Dataset Information

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tumor biomarkers in predicting prognosis in esophageal cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a frequently occurring cancer with poor prognosis despite combined therapeutic strategies. Many biomarkers have been proposed as predictors of adverse events. We sought to assess the prognostic value of biomarkers in predicting the overall survival of esophageal cancer and to help guide personalized cancer treatment to give patients the best chance at remission.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature to summarize evidence for the discriminatory ability of prognostic biomarkers for esophageal cancer. Relevant literature was identified using the PubMed database on April 11, 2012, and conformed to the REMARK criteria. The primary endpoint was overall survival and data were synthesized with hazard ratios (HRs).

Results

We included 109 studies, exploring 13 different biomarkers, which were subjected to quantitative meta-analysis. Promising markers that emerged for the prediction of overall survival in esophageal squamous cell cancer included VEGF (18 eligible studies, n=1476, HR=1.85, 95% CI, 1.55-2.21), cyclin D1 (12 eligible studies, n=1476, HR=1.82, 95% CI, 1.50-2.20), Ki-67 (3 eligible studies, n=308, HR=1.11, 95% CI, 0.70-1.78) and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (5 eligible studies, n=700, HR=1.28, 95% CI, 0.97-1.69); prognostic markers for esophageal adenocarcinoma included COX-2 (2 eligible studies, n=235, HR=3.06, 95% CI, 2.01-4.65) and HER-2 (3 eligible studies, n=291, HR=2.15, 95% CI, 1.39-3.33); prognostic markers for uncategorized ECs included p21 (9 eligible studies, n=858, HR=1.27, 95% CI, 0.75-2.16), p53 (31 eligible studies, n=2851, HR=1.34, 95% CI, 1.21-1.48), CRP (8 eligible studies, n=1382, HR=2.65, 95% CI, 1.64-4.27) and hemoglobin (5 eligible studies, n=544, HR=0.91, 95% CI, 0.83-1.00).

Conclusions

Although some modest bias cannot be excluded, this review supports the involvement of biomarkers to be associated with EC overall survival.

SUBMITTER: Chen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3828582 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tumor biomarkers in predicting prognosis in esophageal cancer.

Chen Meilan M Huang Jizheng J Zhu Zhenli Z Zhang Jun J Li Ke K

BMC cancer 20131111

<h4>Background</h4>Esophageal cancer (EC) is a frequently occurring cancer with poor prognosis despite combined therapeutic strategies. Many biomarkers have been proposed as predictors of adverse events. We sought to assess the prognostic value of biomarkers in predicting the overall survival of esophageal cancer and to help guide personalized cancer treatment to give patients the best chance at remission.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literat ...[more]

PMID: 24206575

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRadioresistance is the major obstacle after cancer radiotherapy. The dysregulation of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) was closely related the radioresistance response. This meta-analysis was aimed to interpret the relationship between lncRNAs and radiotherapy responses in different cancers.MethodThe studies were selected from databases including PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar, PMC, and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure). The publication time was limited to before March 20, 2021. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval were calculated with random-effects models. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and publication bias were also conducted.ResultTwenty-seven lncRNAs in 14 cancer types were investigated, in which 23 lncRNAs were upregulated and four lncRNAs were downregulated. Dysregulation of these lncRNAs were found to be related to radioresistance response. The pooled HR and 95% confidence interval for the combined up-regulated lncRNAs was 1.73 (95% CI=1.50-2.00; P< 0.01) and down-regulated lncRNAs was 2.09 (95% CI= 1.60-2.72; P< 0.01). The HR values of the subgroup analysis for glioma (HR= 2.22, 95% CI= 1.79-2.74; p< 0.01), non-small cell lung cancer (HR=1.48, 95% CI=1.18-1.85; P<0.01), nasopharyngeal carcinoma (HR=4.26; 95% CI= 1.58-11.46; P< 0.01), and breast cancer (HR=1.29; 95% CI= 1.08-1.54; P< 0.01) were obtained. Moreover, the expression of lncRNAs was significantly related to overall survival of patients no matter if the sample size was >50 or not. In addition, the HR values of the subgroup analysis for lncRNA H19 (HR=2.68; 95% CI= 1.92-3.74; P <0.01), lncRNA FAM201A (HR=2.15; 95% CI= 1.15-3.99; P <0.01), and lncRNA HOTAIR (HR=1.22; 95% CI= 0.98-1.54; P =0.08) were also obtained.ConclusionLncRNAs can induce cancer radioresistance by regulating cell death-related signaling pathways. Results indicated that lncRNAs, especially lncRNA H19, FAM201A, and HOTAIR, could be considered as a predictive theragnostic biomarker to evaluate radiotherapy response.

