Dataset Information

The Significance of SIX1 as a Prognostic Biomarker for Survival Outcome in Various Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ABSTRACT: Sine Oculis Homeobox Homolog 1 (SIX1) is reported to promote cancer initiation and progression in many preclinical models and is demonstrated in human cancer tissues. However, the correlation between SIX1 and cancer patients’ prognosis has not yet been systematically evaluated. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis in various human cancer types and extracted some data from TCGA datasets for further verification and perfection. We constructed 27 studies and estimated the association between SIX1 expression in various cancer patients’ overall survival and verified with TCGA datasets. Twenty-seven studies with 4899 patients are include in the analysis of overall, and disease-free survival, most of them were retrospective. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for overall and disease-free survival in high SIX1 expression patients were 1.54 (95% CI: 1.32-1.80, P<0.00001) and 1.83 (95% CI: 1.31-2.55, P=0.0004) respectively. On subgroup analysis classified in cancer type, high SIX1 expression was associated with poor overall survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.17-1.93, P =0.001), breast cancer (HR 1.31; 95% CI: 1.10-1.55, P =0.002) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (HR 1.89; 95% CI: 1.42-2.52, P<0.0001). Next, we utilized TCGA online datasets, and the consistent results were verified in various cancer types. SIX1 expression indicated its potential to serve as a cancer biomarker and deliver prognostic information in various cancer patients. More works still need to improve the understandings of SIX1 expression and prognosis in different cancer types.

SUBMITTER: Zhu G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8567106 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGPRC5A is associated with various cancer initiation and progression. Controversial findings have been reported about GPRC5A prognostic characteristics, and no meta-analysis has been conducted to assess the relationship between GPRC5A and cancer prognosis. Therefore, the objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the overall prognostic effectiveness of GPRC5A.MethodsWe first conducted a systematic search in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Cochrane, and WangFang databases. The hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI were then pooled to assess the associations between GPRC5A expression and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), event-free survival (EFS), and clinicopathological characteristics. Chi-squared test and I2 statistics were completed to evaluate the heterogeneity in our study. A random-effects model was used when significant heterogeneity existed (I2>50% and p<0.05); otherwise, we chose the fixed-effect model. Subgroup analysis was stratified by tumor type, region, HR obtained measurements, and sample capacity to explore the source of heterogeneity.ResultsIn total, 15 studies with 624 patients met inclusion criteria of this study. Our results showed that higher expression of GPRC5A is associated with worse OS (HR:1.69 95%CI: 1.20-2.38 I2 = 75.6% p = 0.000), as well as worse EFS (HR:1.45 95%CI: 1.02-1.95 I2 = 0.0% p = 0.354). Subgroup analysis indicated that tumor type might be the source of high heterogeneity. Additionally, cancer patients with enhanced GPRC5A expression were more likely to lymph node metastasis (OR:1.95, 95%CI 1.33-2.86, I2 = 43.9%, p = 0.129) and advanced tumor stage (OR: 1.83, 95%CI 1.15-2.92, I2 = 61.3%, p = 0.035), but not associated with age, sex, differentiation, and distant metastasis.ConclusionGPRC5A can be a promising candidate for predicting medical outcomes and used for accurate diagnosis, prognosis prediction for patients with cancer; however, the predictive value of GPRC5A varies significantly according to cancer type. Further studies for this mechanism will be necessary to reveal novel insights into application of GPRC5A in cancers.

Project description:BackgroundThe prognostic significance of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on circulating tumor cells (CTCs) has been explored but is still in controversy. We performed, for the first time, a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate its prognostic value in human cancers.MethodsLiterature databases were searched for eligible studies prior to June 30, 2021. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated for the associations of pre-treatment and post-treatment PD-L1+ CTCs with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Subgroup analyses with regards to cancer type, treatment, CTC enrichment method, PD-L1 detection method, cut-off, and specifically the comparison model were performed.ResultsWe included 30 eligible studies (32 cohorts, 1419 cancer patients) in our analysis. Pre-treatment PD-L1+ CTCs detected by immunofluorescence (IF) tended to predict better PFS (HR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.28-1.08, p = 0.084) and OS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.36-1.04, p = 0.067) for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment, but were significantly associated with unfavorable survival for non-ICI therapies (PFS: HR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.21-2.85, p = 0.005; OS: HR = 2.44, 95% CI 1.69-3.51, p < 0.001). Post-treatment PD-L1+ CTCs predicted markedly worse PFS and OS. The prognostic value was obviously modulated by comparison models. Among patients with detectable CTCs, PD-L1+ individuals had comparable survival to PD-L1- individuals, except ICI treatment for which PD-L1+ may predict better PFS (HR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.17-1.06, p = 0.067). Patients with PD-L1+ CTCs had worse survival prognosis compared to those without PD-L1+ CTCs in overall analysis (PFS: HR = 2.10, 95% CI 1.59-2.77, p < 0.001; OS: HR = 2.55, 95% CI 1.70-3.81, p < 0.001) and in most subgroups.ConclusionsOur analysis demonstrated that PD-L1 positive expression on CTCs predicted better survival prognosis for ICI treatment but worse survival for other therapies, which thus can be potentially used as a prognostic marker of malignant tumor treatment. However, the prognostic value of PD-L1+ CTCs for ICI treatment needs validation by more large-scale studies in the future.

Dataset Information

The Significance of SIX1 as a Prognostic Biomarker for Survival Outcome in Various Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets