measure of underlying green asset prices. In the physical market, we can get 2,004 historical data on the prices of SOL (Solana) and Carbon at https://coinmarketcap.com/ and https://www.investing.com, respectively. The sample period is April 14, 2020, to February 29, 2024, yielding 1,002 trading days. The selected sample is dictated by the price data availability of SOL, collected from the representative green cryptocurrency by market capitalization to ensure the longest possible period. Solana (briefly denoted as SOL) is regarded as a green cryptocurrency, see the list of sustainable cryptocurrencies (https://dailycoin.com/green-crypto-eco-friendly-cryptocurrencies/#h-top-green-cryptocurrencies).

    As evidenced in the first-four moments shown in Table 1, the visual impressions are performed by the descriptive statistics for SOL's log-return that the maximum, the minimum, and the mean values are 0.5805, −0.5495, and 0.0048, respectively. Taking into account these historical data, an important SOL (Solana) feature reports that the skewness value is greater than 0, so a large proportion of the data is found in the long right tail, with a relatively fat right tail, however, the opposite result for carbon. Taken together, the measure of log-return distribution is leptokurtic (10.28, 6.94), implying evidence of heavy tails, respectively. It also displays that the kurtosis is greater than the value of 3 for the standard normal distribution. The Jarque-Brea statistic was significant at P < 0.001; as a result, we rejected the hypothesis that the logarithmic return of all series follows a normal distribution. In particular, as depicted in Figure 1, we use daily prices and log-returns of SOL and carbon data to estimate parameter values as far as it is possible to capture the jump and diffuse risk. The bottom panel depicts volatility clustering and asymmetric jump diffusion in the carbon market.

    Figure 1.  The evolution of prices and log returns for SOL and carbon.
    Notes:
    1. As shown in the upper plot, an illustration of price dynamics given the evolution of the SOL (blue line) presents the huge and slight jumps. The most significant jumps are highlighted by red circles when the massive jump occurred. We use Solana (SOL) and carbon data to estimate parameter values as far as it is possible to capture the jump and diffuse risk. The data source is obtained from Coinmarketcap.com.
    2. The bottom panel depicts volatility clustering and asymmetric jump diffusion in the SOL and carbon market.

    To further analyze the jump dynamics, Table 2 exhibit quarterly statistics of the significant jump components for both SOL and carbon returns. The jump size of carbon observations with mean, standard deviation, and jump probability equal 0.0658, 0.2481 and 0.0659, respectively. As a whole, the jump intensity λ is computed along with an average of 0.1214 for the full sample period. Figure 2 illustrates the jump intensity visualization for the SOL and carbon.

    Figure 2.  Jump intensity for SOL and carbon.
    Notes:
    1. Regarding the definition of jumps and jump intensity, and their mean and standard deviation of jump components, see Note of Table 1.
    2. Quarterly estimates for no. of jumps for SOL and carbon denote the number of identifying jumps, and P (jump freq.) indicates the proportion of observations with jumps, and jump frequency accounts for observations with a significant jump occurrence at α = 0.05.

    Figure 3 displays the estimated results for respective graphs of the GARCH model's conditional variance as well as standardized residuals. Overall, as depicted in Figure 3, the conditional volatility and residuals of Carbon have smaller amplitude fluctuations than SOL (Solana) via the TGARCH (1, 1) model.

    Figure 3.  The conditional variance and standardized residuals of TGARCH model for SOL and carbon.
    Notes:
    The top panel for respective graphs the TGARCH model’s conditional variance as well as standardized residuals generated from Eq (3.29) for SOL; the second panel plots the conditional variance and standardize residuals of the TGARCH model for carbon. In specific, the mean equation under a TGARCH process can be given in Eq (3.28).

    Hurst Exponent Calculation

    Following the method of Hurst exponent algorithms, a scatter plot of R/S values at window size is drawn with a natural base 𝑒 and the resulting slope of Hurst exponent values is fitted. According to the results in Table 1, the Hurst exponent is computed as 0.6715 and 0.5720 for SOL and carbon, respectively. These coefficients are significant since p-values are greater than the chosen values at a 5% significance level. Table 1 also displays the values of the underlying green assets prices for the intensity of the jump process 0.065 when the power exponent is taken to be ℎ = 0.572 value obtained from Table 1. The R/S statistics cannot reject the null hypothesis of the absence of long-range dependence in the case of return series. The observed results show that the daily log-return series for SOL and carbon display evidence of long memory behaviour since p-values are reported as significantly lower than 5 %. In this sense, this concludes that the returns of the two green assets exhibit the existence of high volatility persistence but follow a non-random walk. The result aligns with [40]. In addition, Figure 4 displays the boxplots of log(n) and log(R/S) and a clear linear pattern in the two markets, with n ranging from 1 to N. Notably, a general property is exhibited in Figure 4, the scatter diagram depicts that while the return series has shown an exponential market trend, and multifractality increased generally after their respective change-points.

    Figure 4.  An illustration of Hurst exponent for SOL and carbon.

    Consequently, the above-expected average variance and average jump frequency are substituted into the jump-diffusion approximation, as discussed in [41] Bates (1991), and adequate conditions are determined based on the green financial option pricing. The real-world probabilities computed from historical price data are represented as physical or market probability measures P. Consequently, the estimated model parameters can be employed in the option pricing under the risk-neutral pricing measure Q for all pricing options formula in Eq (3.16) above. In this context, we will display the values of the green financial options and the basic parameters are primarily listed:

    The log return of SOL rs is 0.48%, and the carbon rc is 0.09%, the rsrc (cost of carry or position spread) is about 0.39%, accordingly. Based on the historical datum, we apply the R/S analysis approach to estimate the Hurst exponent (H = 0.572). Next, we can calculate the valuation of the green financial call option using European contingent claims written on the underlying asset of green financial assets with carbon quotations lying in the closed interval of [4.85, 5.30]. The remaining time to maturity Tt is updated according to the underlying asset. The empirical results are reported in Table 3. Now, we consider the values of the computed jump parameters and preceding Hurst parameters 𝐻 = 0.572 and then calculate the values for our green financial options under jump mixed fractional Brownian motion. Table 3 and Figures 5a and 5b display the values of the call green financial option against its parameters, H, λ, and μJ. The chosen parameters are acquired from Table 1 as follows: S0 = 52.51(i.e., carbon price at 23 Feb.2024), K = 48.5, rs = 0.0048, rc = 0.0009, σ = 0.0276, t = 0, T = 19 (days), H = 0.572, λ = 7, μJ = 0.0065, and δJ = 0.2418. Not surprisingly Figure 1 depicts that the option value is a decreasing function of μJ, δJ, and the increasing parameter of H and λ is accompanied by an increase of the corresponding option value.

    Table 3.  Calculating European call option valuation with jump fractal Brownian motions.
    Panel a:
    Strike Market price Difference Option value Delta Premium RMSE
    48.50C 5.015 0.3651 4.6499 0.4950 1250 0.7325
    49.00C 4.65 0.4564 4.1936 0.6070 7600
    49.50C 4.295 0.5559 3.7391 0.5951 7300
    50.00C 3.955 0.6686 3.2864 0.5831 7010
    50.50C 3.63 0.7945 2.8355 0.5710 6725
    51.00C 3.32 0.932 2.388 0.5586 6450
    51.50C 3.03 1.0304 1.9996 0.5461 6180
    52.00C 2.755 0.9314 1.8236 0.5335 5915
    52.50C 2.485 0.7321 1.7529 0.5207 5660
    53.00C 2.24 0.5499 1.6901 0.5079 5410
    Notes:
    1. 19 days to expiration on 03/13/24 (Implied Volatility: 58.96%).
    2. Price value of option point: EUR 1,000.
    3. ICE EUA Futures Mar'24 (CKH24) and options prices for Fri, Feb 23rd, 2024. Also,
    S0 =52.51 at 23-Feb-24.
    4. Downloaded from Barchart.com as of 02-23-2024.
    Panel b:
    Strike Market price Difference Option value Delta Premium RMSE
    49.00C 7.78 (0.0006) 7.7794 0.6071 7600 0.4732
    49.50C 7.47 0.0978 7.5678 0.5951 7300
    50.00C 7.165 0.1965 7.3615 0.5831 7010
    50.50C 6.875 0.2853 7.1603 0.5710 6725
    51.00C 6.59 0.3742 6.9642 0.5586 6450
    51.50C 6.315 0.4582 6.7732 0.5461 6180
    52.00C 6.045 0.5421 6.5871 0.5335 5915
    52.50C 5.785 0.6210 6.4060 0.5207 5660
    53.00C 5.535 0.6946 6.2296 0.5079 5410
    53.50C 5.285 0.7730 6.0580 0.4952 5170
    Notes:
    1. 117 days to expiration on 06/19/24.
    2. ICE EUA Futures Jun '24 (CKM24) and options prices for Fri, Feb 23rd, 2024.
    3. Market price downloaded from Barchart.com as of 02-23-2024. Also, a summary of the pricing performance and calibration on 23 February 2024.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 5a.  Option value against the maturity time and the asset price (Scenario a).
    Note: The produced results are performed from the software provided by [43] Haug (2007).
    Figure 5b.  Option value against the maturity time and the asset price (Scenario b).

    Concerning numerical experiments: Application to green financial derivative valuation, we provide numerical implications by using the asymptotic approximations of the green financial prices under numerical study. We can take a closer look at the values of our jump fractional green financial options for constant Hurst parameters H and then consider the values for computed jump parameters. Panel b of Table 3 exhibits the values of a European green financial call option versus its parameters, H, λ, μJ, and δ. The defaulting parameters are S0 = 52.51, K = 48.5, rs = 0.0048, rc = 0.0009, σ = 0.0276, t = 0, T = 117 (days), H = 0.572, λ = 7, μJ = 0.0065, and δJ = 0.2418.

    Perhaps unsurprisingly, Figure 5b suggests that the option value is an increasing function of λ, and increasing parameters of μJ and δJ are accompanied by an increase of the corresponding option value. However, the opposite result was reported in [42].

    This study provides a practical example of a green financial options contract written at the strike price on the interval (48.50−53.00) and calls underlying: ICE (Intercontinental Exchange) EUA Futures Mar'24 (CKH24) on 23 February 2024. Our findings displayed in Table 3 should be interpreted with caution.

    The fitting results are evaluated in terms of the major measure of the root mean squared error (RMSE) of the calibrated model prices in connection with the market prices. We summarize the pricing performance for the previously calibrated models. Turn to Table 3 displays the RMSE for the calibration on 29 February 2024, while the last column of Table 3 shows each model on the error evaluation indicator of RMSE. The longer maturity pricing options already do a better job than the short maturity pricing options, the call option model results in slightly better fits.

    Indeed, the general testing procedure is to compute the implied volatilities of option prices derived by this new model. In what follows, we can account for simultaneously green financial put option prices for various maturities utilizing the JFBM model. In the same way, we present the computed option values generated with our JFBM in Table 4. The calibrated parameters are The strike prices vary from 48.5 to 53.5, S0 = 52.51, rs = 0.0048, rc = 0.0009, σ = 0.0276, t = 0, T = 117 (days), H = 0.572, λ = 7, μJ = 0.0065, and δJ = 0.2418.