Project description:BackgroundEndoscopic treatment is recommended for the management of esophageal varices. However, variceal recurrence or rebleeding is common after endoscopic variceal eradication. Our study aimed to systematically evaluate the prevalence of esophageal collateral veins (ECVs) and the association of ECVs with recurrence of esophageal varices or rebleeding from esophageal varices after endoscopic treatment.MethodsWe searched the relevant literature through the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Prevalence of paraesophageal veins (para-EVs), periesophageal veins (peri-EVs), and perforating veins (PVs) were pooled. Risk ratio (RR) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for cohort studies and case-control studies, respectively. A random-effects model was employed. Heterogeneity among studies was calculated.ResultsAmong the 532 retrieved papers, 28 were included. The pooled prevalence of para-EVs, peri-EVs, and PVs in patients with esophageal varices was 73%, 88%, and 54%, respectively. The pooled prevalence of para-EVs and PVs in patients with recurrence of esophageal varices was 87% and 62%, respectively. The risk for recurrence of esophageal varices was significantly increased in patients with PVs (OR = 9.79, 95% CI: 1.95-49.22, P = 0.006 for eight case-control studies), but not in those with para-EVs (OR = 4.26, 95% CI: 0.38-38.35, P = 0.24 for four case-control studies; RR = 1.81, 95% CI: 0.83-3.97, P = 0.14 for three cohort studies). Patients with para-EVs had a significantly higher incidence of rebleeding from esophageal varices (RR = 13.00, 95% CI: 2.43-69.56, P = 0.003 for two cohort studies). Statistically significant heterogeneity was notable across the meta-analyses.ConclusionsECVs are common in patients with esophageal varices. Identification of ECVs could be helpful for predicting the recurrence of esophageal varices or rebleeding from esophageal varices after endoscopic treatment.

Project description:ObjectiveWe performed a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic values of serum single and multiplex tumor-associated autoantibodies (TAAbs) in patients with lung cancer (LC).MethodsWe searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for relevant studies investigating serum TAAbs for the diagnosis of LC. The primary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the test.ResultsThe systematic review and meta-analysis included 31 articles with single autoantibody and 39 with multiplex autoantibodies. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was the most common detection method. For the diagnosis of patients with all stages and early-stage LC, different single or combinations of TAAbs demonstrated different diagnostic values. Although individual TAAbs showed low diagnostic sensitivity, the combination of multiplex autoantibodies offered relatively high sensitivity. For the meta-analysis of a same panel of autoantibodies in patients at all stages of LC, the pooled results of the panel of 6 TAAbs (p53, NY-ESO-1, CAGE, GBU4-5, Annexin 1 and SOX2) were: sensitivity 38% (95% CI 0.35-0.40), specificity 89% (95% CI 0.86-0.91), diagnostic accuracy 65.9% (range 62.5-81.8%), AUC 0.52 (0.48-0.57), while the summary estimates of 7 TAAbs (p53, CAGE, NY-ESO-1, GBU4-5, SOX2, MAGE A4 and Hu-D) were: sensitivity 47% (95% CI 0.34-0.60), specificity 90% (95% CI 0.89-0.92), diagnostic accuracy 78.4% (range 67.5-88.8%), AUC 0.90 (0.87-0.93). For the meta-analysis of the same panel of autoantibodies in patients at early-stage of LC, the sensitivities of both panels of 7 TAAbs and 6 TAAbs were 40% and 29.7%, while their specificities were 91% and 87%, respectively.ConclusionsSerum single or combinations of multiplex autoantibodies can be used as a tool for the diagnosis of LC patients at all stages or early-stage, but the combination of multiplex autoantibodies shows a higher detection capacity; the diagnostic value of the panel of 7 TAAbs is higher than the panel of 6 TAAbs, which may be used as potential biomarkers for the early detection of LC.

Dataset Information

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tumor biomarkers in predicting prognosis in esophageal cancer.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tumor biomarkers in predicting prognosis in esophageal cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets