Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24416238›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Prognostic significance of MET amplification and expression in gastric cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Zhi Peng, Yan Zhu, Qianqian Wang, Jing Gao, Yilin Li, Yanyan Li, Sai Ge, Lin Shen

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. MET Oncogene Targeting for Cancer Immunotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. TargetingCancers · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhi PengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Yan ZhuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Qianqian WangDepartment of Epidemiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, the Fourth Clinical Medical College of Peking University, Beijing, China.
Jing GaoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Yilin LiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Yanyan LiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Sai GeDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Lin ShenDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Peking University · CNPeking University Cancer Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsMET, the hepatocyte growth factor receptor, is a receptor tyrosine kinase overexpressed and activated in a subset of gastric cancer. Several studies investigated the relationship between MET amplification and expression with the clinical outcome in patients with gastric cancer, but yielded conflicting results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the influence of MET amplification and expression on prognosis in gastric cancer.

methodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies that explored the association between MET amplification and expression with survival in patients with gastric cancer up to 1 April, 2013. Data of individual hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for meta-analyses were extracted from the publications and combined in pooled HRs.

resultsFourteen studies involving 2,258 patients with gastric cancer were included. It was suggested that MET overexpression had an unfavorable impact on survival of patients with gastric cancer, with HRs (95% CIs) of 2.57 (95% CI: 1.97-3.35) overall, 2.82 (95% CI: 1.86-4.27) among studies using amplification for measure scale of MET and 2.42 (95% CI: 1.66-3.54) for expression. The magnitude of association was reduced whereas remained statistically significant in high quality studies or in larger sample size studies and corresponding HRs were 2.18(1.76, 2.70) and 2.35(1.93, 2.87), respectively, without significant heterogeneity.

conclusionThe findings from present study indicated that higher MET gene amplification and expression in gastric cancer was an indicator of poor prognosis.

Indexed as

Gene AmplificationGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansPrognosisProto-Oncogene Proteins c-metStomach NeoplasmsMET protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins c-met

Identifiers

PMID24416238
PMCPMC3885582
OpenAlexW2092930468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.