    Table 4.  Calculating European put option valuation with jump fractal Brownian motions.
    Panel a:
    Strike Market price Difference Option value Delta Premium RMSE
    48.50P 1.295 0.6602 0.6348 −0.5076 6450 0.9878
    49.00P 1.43 0.7519 0.6781 −0.3760 4380
    49.50P 1.575 0.8518 0.7232 −0.3899 4580
    50.00P 1.735 0.9649 0.7701 −0.4041 4790
    50.50P 1.91 1.0912 0.8188 −0.4184 5005
    51.00P 2.1 1.2291 0.8709 −0.4329 5230
    51.50P 2.31 1.328 0.982 −0.4476 5460
    52.00P 2.535 1.2293 1.3057 −0.4624 5695
    52.50P 2.765 1.0304 1.7346 −0.4774 5940
    53.00P 3.02 0.2486 2.7714 −0.4924 6190
    Notes:
    1. Time to Maturity=19 days.
    2. Downloaded from Barchart.com as of 02-23-2024 06:51pm CST.
    3. European put options prices are estimated via Eq (3.27). Calibration of the jump fractal Brownian motions model is simultaneously used to put options, which are the same as Table 3.
    Panel b:
    Strike Market price Difference Option value Delta Premium RMSE
    49.00P 3.98 0.2558 4.2358 -0.3761 4380 0.6920
    49.50P 4.17 0.3518 4.5218 -0.3899 4580
    50.00P 4.365 0.4481 4.8131 -0.4041 4790
    50.50P 4.575 0.5345 5.1095 -0.4184 5005
    51.00P 4.79 0.6211 5.4111 -0.4329 5230
    51.50P 5.015 0.7026 5.7176 -0.4476 5460
    52.00P 5.245 0.7842 6.0292 -0.4624 5695
    52.50P 5.485 0.8606 6.3456 -0.4773 5940
    53.00P 5.735 0.9318 6.6668 -0.4924 6190
    53.50P 5.985 1.0050 6.99 -0.5076 6450
    Notes:
    1. Time to Maturity=117 days.
    2. Numerical results are based on historical parameter estimates and then calibration of the jump fractal Brownian motions model is simultaneously used to put options.
    3. Downloaded from Barchart.com as of 02-23-2024 06:51pm CST.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    As can be evidenced in the bottom panel of Figures 5a and 5b, the graphical results are clearly presented as the "smile" effect. That is, the implied volatility is not a constant but varies with moneyness and maturity, exhibiting our model has a good explanation of the "volatility smile" in option pricing.

    Regarding inclusive of a comparison between the proposed model and standard models like Black-Scholes or other jump-diffusion models without the fractional component. Now, we compared the implied volatility derived from the mfBm model to that of the conventional Black-Scholes model. More importantly, as depicted in the bottom panel of Figures 5a5d, the implied volatility in the fitted JFBM model exhibits the "volatility smile" in option pricing for scenario a−d. However, the implied volatility in the fitted Black-Scholes model exhibits a straight line in option pricing. Therefore, we can confirm that our jump fractional Brownian motion (JFBM) model seems a reasonable and efficient one for pricing green financial options.

    Figure 5c.  Option value against the maturity time and the asset price (Scenario c).
    Figure 5d.  Option value against the maturity time and the asset price (Scenario d).

    This article empirically compounds the jump process and mixed fractional Brownian motion. Besides that, some specific properties of green financial asset pricing formulae are also presented. Moreover, numerical examples acquired in Section 4 suggest that our jump mixed fractional Brownian motion model is commonly used and has particular features to capture the extreme movements of financial markets. In summary, owing to MFBM is a well-developed mathematical model of deeply correlated random processes and jumps can play an important role in financial markets. Meanwhile, JMFBM can be considered a more effective approach for pricing green financial options. In addition, financial asset returns usually have potential jumps, long memory, and volatility clustering. These behaviors cannot be completely captured by geometric Brownian motion. The main objective of this article is to apply a parsimonious parametric model that describes the crucial properties of the data. The major finding from the study is the model specification that allows fractional Brownian motion plus jump processes to quantify these properties of green financial datum.

    As usual, a convergent algorithm and a large sample are necessary for relatively precise estimates of the parameters.

    To our knowledge, the prior studies on option valuation under an uncertain mixed fractional Brownian motion with a jump model are rare. That is to say, we ought to investigate a more predominate asset-pricing model to capture both the jumps and long-range dependence behaviors of the underlying asset price, and identify key sources of uncertainties, i.e., both uncertain and randomness. Motivated by the aforementioned insights, the major objective of this paper is to expand the tractable analytical tool of the uncertainly mfBm model to alternative models with jumps.

    At present, In the face of severe climate change, researchers have looked for assistance from financial instruments. They have examined how to hedge the risks of these instruments created by market fluctuations through various green financial derivatives, including green bonds (i.e., fixed-income financial instruments designed to support an environmental goal). In this study, given the historical measure, we use the GARCH-type models with jump innovations to describe the price dynamics of green financial prices as well as the important components in long-memory behavior. As suggested in Figures 2 and 3, we confirm that combining jumps detection of the green financial market with the calibrated parameters in the computational methods for the option pricing model is suitable.

    This paper develops a new model and produces instruments for digital currency and green options based on the GARCH model with jumps detection and fractional Brownian motion (FBM). The findings hope to offer a reference for upcoming green financial options trading through the green financial option price predicting technique. The fractal feature of green financial option prices implies that it is reasonable to utilize FBM to predict option prices and the GARCH model incorporating the detected jumps can remedy the lack of constant FBM volatility. The modified fractional Brownian motion option pricing model improved the pricing accuracy. Our results can be treated as a policy reference for the development of a green financial derivatives market and can accelerate the transformation of markets towards a more sustainable economic development model.

    To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the phenomenon of SOL's jump risk and long-memory gap to explain its valuation as "exceptionally ambiguous". In addition, evidence suggests that SOL price movements have fat-tailed distributions and the returns process of the SOL demonstrates sudden and unexpected price jumps. There is evidence of jumps in the corresponding green financial options. Moreover, these results may be valid for the SOL and carbon of GARCH option pricing models owing to the blockchain progress.

    As discussed before, this paper utilizes a jump fractional Brownian motion to describe the behavior of the prices of SOL and carbon and infers the European green financial option pricing model in this jump fractional environment. In addition, some specific features of green assets pricing formulae are also indicated. Our numerical results in Section 4 present that it seems to be necessary to utilize our jump fractional Brownian motion model when the time to maturity is sufficient. At the same time, our JFBM model is essential to use and has the potential to interpret the natural phenomena of volatility smile in option pricing. All in all, jumps play a crucial role in financial markets, and the jump fractional Brownian model can be a more suitable model for pricing green financial options because fractional Brownian motion is a cogent mathematical model for self-similarity with vigorously correlated stochastic processes.

    Finally, after analyzing SOL's price under jump-diffusion process, the benefits it may bring, and the potential problems that might arise, we present the specific policy recommendations for the government about green financial assets and derivatives enforcement and regulations that require amendment.

    Kuo Shing Chen: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, review & editing, Validation; Kung-Chi Chen: Writing – original draft, review & editing, Validation. All authors have read and approved the final draft of the paper for publication.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    The authors would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their effort and time to offer valuable suggestion on a previous draft of this manuscript.

    The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.


    Acknowledgments



    I thank Ni Li, Institute of Health Sciences, Shanghai Institute for Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China, very much, the author who deposited their microarray dataset, GSE119063, into the public GEO database.

    Ethical approval



    This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

    Author contributions



    Vikrant Ghatnatti: Methodology and validation; Basavaraj Vastrad: Writing original draft, investigation, and review and editing; Swetha Patil: Formal analysis and validation; Chanabasayya Vastrad: Software and investigation; Iranna Kotturshetti: Supervision and resources.

    Availability of data and materials



    The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are available in the GEO (Gene Expression Omnibus) (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) repository. [(GSE119063) (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE119063)].

    Conflict of interest



    The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

    [1] Thorner MO, Martin WH, Rogol AD, et al. (1980) Rapid regression of pituitary prolactinomas during bromocriptine treatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 51: 438-445. doi: 10.1210/jcem-51-3-438
    [2] Doumith R, Gennes JL, Cabane JP, et al. (1982) Pituitary prolactinoma, adrenal aldosterone-producing adenomas, gastric schwannoma and colonic polyadenomas: a possible variant of multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN) type I. Acta Endocrinol (Copenh) 100: 189-195. doi: 10.1530/acta.0.1000189
    [3] Oruçkaptan HH, Senmevsim O, Ozcan OE, et al. (2000) Pituitary adenomas: results of 684 surgically treated patients and review of the literature. Surg Neurol 53: 211-219. doi: 10.1016/S0090-3019(00)00171-3
    [4] Cho DY, Liau WR (2002) Comparison of endonasal endoscopic surgery and sublabial microsurgery for prolactinomas. Surg Neurol 58: 371-375. doi: 10.1016/S0090-3019(02)00892-3
    [5] Murakami M, Mizutani A, Asano S, et al. (2011) A mechanism of acquiring temozolomide resistance during transformation of atypical prolactinoma into prolactin-producing pituitary carcinoma: case report. Neurosurgery 68: E1761-E1767. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e318217161a
    [6] Tsang RW, Laperriere NJ, Simpson WJ, et al. (1993) Glioma arising after radiation therapy for pituitary adenoma. A report of four patients and estimation of risk. Cancer 72: 2227-2233. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19931001)72:7<2227::AID-CNCR2820720727>3.0.CO;2-I
    [7] Friedman E, Adams EF, Höög A, et al. (1994) Normal structural dopamine type 2 receptor gene in prolactin-secreting and other pituitary tumors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 78: 568-574.
    [8] Fedele M, Pentimalli F, Baldassarre G, et al. (2005) Transgenic mice overexpressing the wild-type form of the HMGA1 gene develop mixed growth hormone/prolactin cell pituitary adenomas and natural killer cell lymphomas. Oncogene 24: 3427-3435. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1208501
    [9] Finelli P, Pierantoni GM, Giardino D, et al. (2002) The High Mobility Group A2 gene is amplified and overexpressed in human prolactinomas. Cancer Res 62: 2398-2405.
    [10] Paez-Pereda M, Giacomini D, Refojo D, et al. (2003) Involvement of bone morphogenetic protein 4 (BMP-4) in pituitary prolactinoma pathogenesis through a Smad/estrogen receptor crosstalk. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 1034-1039. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0237312100
    [11] Shimon I, Hinton DR, Weiss MH, et al. (1998) Prolactinomas express human heparin-binding secretory transforming gene (hst) protein product: marker of tumour invasiveness. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 48: 23-29. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2265.1998.00332.x
    [12] Lania AG, Ferrero S, Pivonello R, et al. (2010) Evolution of an aggressive prolactinoma into a growth hormone secreting pituitary tumor coincident with GNAS gene mutation. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 95: 13-17. doi: 10.1210/jc.2009-1360
    [13] Dworakowska D, Wlodek E, Leontiou CA, et al. (2009) Activation of RAF/MEK/ERK and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways in pituitary adenomas and their effects on downstream effectors. Endocr Relat Cancer 16: 1329-1338. doi: 10.1677/ERC-09-0101
    [14] Semba S, Han SY, Ikeda H, et al. (2001) Frequent nuclear accumulation of beta-catenin in pituitary adenoma. Cancer 91: 42-48. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010101)91:1<42::AID-CNCR6>3.0.CO;2-7
    [15] Seemann N, Kuhn D, Wrocklage C, et al. (2001) CDKN2A/p16 inactivation is related to pituitary adenoma type and size. J Pathol 193: 491-497. doi: 10.1002/path.833
    [16] Ozfirat Z, Korbonits M (2010) AIP gene and familial isolated pituitary adenomas. Mol Cell Endocrinol 326: 71-79. doi: 10.1016/j.mce.2010.05.001
    [17] Lock C, Hermans G, Pedotti R, et al. (2002) Gene-microarray analysis of multiple sclerosis lesions yields new targets validated in autoimmune encephalomyelitis. Nat Med 8: 500-508. doi: 10.1038/nm0502-500
    [18] Diboun I, Wernisch L, Orengo CA, et al. (2006) Koltzenburg, M. Microarray analysis after RNA amplification can detect pronounced differences in gene expression using limma. BMC Genomics 7: 252. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-7-252
    [19] Reiner-Benaim A (2007) FDR control by the BH procedure for two-sided correlated tests with implications to gene expression data analysis. Biom J 49: 107-126. doi: 10.1002/bimj.200510313
    [20] Caspi R, Billington R, Ferrer L, et al. (2016) The MetaCyc database of metabolic pathways and enzymes and the BioCyc collection of pathway/genome databases. Nucleic Acids Res 44: D471-D480. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv1164
    [21] Kanehisa M, Sato Y, Furumichi M, et al. (2019) New approach for understanding genome variations in KEGG. Nucleic Acids Res 47: D590-D595. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky962
    [22] Schaefer CF, Anthony K, Krupa S, et al. (2009) PID: the Pathway Interaction Database. Nucleic Acids Res 37: D674-D679. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn653
    [23] Fabregat A, Jupe S, Matthews L, et al. (2018) The Reactome Pathway Knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res 46: D649-D655. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx1132
    [24] Dahlquist KD, Salomonis N, Vranizan K, et al. (2002) GenMAPP, a new tool for viewing and analyzing microarray data on biological pathways. Nat Genet 31: 19-20. doi: 10.1038/ng0502-19
    [25] Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, et al. (2005) Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 15545-15550. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506580102
    [26] Mi HY, Huang XS, Muruganujan A, et al. (2017) PANTHER version 11: expanded annotation data from Gene Ontology and Reactome pathways, and data analysis tool enhancements. Nucleic Acids Res 45: D183-D189. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw1138
    [27] Petri V, Jayaraman P, Tutaj M, et al. (2014) The pathway ontology—updates and applications. J Biomed Semantics 5: 7. doi: 10.1186/2041-1480-5-7
    [28] Jewison T, Su Y, Disfany FM, et al. (2014) SMPDB 2.0: big improvements to the Small Molecule Pathway Database. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D478-D484. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1067
    [29] Chen J, Bardes EE, Aronow BJ, et al. (2009) ToppGene Suite for gene list enrichment analysis and candidate gene prioritization. Nucleic Acids Res 37: W305-W311. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp427
    [30] Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, et al. (2000) Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet 25: 25-29. doi: 10.1038/75556
    [31] Alanis-Lobato G, Andrade-Navarro MA, Schaefer MH (2017) HIPPIE v2.0: enhancing meaningfulness and reliability of protein-protein interaction networks. Nucleic Acids Res 45: D408-D414. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw985
    [32] Orchard S, Ammari M, Aranda B, et al. (2014) The MIntAct project—IntAct as a common curation platform for 11 molecular interaction databases. Nucleic Acids Res 42: D358-D363. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1115
    [33] Chatr-Aryamontri A, Oughtred R, Boucher L, et al. (2016) The BioGRID interaction database: 2017 update. Nucleic Acids Res 45: D369-D379. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw1102
    [34] Keshava Prasad TS, Goel R, Kandasamy K, et al. (2009) Human Protein Reference Database— 2009 update. Nucleic Acids Res 37: D767-D772. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn892
    [35] Licata L, Briganti L, Peluso D, et al. (2012) MINT, the molecular interaction database: 2012 update. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D857-D861. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr930
    [36] Isserlin R, El-Badrawi RA, Bader GD (2011) The Biomolecular Interaction Network Database in PSI-MI 2.5. Database (Oxford) 2011: baq037. doi: 10.1093/database/baq037
    [37] Pagel P, Kovac S, Oesterheld M, et al. (2005) The MIPS mammalian protein-protein interaction database. Bioinformatics 21: 832-834. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti115
    [38] Salwinski L, Miller CS, Smith AJ, et al. (2004) The Database of Interacting Proteins: 2004 update. Nucleic Acids Res 32: D449-D451. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh086
    [39] Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O, et al. (2003) Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res 13: 2498-2504. doi: 10.1101/gr.1239303
    [40] Przulj N, Wigle DA, Jurisica I (2004) Functional topology in a network of protein interactions. Bioinformatics 20: 340-348. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg415
    [41] Joy MP, Brock A, Ingber DE, et al. (2005) High-betweenness proteins in the yeast protein interaction network. J Biomed Biotechnol 2005: 96-103. doi: 10.1155/JBB.2005.96
    [42] Lehtinen S, Marsellach FX, Codlin S, et al. (2013) Stress induces remodelling of yeast interaction and co-expression networks. Mol Biosyst 9: 1697-1707. doi: 10.1039/c3mb25548d
    [43] Hsu CW, Juan HF, Huang HC (2008) Characterization of microRNA-regulated protein-protein interaction network. Proteomics 8: 1975-1979. doi: 10.1002/pmic.200701004
    [44] Stelzl U, Worm U, Lalowski M, et al. (2005) A human protein-protein interaction network: a resource for annotating the proteome. Cell 122: 957-968. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2005.08.029
    [45] Zaki N, Efimov D, Berengueres J (2013) Protein complex detection using interaction reliability assessment and weighted clustering coefficient. BMC Bioinformatics 14: 163. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-14-163
    [46] Xia JG, Benner MJ, Hancock RE (2014) NetworkAnalyst—integrative approaches for protein-protein interaction network analysis and visual exploration. Nucleic Acids Res 42: W167-W174. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku443
    [47] Vlachos IS, Paraskevopoulou MD, Karagkouni D, et al. (2015) DIANA-TarBase v7.0: indexing more than half a million experimentally supported miRNA: mRNA interactions. Nucleic Acids Res 43: D153-D159. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku1215
    [48] Chou CH, Shrestha S, Yang CD, et al. (2018) miRTarBase update 2018: a resource for experimentally validated microRNA-target interactions. Nucleic Acids Res 46: D296-D302. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx1067
    [49] Zhou G, Soufan O, Ewald J, et al. (2019) NetworkAnalyst 3.0: a visual analytics platform for comprehensive gene expression profiling and meta-analysis. Nucleic Acids Res 47: W234-W241. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz240
    [50] Wang S, Sun H, Ma J, et al. (2013) Target analysis by integration of transcriptome and ChIP-seq data with BETA. Nat Protoc 8: 2502-2515. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2013.150
    [51] Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A, et al. (2011) pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 12: 77. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-77
    [52] Ma C, Wang F, Han B, et al. (2018) SALL1 functions as a tumor suppressor in breast cancer by regulating cancer cell senescence and metastasis through the NuRD complex. Mol Cancer 17: 78. doi: 10.1186/s12943-018-0824-y
    [53] Wang YC, Gallego-Arteche E, Iezza G, et al. (2009) Homeodomain transcription factor NKX2.2 functions in immature cells to control enteroendocrine differentiation and is expressed in gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors. Endocr Relat Cancer 16: 267-279. doi: 10.1677/ERC-08-0127
    [54] Alarmo EL, Pärssinen J, Ketolainen JM, et al. (2009) BMP7 influences proliferation, migration, and invasion of breast cancer cells. Cancer Lett 275: 35-43. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2008.09.028
    [55] Cipriano R, Miskimen KL, Bryson BL, et al. (2014) Conserved oncogenic behavior of the FAM83 family regulates MAPK signaling in human cancer. Mol Cancer Res 12: 1156-1165. doi: 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-13-0289
    [56] Quan YJ, Xu M, Cui P, et al. (2015) Grainyhead-like 2 Promotes Tumor Growth and is Associated with Poor Prognosis in Colorectal Cancer. J Cancer 6: 342-350. doi: 10.7150/jca.10969
    [57] Li H, Sun L, Tang Z, et al. (2012) Overexpression of TRIM24 correlates with tumor progression in non-small cell lung cancer. PLoS One 7: e37657. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037657
    [58] Kaistha BP, Honstein T, Müller V, et al. (2014) Key role of dual specificity kinase TTK in proliferation and survival of pancreatic cancer cells. Br J Cancer 111: 1780-1787. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.460
    [59] Di Leo A, Desmedt C, Bartlett JM, et al. (2011) HER2 and TOP2A as predictive markers for anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens as adjuvant treatment of breast cancer: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 12: 1134-1142. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70231-5
    [60] Zhang CP, Zhu CJ, Chen HY, et al. (2010) Kif18A is involved in human breast carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis 31: 1676-1684. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgq134
    [61] Aguirre-Portolés C, Bird AW, Hyman A, et al. (2012) Tpx2 controls spindle integrity, genome stability, and tumor development. Cancer Res 72: 1518-1528. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1971
    [62] Zhu XG, Lee K, Asa SL, et al. (2007) Epigenetic silencing through DNA and histone methylation of fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 in neoplastic pituitary cells. Am J Pathol 170: 1618-1628. doi: 10.2353/ajpath.2007.061111
    [63] Alatzoglou KS, Andoniadou CL, Kelberman D, et al. (2011) SOX2 haploinsufficiency is associated with slow progressing hypothalamo-pituitary tumours. Hum Mutat 32: 1376-1380. doi: 10.1002/humu.21606
    [64] Heinrichs M, Baumgärtner W, Capen CC (1990) Immunocytochemical demonstration of proopiomelanocortin-derived peptides in pituitary adenomas of the pars intermedia in horses. Vet Pathol 27: 419-425. doi: 10.1177/030098589902700606
    [65] Katznelson L, Alexander JM, Bikkal HA, et al. (1992) Imbalanced follicle-stimulating hormone beta-subunit hormone biosynthesis in human pituitary adenomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 74: 1343-1351.
    [66] Duong CV, Yacqub-Usman K, Emes RD, et al. (2013) The EFEMP1 gene: a frequent target for epigenetic silencing in multiple human pituitary adenoma subtypes. Neuroendocrinology 98: 200-211. doi: 10.1159/000355624
    [67] Wu YT, Bai JW, Hong LC, et al. (2016) Low expression of secreted frizzled-related protein 2 and nuclear accumulation of β-catenin in aggressive nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma. Oncol Lett 12: 199-206. doi: 10.3892/ol.2016.4560
    [68] Lekva T, Berg JP, Lyle R, et al. (2015) Alternative splicing of placental lactogen (CSH2) in somatotroph pituitary adenomas. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 36: 136-142.
    [69] Yavropoulou MP, Maladaki A, Topouridou K, et al. (2016) Expression pattern of the Hedgehog signaling pathway in pituitary adenomas. Neurosci Lett 611: 94-100. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2015.10.076
    [70] Giustina A, Bonfanti C, Licini M, et al. (1994) Inhibitory effect of galanin on growth hormone release from rat pituitary tumor cells (GH1) in culture. Life Sci 55: 1845-1851. doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(94)90095-7
    [71] Hunter JA, Skelly RH, Aylwin SJB, et al. (2003) The relationship between pituitary tumour transforming gene (PTTG) expression and in vitro hormone and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) secretion from human pituitary adenomas. Eur J Endocrinol 148: 203-211. doi: 10.1530/eje.0.1480203
    [72] De Martino I, Visone R, Wierinckx A, et al. (2009) HMGA proteins up-regulate CCNB2 gene in mouse and human pituitary adenomas. Cancer Res 69: 1844-1850. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4133
    [73] Wierinckx A, Auger C, Devauchelle P, et al. (2007) A diagnostic marker set for invasion, proliferation, and aggressiveness of prolactin pituitary tumors. Endocr Relat Cancer 14: 887-900. doi: 10.1677/ERC-07-0062
    [74] Tecimer T, Dlott J, Chuntharapai A, et al. (2000) Expression of the chemokine receptor CXCR2 in normal and neoplastic neuroendocrine cells. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124: 520-525. doi: 10.5858/2000-124-0520-EOTCRC
    [75] Grizzi F, Borroni EM, Vacchini A, et al. (2015) Pituitary Adenoma and the Chemokine Network: A Systemic View. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 6: 141. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2015.00141
    [76] Egashira N, Takekoshi S, Takei M, et al. (2011) Expression of FOXL2 in human normal pituitaries and pituitary adenomas. Mod Pathol 24: 765-773. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.169
    [77] Zhang HY, Jin L, Stilling GA, et al. (2009) RUNX1 and RUNX2 upregulate Galectin-3 expression in human pituitary tumors. Endocrine 35: 101-111. doi: 10.1007/s12020-008-9129-z
    [78] Tampanaru-Sarmesiu A, Stefaneanu L, Thapar K, et al. (1998) Transferrin and transferrin receptor in human hypophysis and pituitary adenomas. Am J Pathol 152: 413-422.
    [79] Rehfeld JF, Lindholm J, Andersen BN, et al. (1987) Pituitary tumors containing cholecystokinin. N Engl J Med 316: 1244-1247. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198705143162004
    [80] Shaima J, William B, Omkaram G, et al. (2017) Developmental pluripotency associated 4: A novel putative predictor for prognosis of aggressive prolactin secreting tumors in the pituitary. Cancer Res 77: 4134.
    [81] Zhang HY, Jin L, Stilling GA, et al. (2009) RUNX1 and RUNX2 upregulate Galectin-3 expression in human pituitary tumors. Endocrine 35: 101-111. doi: 10.1007/s12020-008-9129-z
    [82] Missale C, Losa M, Sigala S, et al. (1996) Nerve growth factor controls proliferation and progression of human prolactinoma cell lines through an autocrine mechanism. Mol Endocrinol 10: 272-285.
    [83] Tomlinson DC, Baldo O, Harnden P, et al. (2007) FGFR3 protein expression and its relationship to mutation status and prognostic variables in bladder cancer. J Pathol 213: 91-98. doi: 10.1002/path.2207
    [84] Shojima K, Sato A, Hanaki H, et al. (2015) Wnt5a promotes cancer cell invasion and proliferation by receptor-mediated endocytosis-dependent and -independent mechanisms, respectively. Sci Rep 5: 8042. doi: 10.1038/srep08042
    [85] Sharma P, Chinaranagari S, Patel D, et al. (2012) Epigenetic inactivation of inhibitor of differentiation 4 (Id4) correlates with prostate cancer. Cancer Med 1: 176-186. doi: 10.1002/cam4.16
    [86] Seder CW, Hartojo W, Lin L, et al. (2009) Upregulated INHBA expression may promote cell proliferation and is associated with poor survival in lung adenocarcinoma. Neoplasia 11: 388-396. doi: 10.1593/neo.81582
    [87] Salem CE, Markl ID, Bender CM, et al. (2000) PAX6 methylation and ectopic expression in human tumor cells. Int J Cancer 87: 179-185. doi: 10.1002/1097-0215(20000715)87:2<179::AID-IJC4>3.0.CO;2-X
    [88] Duan JJ, Cai J, Guo YF, et al. (2016) ALDH1A3, a metabolic target for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Int J Cancer 139: 965-975. doi: 10.1002/ijc.30091
    [89] Xu CS, Chen HY, Wang X, et al. (2014) S100A14, a member of the EF-hand calcium-binding proteins, is overexpressed in breast cancer and acts as a modulator of HER2 signaling. J Biol Chem 289: 827-837. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M113.469718
    [90] DeRycke MS, Andersen JD, Harrington KM, et al. (2009) S100A1 expression in ovarian and endometrial endometrioid carcinomas is a prognostic indicator of relapse-free survival. Am J Clin Pathol 132: 846-856. doi: 10.1309/AJCPTK87EMMIKPFS
    [91] Harpio R, Einarsson R (2004) S100 proteins as cancer biomarkers with focus on S100B in malignant melanoma. Clin Biochem 37: 512-528. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2004.05.012
    [92] Chen H, Suzuki M, Nakamura Y, et al. (2005) Aberrant methylation of FBN2 in human non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 50: 43-49. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2005.04.013
    [93] Yoshimura N, Sano H, Hashiramoto A, et al. (1998) The expression and localization of fibroblast growth factor-1 (FGF-1) and FGF receptor-1 (FGFR-1) in human breast cancer. Clin Immunol Immunopathol 89: 28-34. doi: 10.1006/clin.1998.4551
    [94] Dickinson RE, Dallol A, Bieche I, et al. (2004) Epigenetic inactivation of SLIT3 and SLIT1 genes in human cancers. Br J Cancer 91: 2071-2078. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602222
    [95] Li Z, Zhang W, Shao Y, et al. (2010) High-resolution melting analysis of ADAMTS18 methylation levels in gastric, colorectal and pancreatic cancers. Med Oncol 27: 998-1004. doi: 10.1007/s12032-009-9323-8
    [96] Pei YF, Zhang YJ, Lei Y, et al. (2017) Hypermethylation of the CHRDL1 promoter induces proliferation and metastasis by activating Akt and Erk in gastric cancer. Oncotarget 8: 23155-23166. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.15513
    [97] Jacobs ET, Van Pelt C, Forster RE, et al. (2013) CYP24A1 and CYP27B1 polymorphisms modulate vitamin D metabolism in colon cancer cells. Cancer Res 73: 2563-2573. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-4134
    [98] Liu X, Erikson R (2003) Polo-like kinase 1 in the life and death of cancer cells. Cell Cycle 2: 424-425.
    [99] Grabsch H, Takeno S, Parsons WJ, et al. (2003) Overexpression of the mitotic checkpoint genes BUB1, BUBR1, and BUB3 in gastric cancer—association with tumour cell proliferation. J Pathol 200: 16-22. doi: 10.1002/path.1324
    [100] Kitkumthorn N, Yanatatsanajit P, Kiatpongsan S, et al. (2006) Cyclin A1 promoter hypermethylation in human papillomavirus-associated cervical cancer. BMC Cancer 6: 55. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-6-55
    [101] Kato T, Wada H, Patel P, et al. (2016) Overexpression of KIF23 predicts clinical outcome in primary lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 92: 53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.11.018
    [102] Cao L, Li CG, Shen SW, et al. (2013) OCT4 increases BIRC5 and CCND1 expression and promotes cancer progression in hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Cancer 13: 82. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-82
    [103] Zhang Q, Su RX, Shan C, et al. (2018) Non-SMC Condensin I Complex, Subunit G (NCAPG) is a Novel Mitotic Gene Required for Hepatocellular Cancer Cell Proliferation and Migration. Oncol Res 26: 269-276. doi: 10.3727/096504017X15075967560980
    [104] Nie W, Xu MD, Gan L, et al. (2015) Overexpression of stathmin 1 is a poor prognostic biomarker in non-small cell lung cancer. Lab Invest 95: 56-64. doi: 10.1038/labinvest.2014.124
    [105] Imai K, Hirata S, Irie A, et al. (2011) Identification of HLA-A2-restricted CTL epitopes of a novel tumour-associated antigen, KIF20A, overexpressed in pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer 104: 300-307. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6606052
    [106] Zhou J, Yu Y, Pei YF, et al. (2017) A potential prognostic biomarker SPC24 promotes tumorigenesis and metastasis in lung cancer. Oncotarget 8: 65469-65480. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.18971
    [107] He WL, Li YH, Yang DJ, et al. (2013) Combined evaluation of centromere protein H and Ki-67 as prognostic biomarker for patients with gastric carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 39: 141-149. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.08.023
    [108] Hu P, Shangguan JY, Zhang LD (2015) Down regulation of NUF2 inhibits tumor growth and induces apoptosis by regulating lncRNA AF339813. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 8: 2638-2648.
    [109] Pucci F, Rickelt S, Newton AP, et al. (2016) PF4 Promotes Platelet Production and Lung Cancer Growth. Cell Rep 17: 1764-1772. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.10.031
    [110] Wilson IM, Vucic EA, Enfield KS, et al. (2014) EYA4 is inactivated biallelically at a high frequency in sporadic lung cancer and is associated with familial lung cancer risk. Oncogene 33: 4464-4473. doi: 10.1038/onc.2013.396
    [111] Ma YF, Qin HD, Cui YF (2013) MiR-34a targets GAS1 to promote cell proliferation and inhibit apoptosis in papillary thyroid carcinoma via PI3K/Akt/Bad pathway. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 441: 958-963. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2013.11.010
    [112] Xu YL, Zhang XH, Hu XF, et al. (2018) The effects of lncRNA MALAT1 on proliferation, invasion and migration in colorectal cancer through regulating SOX9. Mol Med 24: 52.
    [113] Mei HJ, Lian SJ, Zhang S, et al. (2014) High expression of ROR2 in cancer cell correlates with unfavorable prognosis in colorectal cancer. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 453: 703-709. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2014.09.141
    [114] Gordon CA, Gulzar ZG, Brooks JD (2015) NUSAP1 expression is upregulated by loss of RB1 in prostate cancer cells. Prostate 75: 517-526. doi: 10.1002/pros.22938
    [115] Kang MA, Kim JT, Kim JH, et al. (2009) Upregulation of the cycline kinase subunit CKS2 increases cell proliferation rate in gastric cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 135: 761-769. doi: 10.1007/s00432-008-0510-3
    [116] Park JH, Lin ML, Nishidate T, et al. (2006) PDZ-binding kinase/T-LAK cell-originated protein kinase, a putative cancer/testis antigen with an oncogenic activity in breast cancer. Cancer Res 66: 9186-9195. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1601
    [117] Hayward DG, Clarke RB, Faragher AJ, et al. (2004) The centrosomal kinase Nek2 displays elevated levels of protein expression in human breast cancer. Cancer Res 64: 7370-7376. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0960
    [118] Corson TW, Huang A, Tsao MS, et al. (2005) KIF14 is a candidate oncogene in the 1q minimal region of genomic gain in multiple cancers. Oncogene 24: 4741-4753. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1208641
    [119] Wong AK, Pero R, Ormonde PA, et al. (1997) RAD51 interacts with the evolutionarily conserved BRC motifs in the human breast cancer susceptibility gene brca2. J Biol Chem 272: 31941-31944. doi: 10.1074/jbc.272.51.31941
    [120] Loveday C, Turnbull C, Ramsay E, et al. (2011) Germline mutations in RAD51D confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 43: 879-882. doi: 10.1038/ng.893
    [121] Hasegawa S, Eguchi H, Nagano H, et al. (2014) MicroRNA-1246 expression associated with CCNG2-mediated chemoresistance and stemness in pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer 111: 1572-1580. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.454
    [122] Paramasivam M, Sarkeshik A, Yates JR, et al. (2011) Angiomotin family proteins are novel activators of the LATS2 kinase tumor suppressor. Mol Biol Cell 22: 3725-3733. doi: 10.1091/mbc.e11-04-0300
    [123] Kosaka Y, Inoue H, Ohmachi T, et al. (2007) Tripartite motif-containing 29 (TRIM29) is a novel marker for lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 14: 2543-2549. doi: 10.1245/s10434-007-9461-1
    [124] Shang B, Gao A, Pan Y, et al. (2014) CT45A1 acts as a new proto-oncogene to trigger tumorigenesis and cancer metastasis. Cell Death Dis 5: e1285. doi: 10.1038/cddis.2014.244
    [125] Jing Y, Nguyen MM, Wang D, et al. (2018) DHX15 promotes prostate cancer progression by stimulating Siah2-mediated ubiquitination of androgen receptor. Oncogene 37: 638-650. doi: 10.1038/onc.2017.371
    [126] Subhash VV, Tan SH, Tan WL, et al. (2015) GTSE1 expression represses apoptotic signaling and confers cisplatin resistance in gastric cancer cells. BMC Cancer 15: 550. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1550-0
    [127] Alvarez-Fernández M, Medema RH (2013) Novel functions of FoxM1: from molecular mechanisms to cancer therapy. Front Oncol 3: 30. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00030
    [128] Scharer CD, McCabe CD, Ali-Seyed M, et al. (2009) Genome-wide promoter analysis of the SOX4 transcriptional network in prostate cancer cells. Cancer Res 69: 709-717. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-3415
    [129] Hu JY, Yi W, Wei X, et al. (2016) miR-601 is a prognostic marker and suppresses cell growth and invasion by targeting PTP4A1 in breast cancer. Biomed Pharmacother 79: 247-253. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2016.02.014
    [130] Wanajo A, Sasaki A, Nagasaki H, et al. (2008) Methylation of the calcium channel-related gene, CACNA2D3, is frequent and a poor prognostic factor in gastric cancer. Gastroenterology 135: 580-590. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.05.041
    [131] Jia Y, Yang YS, Brock MV, et al. (2013) Epigenetic regulation of DACT2, a key component of the Wnt signalling pathway in human lung cancer. J Pathol 230: 194-204. doi: 10.1002/path.4073
  • neurosci-08-02-014-s001.pdf
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(5250) PDF downloads(152) Cited by(7)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog